By Staff Reporter
Bindura — The balance in the ongoing mining dispute between Freda Rebecca Gold Mine and operators at Side Electrical (Pvt) Ltd, trading as Botha Gold Mine, is increasingly tilting in favour of Botha following confirmation that an injunction relied upon by Freda was formally withdrawn before any determination was made.
Contrary to earlier public perceptions, the injunction in question targeting eight miners allegedly operating unlawfully was never filed before the High Court. Instead, it was lodged with the Mining Commissioner under the Ministry of Mines and Mining Development, asserting that the miners were encroaching on ground claimed by Freda Rebecca.
That application was subsequently withdrawn
Crucially, evidence of the withdrawal was produced by Freda Rebecca itself in a Notice of Opposition filed in response to an urgent chamber application by Side Electrical (Pvt) Ltd under case number HCH 354/26.
Side Electrical is seeking an interim prohibitory interdict barring Freda Rebecca Gold Mine and the Zimbabwe Republic Police from carrying out an operation at Botha Mine aimed at evicting miners and fencing off the disputed area.
Legal analysts say this sequence of events significantly weakens Freda Rebecca’s position while strengthening Botha’s argument that there is no lawful authority justifying interference with its mining operations.
Freda Rebecca maintains that the withdrawal followed alleged “compliance” by the affected miners. However, no ruling was ever issued either by the Mining Commissioner or by any court on
ownership of the disputed mining ground, the legality of mining activities at Botha Mine, or Freda Rebecca’s entitlement to exercise control over the area.
Legal observers note that the withdrawal of the application left Freda’s regulatory process without any enforceable outcome.
“Once an application is withdrawn, it effectively ceases to exist in law,” said a legal practitioner familiar with mining disputes.
“There is no order that can be relied upon to justify police action or the exclusion of miners. That legal vacuum is precisely what Botha is challenging before the court.”
Side Electrical’s urgent application places the withdrawn Ministry process at the centre of the dispute, arguing that any attempt to remove miners or fence off Botha Mine without a court order would amount to extra-judicial conduct.
The current standoff has also revived scrutiny of earlier litigation involving the same geographical area, where courts reportedly found that Freda Rebecca lacked sufficient legal standing to assert control, citing shortcomings in land ownership and title documentation.
Investigators reviewing the present record have further identified references to a notice of abandonment affecting land now claimed by Freda Rebecca a matter that remains unexplained.
Botha’s operators argue that these unresolved issues, taken together, suggest that Freda’s claims rest on assertion rather than adjudication.
While the withdrawal of the Ministry application brought Freda Rebecca’s regulatory action to an end, it appears to have reinforced Botha’s core legal argument: that no judicial or administrative ruling exists to displace its mining operations.
The High Court application by Side Electrical now squarely tests whether Freda Rebecca can lawfully interfere with activities at Botha Mine without first securing a clear legal determination.
For now, the documentary record shows that Freda Rebecca’s attempt to assert control through administrative channels failed to produce a binding outcome while Botha’s position is now anchored in court proceedings that demand proof, not presumption.
