Lawyers representing businessmen Mike Chimombe and Moses Mpofu have confirmed that they will take the fight to the Supreme Court, launching an appeal against both conviction and sentence in the high-profile case involving the US$7.7 million Presidential Goat Pass-on Scheme. The two entrepreneurs, who were found guilty of defrauding the government under a programme designed to assist vulnerable rural households, insist that the High Court erred in its judgment.
On Monday, the High Court delivered lengthy custodial sentences to the pair. Mpofu was handed 22 years in prison, while Chimombe received 17 years. After portions of the sentences were suspended and restitution conditions factored in, Mpofu is expected to serve an effective 15 years and Chimombe an effective 12 years. The ruling immediately set the stage for an appeal, with the defence team signaling that they believe the court’s findings were inconsistent and legally unsound.
Speaking to journalists shortly after sentencing, Mpofu’s lawyer, Tapson Dzvetero, made it clear that the legal team was far from satisfied with the outcome. He argued that both the conviction and the penalty imposed reflected serious misdirection on the part of the court. “We are going to the Supreme Court. Our clients believe that the court grossly misdirected itself in its findings, from both the conviction and the sentences, so we have to hear what the Supreme Court says,” he said.
Dzvetero explained that the appeal will challenge what the defence views as fundamental flaws in the reasoning behind the guilty verdict. According to him, the High Court’s ruling hinges on what the defence considers an incorrect premise—the alleged involvement of a fictitious individual in the fraudulent scheme. The defence says the court’s conclusion is “contradictory” because it is built on claims that do not align with the factual existence of the company at the centre of the procurement process.
“We are challenging the conviction that the court has found that there was a fraud perpetrated by a fictitious person,” Dzvetero asserted. He said the businessmen feel strongly that the judgment fails to establish how a fraud could have been committed through a company that is legally registered and operational. “Our clients feel that the judgment itself is contradictory. They do not understand the basis upon which the conviction is built, particularly because this relates to an existing company,” he added.
The defence argued that the ruling did not adequately address what they claim are gaps in the State’s evidence, insisting that the court overlooked alternative explanations for the discrepancies cited during trial. Dzvetero maintained that Chimombe and Mpofu were “aggrieved” by what they see as uncertainty and inconsistency in the High Court’s findings.
Chimombe, Mpofu take fight to Supreme Court
The State’s case, however, paints a very different picture. Prosecutors successfully argued during trial that the two businessmen knowingly submitted falsified documents to win the tender to supply goats under the Presidential Goat Pass-on Scheme. The programme is a national initiative designed to promote livestock production and resilience among rural and disadvantaged households. According to the State, Chimombe and Mpofu failed to deliver on the contracted supply, could not account for millions of dollars disbursed to them, and manipulated procurement procedures for personal benefit.
During the trial, the prosecution alleged that the pair used misrepresentations and fraudulent statements to secure the lucrative deal. Evidence presented in court suggested that the documentation provided by their company did not match actual operations on the ground. The State argued that the discrepancies were not administrative errors but part of a deliberate and coordinated scheme to divert public funds.
While the High Court accepted the prosecution’s version of events, the defence insists that the evidence was misinterpreted, and key submissions relating to the company’s operations and contractual obligations were not given proper weight. Dzvetero told reporters that his clients feel the judgment leaves unanswered questions that only the Supreme Court can address.
Legal analysts say the case will be closely watched as it progresses to the higher court. The matter combines elements of public procurement, corporate responsibility, and accountability in government-funded programmes. With millions of dollars involved and a major national initiative affected, the appeal is expected to attract significant public interest.
For now, Chimombe and Mpofu remain convicted and sentenced, but their legal team is preparing formal appeal papers. The Supreme Court will ultimately decide whether the High Court’s ruling stands or whether the matter should be revisited. Until then, the case continues to stir debate about transparency, oversight, and the handling of public resources in Zimbabwe’s development programmes.
