The core problem remains the lack of legal ownership, missing title deeds, and no protective contracts linking their payments to the land parcels they purchased and were promised by Sithule Tshuma. “You gave us the impression it was Qoki the vehicle.
In reality, you used your personal company.
That’s misrepresentation.
Why didn’t you tell us from the beginning that this was a private, for-profit enterprise? ”
Investors now feel betrayed — not just by the financial outcome, but by the trust they placed in a fellow Zimbabwean woman who claimed to be building generational wealth for Matebeleland women.
Based on documentation, legal experts identify the following serious concerns:
Many investors were never told that the land would be owned under Sithule Tshuma’s personal or business entity, rather than held in cooperative trust.
This violates:
Investors had no legal recourse, no signed agreements confirming ownership, and no documentation disclosing the true nature of the investment vehicle.
Sithule Tshuma positioned herself as a community leader and organiser in a role of trust.
By doing so, she assumed fiduciary responsibilities, whether formalised or not. 🔗 Read Full Article
All Zim News is a central hub for all things Zimbabwean, curating news from across the country so no story is missed.
Alongside aggregation, our team of nationwide reporters provides real-time, on-the-ground coverage.
Stay informed and connected — reach us at admin@allzimnews. com.
