The Walter Mzembi Trial: how a courtroom in Harare is becoming a test for Zimbabwean tourism and the investment message “World of Wonders”
Former minister of tourism and hospitality and once Zimbabwe’s top diplomat Walter Mzembi has been in custody for months, and his case – although formally conducted over alleged abuse of office – is increasingly interpreted as a political-symbolic litmus test for the country’s international reputation. While authorities simultaneously intensify campaigns aimed at convincing foreign markets that Zimbabwe is stable, safe, and open to capital, the court proceedings against one of the best-known faces from the Robert Mugabe era enter a phase that will determine whether the accused will even have to present a defence.
What Mzembi is accused of and why the case is so visible
According to the indictment, the core of the matter concerns the handling of state property – large public viewing screens (public viewing screens) which, the prosecution claims, were allocated or transferred to religious communities without properly followed procedures. Media reports mention a value of around 200 thousand US dollars, and the key legal dilemma is who in the decision-making chain had the authority and responsibility to dispose of such property: the minister as a political office-holder or an “accounting officer” within the civil service.
The proceedings have drawn attention also because Mzembi is a publicly recognizable name. At the time he headed the tourism portfolio, he was one of the country’s main promoters at international fairs, and Zimbabwe, through branding and political communication, sought to mitigate reputational damage generated during periods of political crises and economic collapse. Today’s trial is therefore followed not only as a criminal case, but also as an indicator of how ready the judicial system is to demonstrate professionalism, predictability, and procedural orderliness – concepts that for investors and tourism partners are often as important as promotional slogans.
Latest development: court rejects bid for discharge at the close of the state case
According to reports published on 18 February 2026, the High Court in Harare rejected Mzembi’s application for discharge after the prosecution closed its case. Judge Benjamin Chikowero found that the prosecution had presented enough elements for the matter to proceed, which means the accused is expected to respond to the allegations and, if he wishes, present a defence. The decision followed announcements that the application would be decided on 17 February 2026, a date cited in public reporting as a key turning point in the process.
In practice, such a decision does not mean guilt, but that the court believes there is a “prima facie” case that must be clarified to the end. However, the political and reputational effect is immediate: Mzembi remains in focus, and international observers – especially those in the tourism industry – receive yet another reminder that the story of a “new” Zimbabwe is still unfolding against the backdrop of unresolved cases from the past.
Detention, denied bail, and the question of the accused’s health
Mzembi’s legal team has repeatedly tried to secure bail, but the court has previously rejected such applications, explaining the decision by citing a high flight risk due to earlier non-appearance at hearings and a prolonged stay outside the country. Part of the media also stated that the accused’s health had deteriorated in custody, which further increased public interest and opened debates about conditions in the detention system.
At the same time, law-enforcement institutions and anti-corruption bodies stress that this is a case that must be pursued without exceptions precisely because it involves public property and the conduct of office-holders. Such reasoning carries a strong political message to the domestic audience, but also an external dimension: Zimbabwe wants to show it is ready to prosecute corrupt practices, which is a key signal to international financial institutions and the business community.
Tourism as the “shop window of the state” and why the judiciary enters the brand story
In the tourism industry, reputation is currency. Campaigns and slogans can attract attention, but the impression of safety, stability, and predictability is built over years – and can be undermined by a single crisis. That is precisely why the Mzembi case is often interpreted as a test that goes beyond the confines of one courtroom.
Zimbabwe has long been trying to strengthen the destination brand “Zimbabwe: A World of Wonders”, anchored in natural attractions such as Victoria Falls (Mosi-oa-Tunya), national parks, and rich cultural heritage. In communication toward foreign markets, the emphasis is placed on a “return to normality” and on opportunities to invest in accommodation capacity, infrastructure, meetings and conference tourism, and related services. But in a world where news spreads faster than promotional spots, every image of detention, a court dispute, or institutional uncertainty can quickly become part of the “destination story”.
Why everything is more sensitive right now
The case is unfolding at a time when the country is intensifying its international outreach. Zimbabwe has its own flagship tourism showcase, the Sanganai/Hlanganani/Kumbanayi World Tourism Expo, aimed at connecting exhibitors, buyers, and investors and presenting the offer of different regions. In the 2025 edition, according to reports, the event emphasized business partnerships and the investment component, which is a typical format when a state wants to link tourism and economic development.
In parallel with tourism fairs, the country seeks to strengthen a broader business calendar, including major trade exhibitions presented as platforms for trade and investment. Such events play a double role: they bring direct spending through visits and accommodation, but more importantly, they serve as a stage on which the international audience is persuaded that the business environment is stable. In that logic, the judicial system becomes part of the same message, because investors and international event organizers – from the meetings industry to sports and cultural events – assess risk also through how a state conducts sensitive proceedings.
What the testimonies say: procedural gaps and the question of authority
In the course of the trial so far, according to publicly available reports, witnesses have addressed how decisions on the disposal of assets are made in state administration and which procedures must accompany donations or permanent transfers of equipment. Part of the testimony, according to some media accounts, opened room for the defence argument that the minister is not the “accounting” responsible official and that key steps lie in the hands of civil servants and internal control mechanisms.
On the other hand, the prosecution relies on the thesis that political approval or initiative, if it was decisive for assets leaving the system, is a sufficient basis for criminal liability within the offence of abuse of office. It is precisely at this junction of politics and administration that cases of “high-level corruption” often break: evidentiary standards are high, and public interest is exceptionally strong.
Wider background: the post-Mugabe era, the anti-corruption agenda, and internal politics
Mzembi was part of the top leadership during a period when Zimbabwe went through deep political disputes and economic turbulence. After the change of power in 2017 and new political configurations, many cases from the old system became the subject of investigations or renewed proceedings, and the public is often divided between demands for accountability and suspicions that some processes are also used for political score-settling.
In that context, the trial of a former minister has multiple audiences: the domestic one, seeking an answer to whether the powerful are truly equal before the law; the regional one, especially in southern Africa, where political changes are often followed through court processes; and the international one, whose interest in tourism and investment inevitably touches the question of the rule of law. Any procedural mistake, delay, or contradictory statement can become an argument for both critics and defenders of the official narrative.
How the case spills over into the tourism industry
For the average traveller, news about court proceedings is usually not decisive in a travel decision. But for tour operators, insurers, airlines, and conference organizers, perceptions of political and institutional stability enter risk assessments, and indirectly also prices, insurance, route planning, and capacity.
Zimbabwe has recently emphasized strategies that include strengthening its presence in international markets, digital marketing, and bringing in major events, including the business and meetings segment (MICE). Such a model presupposes long-term cooperation with international partners and a high level of trust in institutions. The trial of a high-profile politician in that sense can work in both directions: as proof that corruption is being prosecuted or as a signal that the country is still “cleaning up” the legacy of past conflicts.
The investment message: figures, plans, and the reality of perception
The government and tourism institutions stress that the tourism sector is an important pillar of economic recovery. In public statements and media reports, targets are cited for growth in arrivals and investment, as well as plans related to infrastructure, staff training, and promotion. The emphasis is placed on a combination of natural attractions and the country’s ability to host international fairs, investment conferences, and business meetings.
But the “reality of perception” is not managed only through press releases. In the tourism industry, especially in more distant markets, information about a country is often condensed into a few dominant images: security, politics, currency, transport, and trust in institutions. In that sense, the Mzembi case is a textbook example of how one story from crime reporting or politics can compete with marketing efforts – and why states that rely on tourism often invest as much energy in reputational management as in building hotels.
What comes next in the courtroom and on the “brand terrain”
After the court rejected the discharge application, the proceedings enter a phase in which the defence can present its own witnesses and arguments. The outcome will depend on whether it is proven that Mzembi had actual authority or intent to dispose of state property outside the rules, and whether the court accepts the defence line that key administrative decisions were outside his direct powers.
For the tourism industry and investors, how the process is conducted is equally important: whether hearings will be regular, whether decisions will be reasoned and well-founded, and whether facts will be communicated to the public without politicization. Zimbabwe is trying to position itself as a destination that offers a “world of wonders”, but modern tourism functions on trust in systems – from safety standards to legal protection of investment. If institutions manage to demonstrate consistency, the case can become an argument that the state takes accountability seriously. If the impression of selectivity or chaos prevails, the damage is measured not only in political points, but also in the interest of partners choosing where to direct money and guests in the coming years.
Sources:- NewZimbabwe.com – report on the High Court decision rejecting the bid for discharge ( link )- The Herald – report on the discharge bid and allegations about donating screens worth around USD 200,000 ( link )- ZimLive – context on detention, denied bail, and hearing delays ( link )- Xinhua – report on the opening of the Sanganai/Hlanganani/Kumbanayi World Tourism Expo and the expo’s goals ( link )- Zimbabwe International Trade Fair (ZITF) – official fact sheet for ZITF 2026 as a platform for trade, investment, and tourism (PDF) ( link )- Zimbabwe Tourism – official content and campaigns related to destination branding and promotion ( link )
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 2 hours ago