Signature Fraud Claims, Alleged Political Pressure Reignite Battle for BGI Ethiopia Stake

Apr 13 , 2025. By AKSAH ITALO ( FORTUNE STAFF WRITER )

Key Takeaways:

Zewdinesh G. Asrat has intensified her legal battle against BGI Ethiopia Plc, asserting that she was unlawfully stripped of a 27pc stake in the company through "fraudulent documents and political coercion." Her legal team from Ethio-Alliance Advocates LLP filed new affidavit evidence at the Federal First Instance Court’s civil bench two weeks ago, claiming that the share transfer occurred without her knowledge or consent.

Zewdinesh's legal team filed a forensic evidence before the Court issued by Pro Scripto Document Examination CC, a South African company, verifying her claim that she never signed off on transferring her shares. The lawyers told judges that the forensic experts compared the signatures on the disputed document with known samples of Zewdnesh’s handwriting, focusing on stylistic elements, stroke proportions, and execution.

In a report dated January 27, 2025, the finding allegedly "identified inconsistencies involving handwriting elements such as inter-stroke connections, design, construction, and signature dimensions. Layers argued the report also "found variations in stroke proportions, height, termination strokes, line quality, writing movement, and the overall combination of writing habits." Zewdinesh's legal team concluded that it was unlikely their client signed the document authorising the share transfer at the April 2001 general assembly.

The evidence offers claims about how internal company documents were allegedly forged, facilitating the unauthorised share transfer. Zewdinesh's lawyers claimed the transfer not only removed her ownership

but also sidelined her from any influential decision-making role she previously held within BGI Ethiopia. The evidence provided by her legal team seeks to demonstrate clear instances of fraud, claiming that the documents were deliberately manipulated without any authorisation or consent from her side.

According to Zewdinesh’s lawyers — Yehualashet Tamiru, Kaleegziabher Gossaye, Ketema Adane, and Yigremachew Kefelegn — the transaction violated the investment laws, which mandate prior approval from the Ethiopian Investment Authority for joint ventures involving foreign entities. They appealed that the Court reinstate her shares, restore her former ownership in BGI Ethiopia, and grant her unpaid dividends, arguing that the share transfer was "fraudulent and illicit."

Her lawyers have consistently maintained that Zewdinesh’s exclusion from the company was orchestrated during an era fraught with political intrigue and interference. They claim that influential figures used their positions within the government to exert undue pressure, ultimately forcing her to relinquish her substantial stake in BGI Ethiopia. The legal team argued the illegality of these actions, stating how political coercion compounded the severity of what they claimed was "a fraudulent transfer."

BGI Ethiopia and B.I.H., represented by attorney Solomon Emeru, challenged the forensic report in Court last week. He disputed its admissibility before the Court, arguing that the plaintiff chose her own examiner and that the signatures used for comparison were not original documents but copies, reducing their value as evidence. The defense team maintained that the shares transfer was "conducted properly" and that Zewdnesh signed the minutes during a shareholders’ meeting.

Solomon argued that the case is a contractual matter rather than one involving property, claiming a two-year statute of limitations applies. He contended that Zewdnesh’s claim is time-barred. The defence also argued that the Court has yet to decide whether the case falls under property or contract law. He objected to the plaintiff's view of the case as a property dispute and collected evidence, including the forensic examination, without a prior court order.

Zewdnesh’s lawyers reject these arguments, insisting the legal dispute involves ownership rights that are not bound by time limits. They framed their case to establish whether their client continues to own shares with BGI Ethiopia, rather than a contract was breached.

Solomon and his team maintained that Zewdnesh knew about the share transfer at least 23 years ago. Even if she revisited the matter only after a proposed deal between Purpose Black and BGI Ethiopia in 2022, they claim her claim still violates the statute of limitations. The proposed but failed deal with Purpuse Black concerned the sale of BGI Ethiopia’s 30,000sqm property near Mexico Square. The sale was initially blocked by legal disputes, but the Federal High Court eventually affirmed BGI’s position, ending the dispute over the property acquisition.

A year ago, Zewdnesh’s legal team secured an injunction from the Federal First Instance Court preventing the sale of BGI’s headquarters and blocking the transfer of B.I.H.’s shares in the company. As the proceedings move forward, the Court is expected to hear testimony from key witnesses. BGI’s defence has named Hagos Debesu, Miraf Gezai, Tilahun Teshome, and Zenebech Shiferaw, while Zewdnesh’s team plans to call prominent figures such as Siye Abraha and Girma Wake.

Her legal team outlined Zewdinesh’s assertion of becoming a victim of "political manipulation" during a turbulent period of factional power struggles within the ruling party in the mid-1990s. The affidavit stated the period when Asefa Abraha, who then served as the board chairman of the Ethiopian Privatisation Agency, faced corruption charges over controversial privatisation deals, notably including the sale of St. George Brewery

The coming months promise a decisive turn in this long-running corporate and legal battle.

Her legal team insisted the Court should rigorously assess the provided evidence and testimony, holding accountable those responsible for orchestrating the alleged fraud.

PUBLISHED ON Apr 13,2025 [ VOL 26 , NO 1302]

Share this...

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin