Harare – 16 May 2025
By Farai D Hove | President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s recent state visit to Eastern Europe has come under intense scrutiny following revelations that one of his travelling companions, Delish Nguwaya, is still out on bail for a case described in court papers as involving dangerous and criminal conduct.
In social media exchanges now trending across Zimbabwe, government spokesperson Nick Mangwana defended Nguwaya’s presence, claiming the businessman paid for his own trip and travelled commercially. However, critics—including veteran journalist Rashweat Mukundu—have sharply questioned why the Zimbabwean government continues to associate with individuals who have serious criminal cases pending before the courts.
Nguwaya is the accused in High Court case HH 199-17, where he faces the following charges:
- Extortion (under Section 134 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act)
- Possession of dangerous drugs (Section 157 of the same Act)
- Possession of prescription preparatory drugs without authorization (Section 30(1) of the Medicines and Allied Substances Control Act)
The charges stem from a 2017 incident in which Nguwaya was denied bail by a magistrate and later by High Court Judge Justice Tsanga, who cited the risk of witness interference and the serious nature of the allegations. While Nguwaya was eventually released on bail, the case has not been concluded, and no acquittal or conviction has been recorded—meaning he remains an accused person in ongoing criminal proceedings.
Responding to questions about why Nguwaya, among thousands of Zimbabwean businesspeople, was chosen to represent the country in such high-profile international engagements, Mukundu said:
“This is not about private travel—it’s about access and privilege. How does a man with such a criminal record find himself rubbing shoulders with presidents and signing contracts that are witnessed by heads of state?”
In response, Mangwana maintained:
“I am not aware of Mr Nguwaya’s criminal record… I can also authoritatively inform you that Government did not pay his travel expenses on his trip to Belarus.”
However, documents and court judgments from ZimLII confirm the existence of the case, under reference B337/17; CRB HRE P2983/17. The controversy raises broader questions about governance, accountability, and the vetting of individuals who are permitted to represent Zimbabwe on international platforms.
Observers say the episode reinforces growing concerns over crony capitalism and the erosion of ethical standards in the administration of public affairs.
This is a developing story.