DAR ES SALAAM, 3 November 2025– Allegations are emerging that Zimbabwe may have played a hidden role in influencing the recent Tanzanian election through a network of business and political interests. At the centre of this controversy is the flamboyant and controversial Zimbabwean businessman Wicknell Chivayo, whose connections reach the highest levels of government in both Harare and Dar es Salaam. His name has become synonymous with murky contracts, inflated tenders and political patronage, and now it appears these dealings could be extending beyond Zimbabwe’s borders.
Investigators and analysts describe a familiar pattern, a rigging modus operandi that begins with the awarding of inflated procurement contracts for electoral materials. In Zimbabwe, Chivayo’s company was involved in a controversial deal with South African firm Ren-Form CC, which supplied election materials to the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission. Reports suggest that out of R1.1 billion paid by Zimbabwe’s Finance Ministry, more than R800 million was funnelled into companies linked to Chivayo. The goods supplied included biometric kits, servers, and even portable toilets, many of which were allegedly over-priced or undelivered.
This network appears to have expanded into Tanzania, where the recently concluded election has delivered an astonishing result: the incumbent president, Samia Suluhu Hassan, was declared winner with some 97-98 % of the vote. The election has been widely criticised as a sham given the exclusion of major opposition contenders and widespread reports of repression. Chivayo has been photographed with President Samia and his alleged business presence in Tanzania’s corridors of power has sparked deep concern. Shortly after images surfaced, the Tanzanian government curtailed media and restricted the internet, adding fuel to suspicions of a cover-up. Independent reports claim that Chivayo may even be involved in printing ballot papers for Tanzania’s election in 2025, again in partnership with Ren-Form. Although these claims remain unverified, they align with a broader pattern of electoral manipulation through control of materials and logistics.
Chivayo’s closeness to Zimbabwe’s ruling party ZANU-PF and to President Emmerson Mnangagwa has long been a subject of public discussion. He has openly supported the party, won high-value state contracts, and flaunted his access to power. The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission has denied directly engaging him for election materials, yet the financial evidence connecting his companies to state payments has prompted continuing scrutiny. His growing presence in Tanzania raises concerns that he may be replicating his Zimbabwean business model abroad, using contracts and influence to shape political outcomes. Observers describe this as part of a wider regional strategy, a cross-border exchange of influence where money, politics and control of election logistics merge into a single power mechanism.
The allegations point toward a troubling reality: that election manipulation in Africa is no longer confined within national borders. Zimbabwean business elites, already known for tender irregularities and corruption, could be exporting these systems to neighbouring countries. If Chivayo’s network indeed controls the printing or distribution of electoral materials in Tanzania, it would give them enormous leverage over the integrity of the vote. Such influence could sway results before ballots are even cast, undermining both transparency and public confidence. The implications are serious for both nations. For Tanzania, any proven involvement of foreign networks in its electoral process would deal a blow to the credibility of its democracy. For Zimbabwe, the spread of its opaque procurement practices could deepen its regional isolation and invite new international sanctions. More broadly, the growing nexus between political power and business elites across southern Africa threatens to entrench authoritarianism through manipulation of state and electoral institutions.
Ultimately, the keyword Zimbabwe appears throughout this narrative not merely as a geographical tag, but as the epicentre of what may be a regional scheme of electoral influence via business and procurement networks. The convergence of business elite, political power and election services presents a troubling picture, one that needs independent, rigorous investigation in both Harare and Dar es Salaam. Until full transparency is achieved and independent investigations are allowed to proceed, Zimbabwe’s shadow over Tanzania’s election will remain a potent and troubling symbol of how influence, money and politics intersect to undermine democracy in the region.
