Legal Battle Over Mengi’s Billion-Dollar Empire Offers Lessons in Marriage & Financial Well-Being

Print or Email This Article

The demise of the business mogul, Dr. Reginald Abraham Mengi, has torn his family into shards, leaving his immediate widow fighting his children from his first marriage for the sole control of his vast empire. At the heart of a bitter legal dispute that is being ferociously waged in the courts lies the legal status of Dr. Mengi’s written will.

His widow, Jackline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi, claims her late husband had died testate – left behind a written will- while his children successfully challenged that will at Dar es Salaam High with the Court nullifying the will, citing it was scribbled when he was mentally incapacitated! I think it’s the right time to reflect on legal issues being sorted out at courts, and the whole judicial process amply demonstrates that Tanzanian courts cannot resolve legal disputes within a reasonable time. 

Dr. Reginald Abraham Mengi was a Tanzanian billionaire, businessperson, philanthropist, and author of the book “I Can, I Must, I Will.” He was born on 29th May 1943 in the Kilimanjaro region and passed away on 2 May 2019 in Dubai, where he had trudged in search of medical attention. He was born into a poor background. His story of overcoming poverty has imprinted a powerful legacy for many to emulate. 

Dr. Mengi’s childhood was tough sailing. He attended primary school barefoot, covering long distances daily to hurry to school with very little in his belly. His determination to overcome endemic poverty led him to study accountancy with Cooper Brothers in the United Kingdom.

After being accepted as a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales, he returned to Tanzania in 1971. The accounting firm Coopers & Lybrand Tanzania employed him. He stayed with Coopers & Lybrand Tanzania (now Price Water House Coopers) until September 1989, when he became its Chairman and Managing Partner. In October 1989, Dr. Mengi left Coopers & Lybrand Tanzania to focus on his private businesses. 

After that, he formed IPP Limited and its associated companies, ranked amongst the largest private companies in Tanzania before his death. His media empire included ITV, one of Tanzania’s first private television stations. Bonite Bottler’s company is considered by many as his most successful business franchise.

He was the Chairman of Tanzania Private Sector Foundation (TPSF), Confederation of Tanzania Industries, IPP Gold Ltd., Media Owners Association of Tanzania, Executive Chairman & Owner at IPP Ltd. (Tanzania) and Chairman of Handeni Gold, Inc. with an estimated net worth of USD 560 million as per Forbes wealthiest people in Africa 2014. 

Perhaps Dr. Mengi’s chief controversy was his role as the chairperson of the procurement committee for the National Investments Company Limited (NICOL), which mobilized funds from Tanzanians of all walks of life to empower Indigenous people. After collecting billions of Tanzanian shillings, the organization went on a buying spree that targeted underperforming local companies for reasons that are not clear, but those languishing acquisitions cost a fortune.

Before that, Dr. Mengi was appointed Chairman of the procurement committee, where mega purchases were concluded. Apart from buying fish processing factories in Mwanza, one mega acquisition of his linked pharmaceutical factory poured cold water into his indigenization motto of our local economy. 

ALSO, READ A Lawyer’s Perspective: Justice into the Ground! Is the Legal System and Lawyers Failing Tanzanians?

NICOL bought the sputtering pharmaceutical company associated with Dr. Mengi for a colossal TZS 43 billion. Later, during one of its annual convention meetings, he defended his actions by saying that he was not the owner of the pharmaceutical company under the spotlight but his brother, whom he never mentioned by name!

He also excused himself by saying that after NICOL had bought the struggling pharmaceutical company, he immediately resigned from the chairmanship of the procurement committee. Many members blamed him for putting self-interest above collective ones.

Strangely, Mengi implored the beleaguered chairman of NICOL to accept responsibility and resign since most members had lost faith in his leadership. That brotherly advice went unheeded as the legal tussle for NICOL leadership was earnestly pursued in courts whose final determination is beyond the scope of this discussion.

Before his demise, Dr. Mengi’s book became part and parcel of evidential submissions before the High Court to push back claims he had prepared and had signed the will while he was mentally incapacitated! At the High Court, the children of the first marriage had lodged a request to be the executors of their father’s estate, a matter of the primary court’s jurisdiction notwithstanding the vast financial claims to the contrary.

It is unclear why the High Court took it as a court of first instance! The probable let-out could be the colossal sums of wealth involved, but the pertinent law of such matters did not impose limitations on them at the primary courts.

The primary courts are better positioned to understand the complexity of estate execution disputes than superior courts such as the High Court. Primary courts know local situations better and will likely make decisions that accommodate local conditions. 

Perhaps more controversy generated by the High Court was the entertainment of the issue of mental incapacitation of the deceased. There was nothing before the High Court to reach that conclusion. The mental capacity of any person can only be assessed when that person is still alive and ought to be carried out by medical professionals certified for that function.

For a court of law to rely on expert opinion after the person in question was already dead defied all norms and conduct of such an exercise. The whole caboodle was drawn out on assumptions where significant attribution errors were introduced and recklessly accepted as correct!

Assessment of the mental health status of the deceased was based entirely on hearsay, suppositions, permutations, and personal views that violated the Evidence Act. Oral evidence is impermissible when documentary evidence is available or required to be applied in such circumstances.

Notably, Dr. Mengi’s family doctor never suggested a mental health assessment or treatment, casting doubt on the testimony, which appears speculative and unfounded. Surprisingly, the High Court was influenced by inadmissible evidence to nullify a valid written will.

The children of Mengi did not explain to the Court why they did not seek an independent opinion of their father’s mental well-being while he was still alive. They waited years after he had passed away before ridiculing and placing their father on the false light just to get their hands in his mega riches.

For a court of law to quash and set aside a written will is scary for all people who delude themselves that a written will is above reproach. After Dr. Mengi’s written will was annulled without medical certification over his mental health at the time he signed, the will should send shock waves to all. 

I say so because once a will is written and signed, the law of contract governs it, and any disputes must be resolved within two years from the date the will becomes a legal instrument for execution.

Apart from the lack of jurisdiction based on the matter of execution of the deceased’s estate, which was solely vested upon primary courts, the High Court was in serious want of jurisdiction to entertain, hear and adjudicate on the written will over two years old. Under the Law of Limitation dictation, no court had inherited jurisdiction to hear and determine a written well over two years old. 

I sympathise with Dr. Mengi’s children that the will had left them with nothing, and I understand why they have a huge axe to grind against their father’s widow, but adult children have no business depending on parents after they have clocked 18 years.

They should move on, and sometimes, parents like Dr. Mengi, who had humble beginnings, believe that leaving enormous wealth to their beloved adult children deprives them of the hunger and zeal to achieve their wildest dreams. This is called “tough love.”

Pampering adult children with insane riches they never earn robs them of self-identity and condemns them to living in the shadow of their “larger-than-life” father. Historical data indicates that once children from well-to-do families inherit large sums of money and properties, they tend to have nothing to live for, which pivots them into immorality. 

Could Dr. Mengi, out of “tough love”, have bequeathed his beloved children what they truly deserve? To the toddlers, the physical wealth, but to his adult ones, a hunger to emulate his life by distancing them from the distractions his feats entailed. 

The execution of Dr Mengi’s estate is an ongoing judicial battle that will never come to fruition soon despite the latest Court of Appeal ruling that litigation must end, which is the ultimate intention of public policy.

The gospel truth ought to come out now that public policy did not aim to permit courts to exercise jurisdiction which they did not have, and parlaying public policy nobler aims to defraud litigants is unacceptable. Parties rush to courts to seek justice but not to lose it in many judicial roller-coasters and intrigues.