By Staff Reporter
HARARE – The dispute over a US$1.18 million debt between businessman Robin Vela and AL Shams Global has intensified, with the creditor maintaining that Vela has not paid the US$430,000 he claims to have settled, even as the High Court recently ruled against him.
AL Shams Global says Vela signed two Acknowledgements of Debt (AODs) in 2023, totalling US$1,180,000. The first, for US$885,000, was signed on 11 May 2023, with payment due by 28 November 2023. The second, for US$295,000, was signed on 5 July 2023, with a final payment deadline of 7 January 2024. Both were notarised in South Africa
The company disputes Vela’s assertion, previously reported in the media, that he repaid US$430,000 towards the debt.
In a strongly worded response, AL Shams Global offered a US$250,000 reward if Vela can produce evidence proving that he paid US$430,000 against the two 2023 AODs
“If Robin Vela fails to provide evidence of payments totalling US$430,000,” the company said, it expects the publication that carried his claim to retract the story
Vela has submitted a document titled “FIRSTMILE CALCULATIONS – AL SHAMS LOANS – Payments Reconciliation – 7 June 2024” as proof of payment . The document outlines a reconciliation of alleged payments and reflects calculations of balances.
However, AL Shams maintains that the reconciliation does not constitute proof that funds were received into its accounts. The company says it is prepared, subject to board and legal approval, to release detailed payment records to demonstrate that the amounts paid are “far less than US$430,000”
The matter comes as Vela, a former chairman of the National Social Security Authority, suffered a legal setback. Early this year in January, the High Court dismissed his attempt to block enforcement of the US$1.18 million debt, clearing the way for recovery proceedings to continue.
In earlier coverage by The Anchor, Vela accused Shar of engaging in “media spin” over the dispute.
AL Shams, however, insists the issue is straightforward: the debt was acknowledged in notarised agreements, payment deadlines have passed, and the alleged US$430,000 repayment has not been substantiated with evidence acceptable in law.
With the High Court ruling against Vela and enforcement proceedings advancing, the central question remains whether he can produce verifiable proof of payment to counter Shar’s position that the bulk of the US$1.18 million remains unpaid.
