…chronicles how he met ex-girlfriend
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.”