High Court Halts Beijing Broadtec’s Mining at Mukovo 12

The High Court Intervenes (image source)

In a significant ruling safeguarding property rights, the Chinhoyi High Court has provisionally barred Chinese-owned Beijing Broadtec Investments (Pvt) Ltd from conducting any mining operations at the Mukovo 12 Mine in Mashonaland West. The order, issued by Justice Philda Muzofa, protects the contested estate of the late Josphat Mutizira, who challenged Broadtec’s presence and actions, described as trespass.

The judgment firmly rejects Broadtec’s position that its presence was for “security purposes” alone. Justice Muzofa held that Broadtec had no Exclusive Prospecting Order (EPO) or mining rights at the site, and therefore lacked any basis for its actions. The intrusion was ruled unlawful, especially given the estate’s pending appeal with the Minister of Mines. Justice Muzofa spotlighted the company’s excessive conduct: forcibly evicting estate workers, vandalizing equipment, and deploying guards without lawful justification. The judge criticized Broadtec’s invocation of the “dirty hands” doctrine — claiming Mutizira acted improperly — to block proceedings, stating there was “nothing to purge” and no taint on the estate’s claim.

The balance of convenience clearly favored Mutizira’s estate: if the interdict were not granted, ongoing activities could lead to irreparable loss of equipment and mineral value. The provisional order remains effective until the Minister of Mines rules on the estate’s appeal.

This judgment touches on several broader issues — a legal precedent in estate rights, the responsibilities of foreign operators, and Zimbabwe’s geological resource governance. Legal scholar Dr. Patricia Chikaka notes: “We are seeing judicial assertion that mining rights must be clean, transparent, and properly registered. Provisional orders like this affirm judicial willingness to intervene where estates and communities may be endangered by corporate overreach.”

Environmental and resources activist Mr. Tendai Mavhunga adds that such rulings can deter aggressive tendering tactics: “Foreign investors must understand that legitimate landholders and proper administrative routes cannot be sidelined.” Zimbabwe’s mining sector is heavily influenced by EPOs, mining rights, and estate-based claims. This ruling reinforces that property rights and lawful appeals cannot be undermined by power plays, even when backed by capital-intensive players.

Looking regionally, this could embolden local communities and estate executors in similar disputes. Government agencies might also be prompted to clarify stakes in disputed areas and enforce stricter compliance checks before conceding rights.

This ruling marks a triumph for judicial oversight and estate protection. It affirms that mining cannot proceed on shaky legal ground, and that Zimbabwe’s courts will uphold the rights of estates and landholders — even against powerful foreign firms. In doing so, it sends a clear message: lawful process and property rights remain foundational to investment legitimacy.