Cape Town – Zimbabwe opposition parties have reportedly slammed First Lady Grace Mugabeover her love for an “extravagant” life after it emerged last week that she had purchase a diamond ring worth $1.4m through a Lebanese dealer Jamal Ahmed.
Grace made headlines on Friday, with reports saying that the deal came to light after she demanded a refund, which she allegedly wanted paid to her in Dubai.
The diamond ring had been meant to be President Robert Mugabe’s wedding anniversary present to her.
The year 2016 marked the 20th anniversary of the Mugabes’ wedding.
Following the botched deal, Ahmed had dragged the first lady to court, accusing her of occupying three of his properties in Zimbabwe.
He also claimed that he had received threats from Grace and her son Russell Goreraza. Grace’s security personnel, Kennedy Fero, was also said to be implicated, the Independent newspaper reported.
“Insatiable appetite for vanity”
According to New Zimbabwe.com, the opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP) reportedly said that it was important for Grace to know that Zimbabweans were watching her.
“This is gluttonous politics surpassing the evil of biblical Sodom and Gomorrah. Her (Grace’s) insatiable appetite for vanity is only comparable to Fedinand Marcos’s wife. She should however, be warned that the people are watching,” the PDP was quoted as saying.
The MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai also weighed in: “Honestly how can somebody buy a ring that is worth $1.4m when people are dying in hospitals because there are no drugs, kids are unable to go to school because they are hungry.”
The MDC said this was the “most disgusting and shocking” ring “to be bought by any human being”.
Meanwhile, a News Day editorial piece also laid into Grace, saying it was shocking that Mugabe, who had over the years been described as “humble” and as the “poorest president in the world” by the first lady, was willing to splurge $1.4m on a diamond ring for his wife.
“While Mugabe has every right to buy his wife a 20-year wedding ring, we find it shattering that the president can choose to be this extravagant when the country is in such an economic mess,” read part of the editorial article.