A Harare man, Joseph Phiri, has been jailed five years for possessing 3,118 grams of gold without a licence — a sentence that immediately reignited old questions about Zimbabwe’s uneven history with gold offences.
For many Zimbabweans, the natural comparison is Henrietta Rushwaya, who was caught at RGM Airport with 6kg of gold in 2020. Her case dragged, she was tried under older statutes, and her ultimate penalties of a wholly suspended sentence and US$5000 fine were far lighter than what Phiri has just received.
This contrast looks like double standards — but legally, it isn’t.
Why Henrietta’s Case Looks Soft Today
Related Stories
Rushwaya’s arrest happened before key amendments to the Gold Trade Act and related regulations. At that time:
- penalties for possession were softer,
- custodial sentences were not mandatory,
- definitions of “possession,” “transportation,” and “temporary custody” had exploitable loopholes,
- enforcement culture was inconsistent, especially for high-profile suspects.
Because Zimbabwe does not apply criminal law retroactively, Rushwaya could only be tried and sentenced under the laws as they existed in 2020 — not the tougher regime introduced later.
Legal experts all agree that however serious her offence looks, you cannot punish someone with a law that didn’t exist at the time the crime was committed.
What Changed After the Rushwaya Saga
But the Rushwaya scandal triggered a full overhaul of gold-possession laws. Between 2021 and 2024:
- Mandatory jail terms were introduced for significant quantities.
- The law was tightened so that any possession without proper papers = automatic offence.
- Forfeiture became standard.
- Digitisation reduced fake paperwork.
- Gold leakages were reframed as a national-security threat, not just an economic offense.
These new laws now apply to Phiri and anyone caught today.
Leave Comments