Zimbabwe’s Minister of Information Communication Technology (ICT), Postal and Courier Services, Hon. Tatenda Mavetera, is facing intense scrutiny following an explosive investigation by the online publication Dug Up.
The report alleges that Mavetera has been misrepresenting her academic credentials, specifically claiming a doctorate she does not possess, including one tied to a fraudulent honorary award and another allegedly completed by a paid academic proxy.
The investigation, authored by Dug Up contributors Changamire and Kuda Maynard, claims that Mavetera has been using the title “Dr.” despite only being a PhD candidate at Midlands State University (MSU), where she is pursuing a Doctorate in Business Leadership with a focus on Digital Marketing and Information Systems.
The exposé goes further, alleging that she paid a Mutare-based academic to undertake the doctoral work on her behalf, casting doubt on the legitimacy of her academic pursuits.
Adding fuel to the fire, Dug Up uncovered evidence that Mavetera has continued to tout an honorary doctorate in Humane Letters, reportedly awarded in 2022 by the International Institute of Philanthropy (IIP).
However, a High Court order in Zimbabwe banned the use of any awards linked to IIP and its founder, Enrico Maverick, a figure described in the investigation as a “petty criminal” known for issuing dubious credentials. Despite this ruling, the ICT Ministry’s official government website still lists Mavetera as holding a doctorate, a claim the Dug Up report labels as a deliberate hoax perpetuated by both the minister and her office.
The controversy erupted into public view earlier this month when prominent lawyer and former legislator Fadzayi Mahere questioned Mavetera’s use of the “Dr.” title. Mahere pointed to a November 9, 2024, tweet by Mavetera listing her qualifications—none of which included a completed PhD—prompting a broader debate about transparency and integrity among public officials. Mavetera responded by citing the honorary doctorate, but the Dug Up investigation challenges the validity of this defense, asserting that she knowingly misrepresented her credentials.
