By staff reporter
In a move that has left officials and industry watchers in shock, Botha Gold Mine – the Bindura operation facing a litany of fraud allegations – has reportedly authored a glossy report to the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) purporting to be a victim of the very state-owned entity it is accused of stealing from.
The document dated 16 October 2026, titled “Systematic Disadvantage of Botha Gold Mine,” now circulating in Harare, paints Botha as a small 32-hectare miner being bullied by Freda Rebecca Gold Mine, a subsidiary of Mutapa Gold Resources under the sovereign wealth fund Mutapa Investment Fund.
The move raises a fundamental question: why would a company facing such serious allegations seek presidential intervention without first addressing the mounting evidence against its operations?
The allegations against Botha
Investigations by NewsHawks, supported by court filings and official correspondence, have placed Botha at the centre of a bitter dispute over Mining Lease 21 (ML21), held by Freda Rebecca Gold Mine.
According to court documents, Freda Rebecca alleges that Botha submitted coordinates for claims Botha 1-4 that materially differed from the original registration data, allegedly shifting the claims into portions of ML21.
The company argued that the coordinates were fraudulent and violated Section 5 of the Gold Trade Act [Chapter 21:03].
Court filings further allege that artisanal miners extracted gold from Freda Rebecca’s lease believing they were operating on Botha’s claims, while Botha allegedly received 30 percent of the proceeds.
The allegations remain subject to due process, but they raise serious questions about the company’s attempt to portray itself as the aggrieved party.
Approval withdrawn
On April 29, 2026, Mashonaland Central Provincial Mining Director Tendai Kashiri informed Botha that its Siting of Works approval, granted on April 21 for claims Botha 1-4, registration numbers 46035-38, had been “withdrawn and nullified”.
The reversal followed objections by Mutapa Gold Resources over allegations of fraud, forgery and abuse of office surrounding the approval.
Mutapa welcomed the decision, arguing that the document had been used to support an alleged attempt to extend Botha’s operations into Freda Rebecca’s lease.
Botha’s reported complaint about the withdrawal therefore cannot be separated from the allegations that prompted the regulatory intervention.
The US$40 million question
The Ministry of Mines’ position further complicates Botha’s victimhood narrative.
In sworn court papers, Kashiri stated that Botha had never acquired mining rights within ML21, warning that mining activities in the area would violate the law.
The Environmental Management Agency (EMA) also reportedly intervened after observing operations outside the coordinates of the approved mining plan.
Meanwhile, a Ministry summary cited in documents relating to the dispute estimates that approximately 271 kilogrammes of gold, valued at US$40 million, was unlawfully collected from State ground.
Mutapa Gold Resources alleges that the extraction prejudiced State-owned resources under its management. The allegations must be tested through due process, but the financial stakes make the dispute too serious to dismiss as a mere administrative disagreement.
A risky appeal to ED
By approaching the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC), Botha appears to be seeking intervention from the very office responsible for overseeing the State’s interests.
If the company believes it has been unfairly treated, it must produce evidence and address the allegations surrounding its coordinates, withdrawn approval and operations within ML21.
The OPC must assess the complaint on its merits, without political pressure undermining regulatory oversight or judicial processes.
A glossy report cannot erase court filings, nullify official correspondence or resolve disputed mining rights.
ENDS///
