LAWYERS representing Grace Mugabe have returned to the Harare High Court over the scandal involving an abortive attempt by the First Lady to buy a wedding anniversary diamond ring worth about $1.4 million.
President Robert Mugabe has come under fire over the splurge, described by critics as shockingly extravagant in a country where the majority live in poverty and his administration has failed to deal with an unemployment rate estimated at more than 90 percent.
Mugabe’s wife admitted that she lost about $1.4m in family cash after engaging a Lebanese dealer to acquire the ring which the President intended as a present for their 20th wedding anniversary last year.
The now 93-year-old Mugabe married his former secretary and mistress in 1996.
Meanwhile, after losing the cash, Grace reportedly ordered State security personnel to grab and occupy Harare properties belonging to the Lebanese in a desperate bid to force him to return the money.
The High Court then ordered Grace, son Russell Goreraza, and ZRP Superintendent Kennedy Fero to vacate the properties.
However, Grace’s lawyers have now returned to the court seeking to have the order overturned. The First Lady claims she and her son were not involved in the police seizure of the properties.
“It is humbly submitted that the interim relief granted by Justice Phiri on 21st December, 2016 must be discharged and in its place be recorded: ‘the application be and is hereby dismissed’,” said her lawyers in their heads of argument.
“The interim relief was directed towards the respondents who clearly are not connected to the properties in question and therefore it is misplaced and a folly for first applicant (Ahmed) to persist with the need to have a flawed order confirmed when instead it must be discharged on the return date.”
Grace has claimed that police seized the properties in connection with cases unrelated to the diamond deal for which they are investigating the Lebanese.
“It is therefore very clear to this honourable court first and second respondents (Grace and her son) were never at any of the properties,” said her lawyers.
“Third respondent (Supt Fero) is in the Police Protection Unit. They are charged with protecting properties, individuals and places of interest to the police.
“It cannot therefore be said guarding these crime scenes was out of the realm of his duties.”
The first lady has claimed that the Lebanese dealer Jamal Ahmed is a wanted by “international police” but failed to explain while she would engage a wanted criminal to acquire her diamond.
Ahmed has remained out of the country, saying she was threatened by Mugabe’s wife who reportedly told him that “I am Zimbabwe”.
The First Lady’s lawyers said Ahmed’s attorneys must facilitate his return to Zimbabwe.
“It is up to the lawyers to assist the State by bringing their client within the jurisdiction of this court,” they said
“Enough information has been made available to the accused in the affidavit of Superintendent Viera for first applicant to understand what is on the table in the investigation that involves him.
“He cannot bark like a dog in the wilderness. He must come to Zimbabwe and present himself to the police.
“He cannot lecture the police on their operations, pretending to be upright and to be a proponent of the rule of law and human rights of Zimbabwe as a foreigner.
“It is humbly submitted that first applicant wants to malign, humiliate, demonise, insult, belittle and cause other hurts against the respondents and the First Family for unknown political reasons as evidenced by the smear campaign in the local and foreign media.”