THE child custody battle between businessman, Frank Buyanga
and his ex-girlfriend, Chantelle Muteswa has reached another level.
Buyanga has written to President Emmerson Mnangagwa
complaining against individuals who he alleged are meddling in his child
custody battle and personal matters, with Chantelle.
In his request, he chronicled to the President on how met
Chantelle.
“During or about 2008, Mr Lawrence Muteswa approached my
offices in Harare to sell his property, namely, 13 Coventry Road, Greystone
Park. I transferred the funds (USD) to his Stanbic account, of which he
acknowledged receipt. As a part of the
agreement, I allowed Mr Muteswa an option to buy back the property, an option
of which he failed to take advantage.
“Whilst my company was in the process of recovering the
property, I received a Facebook request from Ms Chantelle Muteswa stating she
had an interest in meeting me. Unbeknown to me at the time, she was the
daughter of Mr Muteswa. I ignored her
request for some time.
“On December 31, 2009, I was invited to a New Year’s Eve
gathering by a gentleman referred to as Rimo, in Harare’s Vainona
neighbourhood. At the gathering, I was approached by Mr Leeroy Serima who
pointed out Chantelle to me. He informed me that she wanted to be introduced
and to meet me. This is how Chantelle and I became acquainted, but at the time
I did not realise that the real intention of Chantelle was to seek the
forgiveness of her family debt and to manipulate me into not proceeding with
the recovery of her father’s property,” Buyanga said.
He said in their conversations he asked Chantelle if she
knew who Muteswa was but she ignored the question.
“As time progressed, I received a friend request on
Facebook from Mr Muteswa and upon showing this request to Chantelle, she asked
me to ignore it. Chantelle and I became
close, communicating frequently and then began a relationship.
“Chantelle and I have a child who is currently five years
old. Daniel Alexander Sadiqi, was born out of wedlock in South Africa. The
access and parental rights in regard to Daniel has been the subject of
exhaustive litigation scattered between numerous courts.
“I, as the biological father, have had to fight tooth and
nail for every single aspect pertaining to my parental right as the biological
father of Daniel, as well as having to fight for his rights, being guided by
what is in his best interests. As set out hereunder, it has been a disturbing
cumulating of events. The interference of individuals in your confidence in
these matters has exacerbated an already acrimonious situation. These
individuals have taken no cognisance of the impact their actions have on my
five-year-old child.
“Daniel was born in South Africa, however, Chantelle
returned with him to Zimbabwe, where she unlawfully obtained a birth
certificate for him and intentionally omitted to register me as the father on
the illegally obtained document,” he said.
Buyanga said he has made every effort to be involved in his
child’s life and on or about January 25, 2018, the parents entered into a
memorandum of agreement for access to and maintenance of Daniel, which
agreement was made an order of the Children’s Court, by consent.
He said the court order was varied three times at his
instance, with the last variation order being made on April 17, 2019.
He said the court order was violated by Chantelle, and
despite the fact that she was found in contempt of court, she persisted to deny
giving him Daniel’s passport when he exercised his access rights.
“Chantelle and I had agreed that Daniel’s home would be 13
Coventry Road, Greystone Park, Harare, Chantelle’s father’s house that had been
saved by myself. As far as I am aware, Chantelle is dependent upon her father
for her accommodation. In June 2019, whilst Daniel was with me, Chantelle and
her parents were evicted from 13 Coventry Road, Greystone Park, Harare.
“After they were evicted, Mr Muteswa was reported in the
media stating, “I do not have a place to sleep, these days it is cold”. As a
loving father, I had no option but to approach the court, in the best interests
of Daniel, and sought a court order that he could not return back to Chantelle
under the circumstances that she was in, as this would be placing Daniel into
an unstable and unsafe environment that is detrimental to his welfare.
“As a concerned father I exercised my legal right to apply
to extend my access rights to Daniel to allow me to provide accommodation for
him, which the court correctly granted. The court found that I could provide
Daniel with a stable and safe environment where his best interests would be
met.
He added, “Despite the Children’s Court ruling that
Daniel’s best interests were with me and that I could provide a safer home for
him, Chantelle demanded that Daniel be returned to her, even though she was
unable to provide him with a safe and stable home. Chantelle approached the
High Court to assist her and the urgent chamber application was heard before
Honourable Zhou J under case number HC6037/19.”
“In Chantelle’s application to the High Court, she
requested that the High Court set-aside the order granted by the Children’s
Court and that the High Court issue a warrant of arrest. Her application was
dismissed. The reasons for the dismissal are set out in the judgment attached.
Chantelle then appealed against the ruling of the Children’s Court. The appeal
is under case number CIV’A’ 220/2019.
“The court found that it is in the best interests of Daniel
that he stays in a safe and stable environment. To protect him, I made
application for execution pending appeal. The appeal was granted, and Daniel
remained safe with me.”
He said Chantelle proceeded with yet another urgent chamber
application under case number HC6651, in which she sought stay of execution of
the Children’s Court order under case number CCA205/18 pending determination of
appeal under CIV ‘A’. 220/19. The order was to serve as a warrant of arrest.
This application was found not to be urgent and was removed from the urgent
roll.
“Your Excellency, it has never been in doubt that I am
Daniel’s biological father, but Chantelle secured a birth certificate for our
son which did not include my name as his father. She intended to make it seem
as though he did not have a father. Despite several interactions to resolve
this matter, and include me on our child’s birth certificate, Chantelle did not
want my inclusion on the birth certificate as Daniel’s father. This right is
enshrined in terms of Section 81(1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
“Section 81(1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe states
“Every child, that is to say every boy and girl under the age of 18 years has
the right to be given a name and a family name”.
“Daniel was being denied his constitutional right of having
a family name which is my name. My child deserved to have his father’s family
name and I made an application that his birth certificate should include my
name. This application was granted by the court,” he said.
“Notwithstanding that the court ordered that Daniel remain
with me, Chantelle was granted the right to see him under supervision by either
myself or by my personnel. Through my attorneys, and in the interests of our
son, I engaged her several times that we should discuss the way forward,
inviting her to see Daniel, but she was not willing discuss the matter.
“It came to my attention that Chantelle had been going to
Daniel’s school and disrupting his learning. This was extremely inappropriate
as Chantelle was given the opportunity to see Daniel at any other time, but she
chose to disrupt him at school. To prevent this, I proceeded with an
application to the Magistrates’ Court, which the court granted, to bar Harare
International School from allowing anyone to see Daniel during his learning
time to ensure that his education was not disrupted.” H Metro
0 comments:
Post a Comment