Regarding the profoundly unprofessional and unethical letter dated 5 March 2026, purportedly authored by Advocate Method Ndlovu (@Gatsheniadv) and enthusiastically circulated by those who have either posted it, for example:An interesting development in the Mbuso Fuzwayo and his group case that is before the CONCOURT. The counsel Adv Ndlovu according to this letter has withdrawn citing issues of payment and not understanding the direction the case has now taken. Once again@ProfJNMoyois cited in…pic.twitter.com/XRofqz6QEu— Gerrard Anko Ged Belts (@MacBelts)March 5, 2026or promoted it, for example:Holy moly!Wow! Just wow!East African good night principal architect.Wow!https://t.co/axYTUsnnCH— Thabani Mpofu (@adv_fulcrum)March 5, 2026, the following verifiable and irrefutable facts stand as unassailable testimony to the truth:1. Any lawyer worthy of the name will immediately discern that the letter reeks of juvenile mischief. It fails to identify which “Mr Sithole” is being addressed or specify his law firm. It is axiomatic that law firms, as instructing attorneys, engage advocates – not individuals acting in isolation.The conspicuous absence of these essential professional elements from the one-page document being paraded with such fanfare strongly suggests it is nothing more than a reckless media stunt, one that will ultimately leave its promoters with egg on their faces.2. Even more damning, Advocate Method Ndlovu has failed to disassociate himself from the letter. This silence confirms his authorship and his deliberate “leak” of it to the usual suspects, who were only too eager to disseminate it.It is both notable and instructive that these same individuals were the first to post the illegally recorded audio of a telephone conversation I had with Counsel Zibusiso Ncube and Advocate Ndlovu on 16 December 2025. In that call, initiated by Ncube who placed me on speakerphone without prior warning, Ncube only revealed Advocate Ndlovu’s presence well over a minute into the conversation. Given the striking parallels in how both the illegally recorded audio (first posted, for example, at https://x.com/MacBelts/status/2026319749043405093?s=20) and the letter have been leaked – coupled with the identical circles responsible for their dissemination – it is inescapably clear that both originated from one unmistakable source: Advocate Ndlovu himself.There is now compelling reason to infer that it was Advocate Ndlovu who secretly and unlawfully recorded the call. Notably, the leaked audio reveals absolutely no wrongdoing on my part, not least of the sort alleged in his 5 March 2026 letter; there was neither any instruction nor any offer of anything directed to Advocate Ndlovu or anyone else. What is unequivocally wrong and unacceptable is Advocate Ndlovu’s illegal recording and subsequent leaking of the conversation and his letter to a desperate political cartel.3. Following the illegally recorded call of 16 December 2025, Counsel Ncube contacted me again on 3 February 2026 in a four-minute conversation, pleading that I speak with Advocate Ndlovu, who purportedly wished to discuss the Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu Constitutional Court case. I firmly rejected the request, stating unequivocally that I had never spoken to Advocate Ndlovu about the matter, I don’t know him at all; I had nothing to discuss with him, and that his only proper recourse was to engage the instructing attorneys who had originally briefed him without my involvement whatsoever.4. The attached evidence irrefutably demonstrates that Advocate Ndlovu relentlessly pestered Counsel Ncube for access to me, with Ncube in turn pressing me to engage with Ndlovu solely on the Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu LikaZulu case.5. As recently as the morning of 8 February 2026, Advocate Ndlovu sent Counsel Ncube a WhatsApp message (see bottom-left attachment) once again urging him to facilitate contact with me. The following is the verbatim, self-explanatory exchange:8 February 2026[02/07, 07:42] Advocate Ndlovu Gatsheni: Good morning[02/07, 07:42] Advocate Ndlovu Gatsheni: Akungibambele or prof[02/07, 07:42] Advocate Ndlovu Gatsheni: Or send his number/Jonathan[02/08, 08:25] Advocate Ndlovu Gatsheni: Eta[02/08, 08:25] Advocate Ndlovu Gatsheni: You did not respond to my message[02/08, 08:26] Z. C Ncube: Morning was at church izolo[02/08, 08:27] Z. C Ncube: Remember lapha I told you what prof said. That you must liaise with the instructing attorneys.09:306. I received these WhatsApp screenshots directly from Counsel Ncube. Significantly, I previously shared them publicly [https://x.com/ProfJNMoyo/status/2026766854941753499?s=20] and neither Counsel Ncube nor Advocate Ndlovu has contested their authenticity.7. In his 5 March 2026 letter to Counsel Sithole, Advocate Ndlovu claims: “From the outset I made clear to you and to Professor Jonnathan (sic.) Moyo, the principal architect of the litigation, that this matter would expose me to significant reputational risk and would therefore require appropriate and timely commitments and undertakings.”8. This allegation is revealing in two critical respects. First, the very next sentence exposes its true nature: “It is therefore inconsistent and unacceptable that, after the grant of direct access, you now state that you are unable to pay me, particularly given my understanding that you have received payment in respect of the matter.”It is as astonishing as it is shocking: Advocate Ndlovu’s professed “reputational risk” appears to rest solely and cynically on financial payment, rather than on adherence to the professional and ethical standards demanded by the Law Society of Zimbabwe [@Lawsocietyofzim] of every registered legal practitioner.9. The second aspect of his allegation is not only unprofessional and prejudicial to his former clients, but constitutes pure, unadulterated fiction. His assertion that he warned both Counsel Sithole and me – “Professor Jonnathan (sic.) Moyo, the principal architect of the litigation” – about reputational risk from the outset is a complete fabrication. While it may serve the narrative to grandly proclaim me as “the principal architect,” this is a reckless, unethical falsehood unsupported by a shred of evidence.The bare claim is the desperate ploy of an advocate willing to peddle lies for financial gain; and to stoke the propaganda machine of a thoughtless political cartel whose sole tactic – whether on the economy or Constitution Amendment No. 3 – is smear, character assassination, and baseless “Top Secret Intelligence Risk Assessments” that are always over the top.10. Media reports this morning indicate that Advocate Ndlovu hastily drafted and leaked his 5 March 2026 letter immediately after learning yesterday that he was being disengaged from the Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu case on professional and ethical grounds, with formal written notification to follow today.11. Had the claim about me being “the principal architect” held any truth or materiality, Advocate Ndlovu would unquestionably have included it in his earlier letter of 27 February 2026, which was also widely circulated. Its sudden appearance six days later as an afterthought in the 5 March letter proves it to be nothing but fiction. It is telling that the usual echo chamber of the desperate political cartel has embraced this baseless assertion as gospel without demanding a single piece of corroborating evidence.12. I have never met Advocate Method Ndlovu. I do not possess his telephone number, nor does he have mine. He’s not someone I wish to be in any communication with. The sole occasion on which we communicated directly was during the 16 December 2025 call into which he was surreptitiously inserted by Counsel Ncube without any forewarning. This is fully corroborated by the attached WhatsApp exchanges with both Counsel Ncube and Advocate Ndlovu.13. The reason Advocate Ndlovu was still desperately seeking my phone number from Counsel Ncube as late as 8 February 2026 is straightforward: we have no prior relationship or direct dealings; we are neither friends nor acquaintances; we simply have no basis for communicating or engaging each other about anything under the sun. Our only interaction occurred when Counsel Ncube ambushed me on 16 December 2025.It is for this very reason that, well before the illegal audio leak on 24 February 2026 and well before the 5 March letter (which introduced the fabricated title “Professor Jonnathan (sic.) Moyo, the principal architect of the litigation”), I sent the following WhatsApp message to Counsel Ncube on 8 February 2026 – on the eve of the Constitutional Court hearing on the application for direct access:”Good morning Counsel Ncube. I’m in church. What guidance do you want from me? I’ve previously made my position crystal clear to you. I’ve nothing to do with this case. I don’t understand why on earth Advocate Method Ndlovu is persisting to want to talk to me about the Fuzwayo case, which I’ve neither interest in nor involvement of any kind; and which I’ve never discussed with him for any reason at any point? Exactly what mischief is he pursuing by persistently going through you to drag me into the case? What exactly does he want? Money? What for and why from me? I’m disturbed by his persistence, which is now bordering on unprofessional and unethical conduct. It should stop. Please.”14. This was my unequivocal message to Counsel Ncube for him to share with Advocate Ndlovu – not yesterday or last week, but on 8 February 2026. I warned that Advocate Ndlovu’s persistent attempts to use Ncube as an intermediary to involve me in the Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu LikaZulu case, while refusing to deal directly with the instructing attorneys, was “bordering on unprofessional and unethical conduct.” Tragically, events have proven this assessment correct. The rest is now history.15. Advocate Ndlovu’s unprofessional and unethical conduct in this matter does not exist in isolation; it forms part of a deeply troubling pattern with disturbing precedents. Two cases stand out.16. Last year, after successfully representing Professor Welshman Ncube in a High Court matter concerning the reassignment of CCC Members of Parliament to portfolio committees, Advocate Ndlovu “double-dipped” by preparing what he said was a draft Notice of Appeal at the Supreme Court for Senator Tshabangu – the very party seeking to overturn the victory he Advocate Ndlovu had secured for Professor Ncube.Advocate Ndlovu manipulated Tshabangu into paying for the draft by falsely claiming awareness of a legal loophole and alleging non-payment of fees by Professor Ncube.When Tshabangu’s lawyers learned of this devious scheme, they advised Tshabangu to discard the document. By then, however, Advocate Ndlovu had already unprofessionally and unethically swindled Tshabangu. Once this pattern of dishonesty is known, as I happen to know about it, trust in Advocate Ndlovu becomes impossible.17. This is precisely why, on 3 February 2026, I informed Counsel Ncube that if I had any involvement whatsoever in the Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu case, I would never – under any circumstances – have permitted the engagement of Advocate Method Ndlovu. Never. He has proven himself to be profoundly dishonest and fraudulent.18. A further glaring example of Advocate Ndlovu’s dishonest and fraudulent practice is evident in case HC 10820/17 (see bottom-right attachment), heard on 24 November 2017 before the Harare High Court. In that matter, Advocate Thabani Mpofu deployed pseudo-applicants as “tortoises” – individuals lacking locus standi and financial means to cover legal fees – while Advocate Method Ndlovu falsely presented himself as President Mugabe’s counsel, claiming instructions to represent him when he had absolutely none.I know this for a fact because I was in direct communication with President Mugabe at the time. The fraud was staggering. This occurred despite Mugabe having resigned three days earlier on 21 November 2017, and possessing a well-known lawyer at the time.The deception escalated when both scheming advocates colluded to engineer a fraudulent consent order. Through false pretences, they misled the Court into believing President Mugabe had instructed Advocate Ndlovu to consent to an order acknowledging that he had “abdicated his constitutional function,” thereby providing legal cover for the military coup.There’s no way President Mugabe could have consented to such nonsense. This collusion was not merely dishonest and fraudulent; it was dastardly and evil. As officers of the Court, Advocate Ndlovu and his mentor, Advocate Mpofu, betrayed their duty to justice by obtaining a consent order through deliberate deceit. This fact remains a hideous stain on the Zimbabwean judiciary!
An interesting development in the Mbuso Fuzwayo and his group case that is before the CONCOURT. The counsel Adv Ndlovu according to this letter has withdrawn citing issues of payment and not understanding the direction the case has now taken. Once again@ProfJNMoyois cited in…pic.twitter.com/XRofqz6QEu
Holy moly!Wow! Just wow!East African good night principal architect.Wow!https://t.co/axYTUsnnCH
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24’s community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24’s community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
More on:#Method_Ndlovu,#Ugly,#AdvocateJoin the discussionLoading comments…Enable JavaScript to view comments.
More on:#Method_Ndlovu,#Ugly,#Advocate
Join the discussionLoading comments…Enable JavaScript to view comments.
Join the discussionLoading comments…Enable JavaScript to view comments.
Join the discussionLoading comments…Enable JavaScript to view comments.
Enable JavaScript to view comments.
Source: Bulawayo24
All Zim News – Bringing you the latest news and updates.
Allzimnews – Bringing you the latest news and updates.
