Showing posts with label zimbabwe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label zimbabwe. Show all posts
Friday, 30 October 2015
On Zimbabwean schools that banned cereals after students used them to brew beer
In September, The Chronicle reported that a number of boarding schools in Zimbabwe have banned students from bringing certain types of breakfast cereals to school because some of the students are using the cereals to brew beer.
The report was subsequently picked up by a number of international media organisations, among them, SABC News, The Guardian, TIME and RT.
To me, the incident suggests the students are highly resourceful, creative and enterprising. It also suggests they have multi-faceted skills and aptitude that should be encouraged, rewarded and developed.
The schools mentioned in the report are: Tennyson Hlabangana High School, Cyrene Boys High and Embakwe.
Does anyone know what the schools' science teaching and learning resources and facilities are like? Are the schools OK for textbooks, equipment, facilities and resources or can they do with support in sourcing these?
Monday, 28 July 2008
An Abhorrent Form of Censorship
Two Zimbabwean journalists from the state-owned Sunday Mail and Herald newspapers -- Munyaradzi Huni and Caesar Zvayi -- have been placed on the European Union's sanctions list. The two, alongside other perceived supporters of the Mugabe regime, will have their assets frozen and will not be allowed into European Union territory ("Journalists added to EU sanctions list," SW Radio Africa, July 23).
This move is shocking because it is a blatant attempt at mind-control and is clearly aimed at muzzling all voices, other than those that are seen and heard to be supporting Morgan Tsvangirai.
I say the decision to place the journalists on the sanctions list is an attempt at mind-control because, early this month, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner stated that the EU would not recognise any government in Zimbabwe other than a government led by Tsvangirai ("EU wants Tsvangirai to head Zimbabwe govt", Reuters, July 1).
The EU, like the United States, tries to justify this position by arguing that because Tsvangirai 'won' the March 29 elections, he should, therefore, lead the country.
In all likelihood, the EU is aware that the argument it is advancing on who should lead Zimbabwe is deeply flawed. This would explain why it is now waging psychological warfare on writers and political commentators -- it wants to manipulate and control what journalists, writers and political commentators write and say about Tsvangirai.
I say the EU's position on Tsvangirai is flawed because it is not and should not be up to the EU to decide who should have what position in the Zimbabwean government. That decision should be left to the people of Zimbabwe.
In addition to that, the EU's position on who should lead the country is flawed because it is based on the embellishment that Tsvangirai won the March 29 elections. The truth of the matter is that Tsvangirai got 47.9% of the votes and this fell short of the 50% (plus 1) that both the MDC and Zanu-PF had agreed were needed in order to determine who should lead the country.
Based on the results of the March 29 elections, it can actually be argued that the majority of the people in Zimbabwe (52.1%), do not have confidence in Morgan Tsvangirai as a leader.
Had Tsvangirai taken part in the June 27 presidential run-off and had he received 50% plus 1 of the votes, then yes, he would have had the right to lead the country. But because he unilaterally pulled out of the elections, he left Robert Mugabe as the sole candidate. And, because Mugabe was the sole contestant in the June 27 elections, he won and is, therefore, the legitimate leader of Zimbabwe.
Also, Zvayi no longer works for the Sunday Mail and I doubt that Huni, like the bulk of those working within Zimbabwe's state-owned media, can afford to travel to any part of the EU. It is also highly unlikely that any of them have assets in the EU.
In placing these two journalists on the sanctions list, the EU is actually trying to instill fear and create a psychological block on all writers and commentators who have an interest in Zimbabwe and who have an alternative take on what is happening there. This is further evidenced by the fact that, currently, among other things, Peter Mavhunga -- a court probation officer and part-time newspaper columnist who has been living and working in the U.K. for the past 30 years -- is now being subjected to a witch-hunt by British authorities because he writes for the Zimbabwean state-owned Herald newspaper ("UK bars Zim DJs," Journalism.co.za, July 15).
While I believe that a solution needs to be found to the country's political and economic crisis, I do not believe that threatening, harassing and intimidating writers in this manner will do anything to resolve the crisis.
Behaviours like these are an abhorrent form of censorship and are an attack on the freedoms of speech, thought and association. They are no different from the treatment repressive regimes all over the world routinely mete out on writers they see as expressing views that deviate from and which threaten the regimes' interests.
In placing Huni and Zvayi on its sanctions list, the EU is, in effect, threatening, not only journalists who work for the state-owned media in Zimbabwe, but all people who have an interest in the future of the country and is telling them, "If you are seen to be supporting anyone other than Tsvangirai, we will make life uncomfortable for you."
Instead of threatening writers and political commentators, if the EU truly wants a feasible solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe, it should support the mediation efforts that are currently being overseen by South African President Thabo Mbeki.
Link
An earlier version of this article has been featured on OhmyNews International.
This move is shocking because it is a blatant attempt at mind-control and is clearly aimed at muzzling all voices, other than those that are seen and heard to be supporting Morgan Tsvangirai.
I say the decision to place the journalists on the sanctions list is an attempt at mind-control because, early this month, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner stated that the EU would not recognise any government in Zimbabwe other than a government led by Tsvangirai ("EU wants Tsvangirai to head Zimbabwe govt", Reuters, July 1).
The EU, like the United States, tries to justify this position by arguing that because Tsvangirai 'won' the March 29 elections, he should, therefore, lead the country.
In all likelihood, the EU is aware that the argument it is advancing on who should lead Zimbabwe is deeply flawed. This would explain why it is now waging psychological warfare on writers and political commentators -- it wants to manipulate and control what journalists, writers and political commentators write and say about Tsvangirai.
I say the EU's position on Tsvangirai is flawed because it is not and should not be up to the EU to decide who should have what position in the Zimbabwean government. That decision should be left to the people of Zimbabwe.
In addition to that, the EU's position on who should lead the country is flawed because it is based on the embellishment that Tsvangirai won the March 29 elections. The truth of the matter is that Tsvangirai got 47.9% of the votes and this fell short of the 50% (plus 1) that both the MDC and Zanu-PF had agreed were needed in order to determine who should lead the country.
Based on the results of the March 29 elections, it can actually be argued that the majority of the people in Zimbabwe (52.1%), do not have confidence in Morgan Tsvangirai as a leader.
Had Tsvangirai taken part in the June 27 presidential run-off and had he received 50% plus 1 of the votes, then yes, he would have had the right to lead the country. But because he unilaterally pulled out of the elections, he left Robert Mugabe as the sole candidate. And, because Mugabe was the sole contestant in the June 27 elections, he won and is, therefore, the legitimate leader of Zimbabwe.
Also, Zvayi no longer works for the Sunday Mail and I doubt that Huni, like the bulk of those working within Zimbabwe's state-owned media, can afford to travel to any part of the EU. It is also highly unlikely that any of them have assets in the EU.
In placing these two journalists on the sanctions list, the EU is actually trying to instill fear and create a psychological block on all writers and commentators who have an interest in Zimbabwe and who have an alternative take on what is happening there. This is further evidenced by the fact that, currently, among other things, Peter Mavhunga -- a court probation officer and part-time newspaper columnist who has been living and working in the U.K. for the past 30 years -- is now being subjected to a witch-hunt by British authorities because he writes for the Zimbabwean state-owned Herald newspaper ("UK bars Zim DJs," Journalism.co.za, July 15).
While I believe that a solution needs to be found to the country's political and economic crisis, I do not believe that threatening, harassing and intimidating writers in this manner will do anything to resolve the crisis.
Behaviours like these are an abhorrent form of censorship and are an attack on the freedoms of speech, thought and association. They are no different from the treatment repressive regimes all over the world routinely mete out on writers they see as expressing views that deviate from and which threaten the regimes' interests.
In placing Huni and Zvayi on its sanctions list, the EU is, in effect, threatening, not only journalists who work for the state-owned media in Zimbabwe, but all people who have an interest in the future of the country and is telling them, "If you are seen to be supporting anyone other than Tsvangirai, we will make life uncomfortable for you."
Instead of threatening writers and political commentators, if the EU truly wants a feasible solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe, it should support the mediation efforts that are currently being overseen by South African President Thabo Mbeki.
Link
An earlier version of this article has been featured on OhmyNews International.
Tuesday, 22 July 2008
12 Steps to Get Into Office (Without Winning an Election)
- Have no plan, other than to get into office.
- Contradict yourself often.
- Blame the other parties for all the problems in the country.
- Treat your party like it's your farm.
- Treat members of your party like they are your farm workers.
- Repeatedly ask members of your party to use violent tactics to get you into office.
- Get the biggest bullies in the playground to take you under their wing.
- Ask other countries to impose sanctions on your country.
- Ask other countries to invade your country.
- If it looks like you are going to win an election, pull out. Refuse to participate in the elections.
- Say you are not going to negotiate, then negotiate.
- Say you are not going to take part in a 'government of national unity', then make efforts to be included in such a government.
Thursday, 28 February 2008
[Interview] John Nyamande, Zimbabwean opposition political party activist
Between June 25 and 29, 2007, I had a wide-ranging interview with the veteran Zimbabwean opposition political activist, John Nyamande in which he talked, among other things, about the Save Zimbabwe Campaign’s visit to the U.K.; the talks that were then still going on in South Africa and about the conditions under which Zimbabwean asylum seekers are living in the U.K.The following is a lightly edited version of the interview:
During one of MDC president, Morgan Tsvangirai’s last visits to the U.K., he held a rally in Luton. What was the purpose or significance of the visit?
The rally in Luton, on June 23, 2007 was purposeful and had lots of significance.
At this rally Morgan Tsvangirai and Lovemore Madhuku were able to address the people. The President [Tsvangirai] spoke about the talks in South Africa and asylum issues in the U.K.
Lovemore Madhuku talked about a new constitution.
The party travelled under the Save Zimbabwe Campaign (SZC) and the delegation comprised of Morgan Tsvangirai, Prof Arthur Mutambara, Paul Siwela of ZAPU, Lovemore Madhuku, Rev. Levee Kadenge of the Christian Alliance and Miss Mudehwe for Zinasu.
The purpose of the SZC was to lobby the diplomatic community in Europe, about a new constitution before free, fair and internationally supervised elections take place.
They visited Belgium, Germany and France and were able to have fruitful talks with the governments of these countries. I understand the campaign is going to be taken to the SADCC countries, Central and West Africa, Canada, Australia, United States and other progressive countries in the world.
It is only fair for the progressive groups like the SZC to have their views regarding problems in Zimbabwe heard as well. However, on the sidelines of these diplomatic manoeuvres, members of this group had an opportunity to meet their members to listen and brief them about progress regarding talks in South Africa. Tsvangirai met his group at Luton and, Mutambara met his at a hotel in London and I hope Siwela did the same. It was fair for them to meet their supporters because a lot of Zimbabweans are now in the Diaspora as refugees and need to hear about developments at home from their leaders.
In the U.K., many Zimbabweans have had their applications for political asylum refused. How would you describe the conditions under which they are living?
The position of the MDC is that under the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948), Zimbabweans who are seeking asylum and currently in the U.K., must be treated with dignity and humanity.
These are people with skills, who are trainable and hard working. Evidence shows that the health and social care sector is immensely benefiting from Zimbabweans who are legally and illegally working in this country. This group is contributing to the GDP of this economy.
Those who have been refused political asylum are not allowed to work and do not receive any government benefits at all. Some have committed suicide and others have children.
Surely the government of the U.K. is a champion in condemning other governments that violate such kinds of human rights. The U.K. government must reconsider its position and give asylum seekers temporary work permits that become invalid as soon as the situation in Zimbabwe is resolved. However, the MDC does encourage its members to be law abiding and does not support those who break the laws of the host country.
What is the background to the talks in South Africa? How significant are they?
Mismanagement of the Zimbabwean economy, bad governance that has left 80% of the population unemployed, price madness with inflation galloping at well over 5000% [at the time of the interview], hunger, reduced life expectancy to 37years for men and 34 years for women, politicized judiciary and police, human rights abuses, amending of the Constitution and other issues have forced the opposition, civic groups and even SADCC to speak their concerns.
Zimbabwe is having Presidential elections in 2008 and ZANU (PF) which is in government has amended the constitution so that Robert Mugabe, whose term had expired would extend his term, increase the number of constituencies in the assembly and also increase the number of senators who were introduced only last year.
The view of the majority is that Robert Mugabe is afraid to face a challenger under the same constitution he has been enjoying for the past 25 years. If Mugabe is still popular, Zimbabweans are demanding impartiality in the conduct of elections, according to SADCC protocol, conduct and conditions laid down by himself and other members of the community.
Before the elections in March 2008, Zimbabweans at home and Diaspora are demanding a new Constitution designed by all groups, which would then address issues of repressive laws like AIPPA, POSA, and voter registration, delimitation of constituency boundary and composition of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC).
If these talks succeed and elections conducted and supervised by a neutral body, surely, there is no reason why sanctions should not be lifted and Zimbabwe slotted back into the progressive community. Sanctions should not be lifted before an agreement because (ZANU (PF) is not faithful when it comes to negotiations of such a nature. He did this when Mbeki was engaging them during the first initiatives of talks.
What will be needed for the talks to succeed?
The ZANU (PF) government must start by re-orientating its attitude towards opposition movements, civic groups. They must also listen, respect the views of the ordinary people who are facing the price madness, and shortages of basic commodities.
ZANU (PF) has failed to tell Mugabe the truth about the hunger, disease, poverty and suffering on the grassroots level, because of the patronage system of governance he has entrenched. His cronies are afraid to tell him in case they lose the farms, business contracts, houses and food they receive. It is high time Robert Mugabe starts listening to the opposition and other civic groups if he has the country at heart. Time is running out.
The ZANU (PF) government must stop harassing the opposition, trumping up charges of petrol bombing and terrorist training. These are cheap charges, bogus and can easily be laughed at by any person on the street. A government must treat its people by dignity and humanity irrespective of their political affiliations.
The other factor that I hope will force the talks to succeed is: the state of the economy that has reached rock bottom.
A number of MDC activists have been accused of bombing various institutions and places in Zimbabwe. What do you think really happened?
Zimbabweans are peace loving people and all the bomb accusations are tactics that were used by Ian Douglas Smith and have been borrowed by Robert Mugabe.
Ian Smith had the Selous Scouts that disguised themselves as freedom fighters and killed villagers to discredit our freedom fighters who were doing a sterling job. Now we have a clandestine group of youths who are on the payroll of Gideon Gono masquerading as MDC youths. This is cheap propaganda and people are fed up of it.
I think there is some congruence and relationship with what was said by Shadreck Chipanga in the Herald a month before this spat of bombings started. Shadreck Chipanga chronicled how he was trained to make petrol bombs in Gweru, ran away from Rhodesian intelligence and crossed into Zambia for guerrilla training. It seems to me that this is by no means coincidence. His chronicle has something to do with this.
And was there really a coup attempt in Zimbabwe?
I do not believe there has been any coup attempts in Zimbabwe. As I have mentioned earlier on, Zimbabweans are peace loving, and they would not like to experience the killings of innocent civilians like what happened during the wars of liberation. I believe it is a tactic that is used by Mugabe time and time again to shift people’s attention on real issues of hunger, disease, poverty, unemployment. The country is bleeding and Mugabe is good at creating situations that draw people’s attention from the real issues.
Lookout Masuku, Dumiso Dabengwa, Joshua Nkomo all were accused of having arms caches in Matebeleland that Mugabe said were going to be used to overthrow the Government. Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole was accused of trying to kill Robert Mugabe at Heroes Acre on his way from Zvimba. Bishop Abel Muzorewa was arrested on his way from America and accused of having plans to overthrow his Government. The Bishop was tortured at Goromonzi and that is why the bishop went silent for a very long time. Morgan Tsvangirai was arrested and charged with planning to eliminate Robert Mugabe in a case that in the end embarrassed the government.
It seems to me that the Zimbabwe intelligence are going to torture and force the victims to sing statements that are going to implicate the opposition groups. This is a ZANU (PF) ploy that is aimed at disturbing the MDC and other groups in making preparations for the elections in 2008.
What do you think is going to happen during the March 2008 elections? Are they going to be free and fair?
These elections were supposed to be Presidential Elections but the ZANU (PF) Government, as usual has shifted the goal posts by bringing forward parliamentary elections in the name of harmonization. Most rural forks are going to be confused and in this confusion the state machinery will rig the election. There are players in this game who have got an unfair advantage over other players who do not have control over the state machinery.
At the moment ZANU (PF) has already started campaigning for the elections. Village headman are now receiving a salary, War vets allowances have been increased to Z$3.5million and Gono is funding a project that is going to see more than 300,000 Scotch carts distributed to the communal farmers and at the same time disturbing the activities of the opposition by banning all meetings and rallies.
Institutionalized torture, abductions of opposition members is taking place daily. It is sad that this is all happening when talks in South Africa are taking place and Thabo Mbeki and SADCC not cautioning ZANU (PF) at all. Thabo Mbeki and Robert Mugabe have a game plan and the negotiating team has got to be careful especially Tendai Biti who is representing Morgan Tsvangirai. It seems to me most SADC countries are not comfortable with a government born out of a trade union movement. Trade Union movements have structures already and if they decide to form political parties, they can easily use the structures to launch the party. They also represent the working class who always suffer when governments mismanage the economies. Most SADCC leaders believe that if this happens in Zimbabwe, the next country could be South Africa (COSATU) or Namibia. Even in South Africa, COSATU played a very important role in bringing down apartheid.
ZANU (PF) has already started rigging the elections and will stop the beatings, torture, bans and abductions when observers start coming into Zimbabwe. Surely, SADCC and other interested bodies who have been monitoring elections in Zimbabwe should be aware of this ZANU (PF) strategy.
Robert Mugabe has already started instilling fear ahead of the crucial elections. He should also not be allowed to choose observers like he did in the last elections. Any observers from bodies like SADC, AU, UN or Commonwealth should be allowed and be deployed now if the exercise is going to be credible. However if Mugabe is allowed to do what he likes, only those he feel are his friends would be allowed [to monitor the elections]. By that time he would have finished vote buying, torturing and putting rigging systems in place.
Will the two factions of the MDC ever unite?
As far as I am concerned, the fact that Tsvangirai, Mutambara, Siwela, and others have accepted to work under the Save Zimbabwe Coalition its enough evidence to show that people are united in trying to set the atmosphere for free and fair elections. The party’s priorities is to set the ground for free and fair elections. Time is not on their side to engage is serious talks on unity.
As far as I am concerned, the issue of uniting will naturally fall in place as soon as the conditions for the elections have been agreed and finalized. After all, the groups agree on the fundamentals for free and fair elections; a new constitution, which would solve the issue of repressive laws; and, elections supervised by international observers.
Link
Friday, 4 May 2007
Crisis in Zimbabwe: Is there a solution?
IMF Deputy Director Siddharth Tiwari described the state of the economy in Zimbabwe as "tragic" and "grim".
"It has faced three, four, five, six years of continuous output decline, a rise [in] prices at these rates over several years, increase in poverty, a decrease in public services, increasing HIV/AIDS rates. It is a tragic situation, frankly, and prospects are grim; they are not bright," he said.
The prospects are so grim that nearly a third of the country's 12 million people have fled, some to escape the poverty and others to escape the way in which the President Robert Mugabe regime deals with dissent. Since coming to power in 1980, the regime has routinely destroyed or appropriated political opponents' homes and possessions and "re-distributed" them to ZANU PF officials and supporters. Dissidents risk losing lives, homes and livelihoods.
Operation Murambatsvina, the Government's controversial urban slum clearance programme, created over half a million internally displaced persons and destroyed the livelihoods of close to 10% of the population. Eighty per cent of the country's population is unemployed. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that the rate of inflation, which currently stands at over 1,700%, could reach an unprecedented 4,000% this year. The average life expectancy in the country has dropped to 37, possibly the lowest in the world.
The infrastructure is crumbling. Basic food commodities, transport, foreign currency, fuel and power are in short supply. Water treatment plants break down frequently and outbreaks of cholera in urban areas are claiming many lives every year. Nearly a quarter of the population is dependent on food aid in order to survive.
These concerns have led to waves of industrial action, political demonstrations and protest marches. If it is not college and university students, it is women's rights groups, the constitutional reform movement, trade unions, or one or both factions of the main opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) who are taking to the streets.
Each wave of protests is dealt with ruthlessly. It starts with public threats of violence by senior government officials and the deployment of the country's secret police, the Central Intelligence Organisation, to harass organisers, civic leaders and political opponents in an attempt to instil fear, to prevent the planning of protests and to stop planned protests from going ahead.
On numerous occasions activists like Progressive Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) Secretary General, Raymond Majongwe, have been harassed and severely assaulted by the police for organising peaceful protests. Others -- like civil rights activist and Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) national co-ordinator Jenni Williams -- have been told by the country's security agents that they will pay with their lives if they continue organising and taking part in demonstrations and protests. Others activists, like University of Zimbabwe student leader Christopher Giwa, have died in accidents involving military personnel, prompting speculation that their deaths were nothing short of political assassinations. No public enquiries into their deaths were ever held.
The free hand and impunity with which security agents harass, detain and torture ordinary citizens, trade unionists, civil rights activists and members of opposition political parties is not the only problem. The Government has introduced a battery of repressive legislation such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) 2002 and the Interception of Communications Bill 2006, which is expected to be passed shortly, in an attempt to curtail citizens' rights to organise, express their grievances or protest against the way they are being governed.
Critics of the regime have to contend with being placed under constant surveillance by the country's security agencies. They also risk being placed under a travel ban: in 2005, the country introduced laws allowing government agencies to withdraw passports from people who threaten the country's national interests and security. People on the government list whose passports are to be withdrawn include opposition political party officials Paul Themba Nyathi and Grace Kwinjeh; human rights lawyers Beatrice Mtetwa and Gabriel Shumba; and journalists Geoff Nyarota, Nqobile Nyathi, Lloyd Mudiwa, Basildon Peta and Caroline Gombakomba.
However, in spite of bans on demonstration and political rallies and in spite of the repressive laws and the heavy-handedness with which security agents in Zimbabwe deal with dissent, industrial action and protest marches are going to continue until a solution is found to the crisis.
Lord Hamilton of Epsom recently asked: "If it is right to invade Iraq to get rid of the tyrant Saddam Hussein, who was making life hell for the citizens of Iraq, why is it not right to invade Zimbabwe to get rid of the tyrant Mugabe?"
Such a move would be unfortunate. It would only serve to make the situation worse for the ordinary man, woman and child in Zimbabwe and would further undermine the democratic process in the country. It would give credence to Robert Mugabe who accuses the MDC leadership of being puppets of the West and who has repeatedly said that the crisis in Zimbabwe is because of efforts by Britain and the US to overthrow his government. As has happened with Saddam Hussein in Iraq, invading Zimbabwe to get rid of Robert Mugabe would turn him into a martyr and would lead to the unnecessary deaths of innocent and unarmed civilians.
The solution to the crisis rests with the people of Zimbabwe.
For a number of years now, independent newspaper publisher, Trevor Ncube has been calling for a "third way" -- sentiments that have been echoed recently by the International Crisis Group in its March 2007 report, "Zimbabwe: An End to the Stalemate?".
In an interview with Chipo Chinembiri (Institute for War and Peace Reporting, December 13, 2005), Trevor Ncube said: "We should find the middle ground -- that is, we should find the good people in Zanu PF and good people in the MDC. We should find good people from across the board to speed up our nation's aspirations. Let's start afresh."
It remains to be seen whether this third way will be found any time soon.
An earlier version of this article was published in the Labour Left Briefing's April issue.
"It has faced three, four, five, six years of continuous output decline, a rise [in] prices at these rates over several years, increase in poverty, a decrease in public services, increasing HIV/AIDS rates. It is a tragic situation, frankly, and prospects are grim; they are not bright," he said.
The prospects are so grim that nearly a third of the country's 12 million people have fled, some to escape the poverty and others to escape the way in which the President Robert Mugabe regime deals with dissent. Since coming to power in 1980, the regime has routinely destroyed or appropriated political opponents' homes and possessions and "re-distributed" them to ZANU PF officials and supporters. Dissidents risk losing lives, homes and livelihoods.
Operation Murambatsvina, the Government's controversial urban slum clearance programme, created over half a million internally displaced persons and destroyed the livelihoods of close to 10% of the population. Eighty per cent of the country's population is unemployed. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that the rate of inflation, which currently stands at over 1,700%, could reach an unprecedented 4,000% this year. The average life expectancy in the country has dropped to 37, possibly the lowest in the world.
The infrastructure is crumbling. Basic food commodities, transport, foreign currency, fuel and power are in short supply. Water treatment plants break down frequently and outbreaks of cholera in urban areas are claiming many lives every year. Nearly a quarter of the population is dependent on food aid in order to survive.
These concerns have led to waves of industrial action, political demonstrations and protest marches. If it is not college and university students, it is women's rights groups, the constitutional reform movement, trade unions, or one or both factions of the main opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) who are taking to the streets.
Each wave of protests is dealt with ruthlessly. It starts with public threats of violence by senior government officials and the deployment of the country's secret police, the Central Intelligence Organisation, to harass organisers, civic leaders and political opponents in an attempt to instil fear, to prevent the planning of protests and to stop planned protests from going ahead.
On numerous occasions activists like Progressive Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) Secretary General, Raymond Majongwe, have been harassed and severely assaulted by the police for organising peaceful protests. Others -- like civil rights activist and Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) national co-ordinator Jenni Williams -- have been told by the country's security agents that they will pay with their lives if they continue organising and taking part in demonstrations and protests. Others activists, like University of Zimbabwe student leader Christopher Giwa, have died in accidents involving military personnel, prompting speculation that their deaths were nothing short of political assassinations. No public enquiries into their deaths were ever held.
The free hand and impunity with which security agents harass, detain and torture ordinary citizens, trade unionists, civil rights activists and members of opposition political parties is not the only problem. The Government has introduced a battery of repressive legislation such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) 2002 and the Interception of Communications Bill 2006, which is expected to be passed shortly, in an attempt to curtail citizens' rights to organise, express their grievances or protest against the way they are being governed.
Critics of the regime have to contend with being placed under constant surveillance by the country's security agencies. They also risk being placed under a travel ban: in 2005, the country introduced laws allowing government agencies to withdraw passports from people who threaten the country's national interests and security. People on the government list whose passports are to be withdrawn include opposition political party officials Paul Themba Nyathi and Grace Kwinjeh; human rights lawyers Beatrice Mtetwa and Gabriel Shumba; and journalists Geoff Nyarota, Nqobile Nyathi, Lloyd Mudiwa, Basildon Peta and Caroline Gombakomba.
However, in spite of bans on demonstration and political rallies and in spite of the repressive laws and the heavy-handedness with which security agents in Zimbabwe deal with dissent, industrial action and protest marches are going to continue until a solution is found to the crisis.
Lord Hamilton of Epsom recently asked: "If it is right to invade Iraq to get rid of the tyrant Saddam Hussein, who was making life hell for the citizens of Iraq, why is it not right to invade Zimbabwe to get rid of the tyrant Mugabe?"
Such a move would be unfortunate. It would only serve to make the situation worse for the ordinary man, woman and child in Zimbabwe and would further undermine the democratic process in the country. It would give credence to Robert Mugabe who accuses the MDC leadership of being puppets of the West and who has repeatedly said that the crisis in Zimbabwe is because of efforts by Britain and the US to overthrow his government. As has happened with Saddam Hussein in Iraq, invading Zimbabwe to get rid of Robert Mugabe would turn him into a martyr and would lead to the unnecessary deaths of innocent and unarmed civilians.
The solution to the crisis rests with the people of Zimbabwe.
For a number of years now, independent newspaper publisher, Trevor Ncube has been calling for a "third way" -- sentiments that have been echoed recently by the International Crisis Group in its March 2007 report, "Zimbabwe: An End to the Stalemate?".
In an interview with Chipo Chinembiri (Institute for War and Peace Reporting, December 13, 2005), Trevor Ncube said: "We should find the middle ground -- that is, we should find the good people in Zanu PF and good people in the MDC. We should find good people from across the board to speed up our nation's aspirations. Let's start afresh."
It remains to be seen whether this third way will be found any time soon.
An earlier version of this article was published in the Labour Left Briefing's April issue.
Monday, 23 October 2006
[Interview_1]: John Nyamande, Zimbabwean opposition political party activstween Mugabe's Regime And White Rule
John Nyamande is a veteran in Zimbabwe's struggle for independence.
He has been a political activist since the 1960s when he joined ZAPU as a youth member.
Nyamande has worked as a teacher in inner London schools in the U.K.; in rural and urban Zimbabwean schools during and after the war of liberation; and as a deputy head teacher in Zimbabwe of a school that had an enrollment of over 1200 pupils and 42 members of staff.
Currently, Nyamande chairs the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Gray's Branch, in Essex in the United Kingdom.
In an email interview, which took place between Sept. 5 and Oct. 18, John Nyamande spoke about the things that compelled him to become a political activist.
How would you describe the current situation in Zimbabwe?
It is really pathetic and sad that Zimbabwe, which was once a breadbasket of Southern Africa, is now a basket case of Southern Africa. Any reasonable person cannot deny that. I remember very well that after independence in 1980, a Zimbabwe dollar was equivalent to a British pound and was stronger than the South African Rand. Was Rhodesia Front managing the economy better than ZANU (PF)? What was happening? Good management is not about color. Look at developing countries like South Africa. They co-exist.
Why do you think things are as they stand in the country?
Obviously it's management of the economy by ZANU (PF). It's scandal after scandal swept under the carpet. We had the Willowvale scandal, War Victims Compensation Fund, Government Tender Board, the housing scheme, foreign exchange, multiple farm owners and many other scandals.
In my view, [President] Robert Mugabe has encouraged this to happen. He should have nipped this in the bud, shamed and fired a lot from the government for non-performance. Zimbabwe has an abundance of qualified and capable managers who are now in the Diaspora serving other governments. Surely how can someone serve effectively for 25 years as a minister?
I strongly believe that it's Mugabe who doesn't let some of these guys leave the government for reasons best known to himself.
Will things improve?
All Zimbabweans should learn to forgive and come together and discuss the roadmap to normalcy. The issue is political as well as economical. You cannot separate the two. Things have run down. Look at public transport, health, education, and parastatals. Most parastatals are being run by retired army personnel. Why is Zimbabwe militarizing? There is something wrong that needs correcting.
The recent AIT ruling on A.A. allows the British government to resume forced deportations to Zimbabwe. What are your views on this?
Deportations to Zimbabwe at the moment should not be encouraged. There is more than 75 percent unemployment in Zimbabwe at the moment. People need to survive. Two reasons why Zimbabweans are here at present: economical and political.
Those who can work and are law-abiding migrants should be allowed to work. Zimbabweans are hard workers and are known even here for that. They have a significant contribution to make to the economy of this country.
Those who are here on political reasons should definitely not be forced back to Zimbabwe. MDC (U.K.) branches have got databases of their membership and there is no reason why they should be forced back. The (U.K.) representative can always provide proof of this if required by Home office.
What made you to join ZAPU in the 1960s?
I was compelled to join ZAPU in the 1960s because of racial segregation. There were different laws for blacks and whites in education, health, labor, housing etc. Can you believe that my father used to put his bottle of brandy under the bed because only white people were allowed to enjoy this drink? Black people were not allowed to have businesses in the central business district. My uncle who was working in South Africa then, married a Xhosa woman who looked white. When he came home to Rusape with her, he was arrested because the laws did not allow blacks to marry whites. My family in Makoni District had been moved from the rich red soils near Nyazura to the sandy soils further down to make way for white farmers. All this social injustice puzzled me and forced me join Zapu, which was being led by people like Joshua Nkomo, James Chikerema, Josiah Chinamano, Robert Mugabe and others.
What was the environment like then?
The environment was bad. The [system was designed in such a way that] black people were to serve the whites who were the masters. The majority of people were meant to learn the 3Rs. That is, Reading Writing and Arithmetic. Urban schools were run by the government and rural schools were set up by the missionaries who did a commendable job indeed. The urban schools were meant to produce teachers, nurses and clerks. Those who chose law like the late Herbert Chitepo and Dr. Tichafa Parirenyatwa had to struggle and do it outside Zimbabwe. This class of people was to support the masters who had set up their industries in the towns. The rural folk, where the majority of the blacks lived, were supposed to work on the white farms. They were not supposed to have gone above lower primary, which was standard three. The majority of poor people were marginalized. However, most people working in towns were able to buy basic foodstuffs.
Are there any similarities between conditions in the 1960s, when you first became politically active, and now?
Oh, yes, there are. The majority of people in Zimbabwe are still marginalized. There is no respect for basic human rights. There is no freedom of speech, association, and movement etc. [The Public Order and Security Act] POSA, [the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act] AIPPA and other restrictive laws in place now. In the 60s it was all about "Freedom Kwacha" and "the soil."
But today land has been distributed to members of the ruling party only.
In the 60s there were black informers, drawn from the Police Reserve. Chiefs were politicized and used to denounce the political leadership. Jeremiah Sikireta Chirau and Kayisa Ndiweni are examples of some the Chiefs who were used by the Government to denounce and crush the voice of the people. They were also members of the Rhodesia Senate.
Today we have the Green Bombers who are known because of their notoriety. The ZANU P.F. government has plenty of informers in the villages who report to the [Central Intelligence Organisation] CIO.
Lastly, Nationalist leaders like Robert Mugabe, Joshua Nkomo, Maurice Nyagumbo, Enos Nkala, James Chikerema Eddison Sithole and many others were detained at Wha Wha by the Smith Regime. The ZANU government is doing the same and has done the same to people like Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole, Dumiso Dabengwa, Lookout Masuku and many others.
Why these similarities?
People in government have overstayed and have gone past their expiry date. They have forgotten the founding principles and values of the political parties and liberation movements of the country, ZANU and ZAPU. People have died for this beautiful country and they need to be honored.
What are some of the differences?
Although we were oppressed, families could afford a meal. Public transport was by far better. Trains ran between Harare and Mutare and between Harare and Bulawayo beautifully. At one time Rhodesia Railways ran a railcar between Harare and Mutare in less than four hours. It was a fantastic mode of transport. Municipalities had enviable social service amenities in the townships. At the Stodart Hall in Mbare, who doesn't know Mr. Roberts? He was inspirational in setting up the George Hartley Swimming Pools, and the C.S. Davies swimming pool in Highfields. After school clubs were plenty. All that is no more with our own black government. It's sad. Everyone is now selling for survival. To make it even worse, these vendors have been driven out in the name of "cleaning" up the mess.
In the 1970s, you left ZAPU and joined the UANC. What did you find appealing about the UANC?
I joined UANC in 1973, when I was training as a teacher. The war was at its height and the two main political parties had been banned and were operating externally. UANC was formed to mobilize, educate and support the war that was being fought. UANC had its base in the churches especially the United Methodist Church, where Bishop Muzorewa belonged. The party was able to unite Zimbabweans across the political divide. People had one vision, of liberating Zimbabwe. UANC helped so many young boys and girls to cross into Mozambique, Botswana or Zambia for guerilla training. The party supported the guerillas with food and clothing and so many of their members were arrested for collaborating with the "boys." UANC played a big and supportive role during the struggle. What happened during Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was something different.
How was it different from ZAPU?
ZAPU and ZANU did not see eye to eye and used the tribal card although some people deny this. UANC was less tribalistic than the other two. It was a church driven organization. Members feared God.
In 1994, you joined ZANU PF. What led to this?
I had just completed my studies in England, and I said: "Why can't I go back to Zimbabwe and be part of the agents of change in developing the country?" At that time the focus was development and there was no need for opposition.
And why did you leave ZANU P.F. to join the MDC in 1999?
The economy of the country was fast shrinking and the party did not want to listen to constructive criticism at all. I became unpopular within ZANU P.F. for asking the reason why certain things were being done. I finally quit when MDC was born in September 1999.
When you were teaching in the rural and urban schools during the war of liberation in Zimbabwe, did you experience any form of harassment or persecution by any group that was involved in the conflict?
I left Bindura, where I was teaching, in a huff because the security forces were after my life, for supporting the guerillas with food and clothing. Teachers were conduits of information between the rural and urban structures of UANC and the People's Movement led by Dr. Tsvarayi. This was an internal structure of ZANU, which was beginning to distance itself from UANC because there were signs that the war was coming to a conclusion. ZANU P.F. was positioning itself for government.
How were teachers viewed in the communities they worked in?
Before independence, Teachers were viewed as leaders, advisers and earned a lot of respect and dignity from the communities they served. The salaries they received were decent and most could afford to buy a car and send children to boarding school.
Today it's totally the opposite. Teachers have been turned to paupers and are a miserable sight. Most teachers have resorted to engaging in second activities to supplement their meager salaries. They travel to neighboring countries to buy goods for resale. Others sell sweets, bananas, and cool drinks at school during break time.
At present, teachers in Zimbabwe are being routinely subjected to what can only be described as persecution and harassment. Some have endured beatings and others have lost their lives at the hands of agents of the state and/or ZANU P.F. Why is this so?
Teachers advise the communities they serve especially in the rural areas. They are being intimidated to stop them from advising the communities they serve. They are seen as knowledgeable in the daily affairs of the country.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
He has been a political activist since the 1960s when he joined ZAPU as a youth member.
Nyamande has worked as a teacher in inner London schools in the U.K.; in rural and urban Zimbabwean schools during and after the war of liberation; and as a deputy head teacher in Zimbabwe of a school that had an enrollment of over 1200 pupils and 42 members of staff.
Currently, Nyamande chairs the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Gray's Branch, in Essex in the United Kingdom.
In an email interview, which took place between Sept. 5 and Oct. 18, John Nyamande spoke about the things that compelled him to become a political activist.
How would you describe the current situation in Zimbabwe?
It is really pathetic and sad that Zimbabwe, which was once a breadbasket of Southern Africa, is now a basket case of Southern Africa. Any reasonable person cannot deny that. I remember very well that after independence in 1980, a Zimbabwe dollar was equivalent to a British pound and was stronger than the South African Rand. Was Rhodesia Front managing the economy better than ZANU (PF)? What was happening? Good management is not about color. Look at developing countries like South Africa. They co-exist.
Why do you think things are as they stand in the country?
Obviously it's management of the economy by ZANU (PF). It's scandal after scandal swept under the carpet. We had the Willowvale scandal, War Victims Compensation Fund, Government Tender Board, the housing scheme, foreign exchange, multiple farm owners and many other scandals.
In my view, [President] Robert Mugabe has encouraged this to happen. He should have nipped this in the bud, shamed and fired a lot from the government for non-performance. Zimbabwe has an abundance of qualified and capable managers who are now in the Diaspora serving other governments. Surely how can someone serve effectively for 25 years as a minister?
I strongly believe that it's Mugabe who doesn't let some of these guys leave the government for reasons best known to himself.
Will things improve?
All Zimbabweans should learn to forgive and come together and discuss the roadmap to normalcy. The issue is political as well as economical. You cannot separate the two. Things have run down. Look at public transport, health, education, and parastatals. Most parastatals are being run by retired army personnel. Why is Zimbabwe militarizing? There is something wrong that needs correcting.
The recent AIT ruling on A.A. allows the British government to resume forced deportations to Zimbabwe. What are your views on this?
Deportations to Zimbabwe at the moment should not be encouraged. There is more than 75 percent unemployment in Zimbabwe at the moment. People need to survive. Two reasons why Zimbabweans are here at present: economical and political.
Those who can work and are law-abiding migrants should be allowed to work. Zimbabweans are hard workers and are known even here for that. They have a significant contribution to make to the economy of this country.
Those who are here on political reasons should definitely not be forced back to Zimbabwe. MDC (U.K.) branches have got databases of their membership and there is no reason why they should be forced back. The (U.K.) representative can always provide proof of this if required by Home office.
What made you to join ZAPU in the 1960s?
I was compelled to join ZAPU in the 1960s because of racial segregation. There were different laws for blacks and whites in education, health, labor, housing etc. Can you believe that my father used to put his bottle of brandy under the bed because only white people were allowed to enjoy this drink? Black people were not allowed to have businesses in the central business district. My uncle who was working in South Africa then, married a Xhosa woman who looked white. When he came home to Rusape with her, he was arrested because the laws did not allow blacks to marry whites. My family in Makoni District had been moved from the rich red soils near Nyazura to the sandy soils further down to make way for white farmers. All this social injustice puzzled me and forced me join Zapu, which was being led by people like Joshua Nkomo, James Chikerema, Josiah Chinamano, Robert Mugabe and others.
What was the environment like then?
The environment was bad. The [system was designed in such a way that] black people were to serve the whites who were the masters. The majority of people were meant to learn the 3Rs. That is, Reading Writing and Arithmetic. Urban schools were run by the government and rural schools were set up by the missionaries who did a commendable job indeed. The urban schools were meant to produce teachers, nurses and clerks. Those who chose law like the late Herbert Chitepo and Dr. Tichafa Parirenyatwa had to struggle and do it outside Zimbabwe. This class of people was to support the masters who had set up their industries in the towns. The rural folk, where the majority of the blacks lived, were supposed to work on the white farms. They were not supposed to have gone above lower primary, which was standard three. The majority of poor people were marginalized. However, most people working in towns were able to buy basic foodstuffs.
Are there any similarities between conditions in the 1960s, when you first became politically active, and now?
Oh, yes, there are. The majority of people in Zimbabwe are still marginalized. There is no respect for basic human rights. There is no freedom of speech, association, and movement etc. [The Public Order and Security Act] POSA, [the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act] AIPPA and other restrictive laws in place now. In the 60s it was all about "Freedom Kwacha" and "the soil."
But today land has been distributed to members of the ruling party only.
In the 60s there were black informers, drawn from the Police Reserve. Chiefs were politicized and used to denounce the political leadership. Jeremiah Sikireta Chirau and Kayisa Ndiweni are examples of some the Chiefs who were used by the Government to denounce and crush the voice of the people. They were also members of the Rhodesia Senate.
Today we have the Green Bombers who are known because of their notoriety. The ZANU P.F. government has plenty of informers in the villages who report to the [Central Intelligence Organisation] CIO.
Lastly, Nationalist leaders like Robert Mugabe, Joshua Nkomo, Maurice Nyagumbo, Enos Nkala, James Chikerema Eddison Sithole and many others were detained at Wha Wha by the Smith Regime. The ZANU government is doing the same and has done the same to people like Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole, Dumiso Dabengwa, Lookout Masuku and many others.
Why these similarities?
People in government have overstayed and have gone past their expiry date. They have forgotten the founding principles and values of the political parties and liberation movements of the country, ZANU and ZAPU. People have died for this beautiful country and they need to be honored.
What are some of the differences?
Although we were oppressed, families could afford a meal. Public transport was by far better. Trains ran between Harare and Mutare and between Harare and Bulawayo beautifully. At one time Rhodesia Railways ran a railcar between Harare and Mutare in less than four hours. It was a fantastic mode of transport. Municipalities had enviable social service amenities in the townships. At the Stodart Hall in Mbare, who doesn't know Mr. Roberts? He was inspirational in setting up the George Hartley Swimming Pools, and the C.S. Davies swimming pool in Highfields. After school clubs were plenty. All that is no more with our own black government. It's sad. Everyone is now selling for survival. To make it even worse, these vendors have been driven out in the name of "cleaning" up the mess.
In the 1970s, you left ZAPU and joined the UANC. What did you find appealing about the UANC?
I joined UANC in 1973, when I was training as a teacher. The war was at its height and the two main political parties had been banned and were operating externally. UANC was formed to mobilize, educate and support the war that was being fought. UANC had its base in the churches especially the United Methodist Church, where Bishop Muzorewa belonged. The party was able to unite Zimbabweans across the political divide. People had one vision, of liberating Zimbabwe. UANC helped so many young boys and girls to cross into Mozambique, Botswana or Zambia for guerilla training. The party supported the guerillas with food and clothing and so many of their members were arrested for collaborating with the "boys." UANC played a big and supportive role during the struggle. What happened during Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was something different.
How was it different from ZAPU?
ZAPU and ZANU did not see eye to eye and used the tribal card although some people deny this. UANC was less tribalistic than the other two. It was a church driven organization. Members feared God.
In 1994, you joined ZANU PF. What led to this?
I had just completed my studies in England, and I said: "Why can't I go back to Zimbabwe and be part of the agents of change in developing the country?" At that time the focus was development and there was no need for opposition.
And why did you leave ZANU P.F. to join the MDC in 1999?
The economy of the country was fast shrinking and the party did not want to listen to constructive criticism at all. I became unpopular within ZANU P.F. for asking the reason why certain things were being done. I finally quit when MDC was born in September 1999.
When you were teaching in the rural and urban schools during the war of liberation in Zimbabwe, did you experience any form of harassment or persecution by any group that was involved in the conflict?
I left Bindura, where I was teaching, in a huff because the security forces were after my life, for supporting the guerillas with food and clothing. Teachers were conduits of information between the rural and urban structures of UANC and the People's Movement led by Dr. Tsvarayi. This was an internal structure of ZANU, which was beginning to distance itself from UANC because there were signs that the war was coming to a conclusion. ZANU P.F. was positioning itself for government.
How were teachers viewed in the communities they worked in?
Before independence, Teachers were viewed as leaders, advisers and earned a lot of respect and dignity from the communities they served. The salaries they received were decent and most could afford to buy a car and send children to boarding school.
Today it's totally the opposite. Teachers have been turned to paupers and are a miserable sight. Most teachers have resorted to engaging in second activities to supplement their meager salaries. They travel to neighboring countries to buy goods for resale. Others sell sweets, bananas, and cool drinks at school during break time.
At present, teachers in Zimbabwe are being routinely subjected to what can only be described as persecution and harassment. Some have endured beatings and others have lost their lives at the hands of agents of the state and/or ZANU P.F. Why is this so?
Teachers advise the communities they serve especially in the rural areas. They are being intimidated to stop them from advising the communities they serve. They are seen as knowledgeable in the daily affairs of the country.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Friday, 28 July 2006
[Interview] Matthew Nyashanu, Zimbabwean journalist
Matthew Nyashanu is a Zimbabwean teacher, journalist, political analyst and media commentator currently living in the United Kingdom.
He is a member of the Zimbabwean Association of Journalists in the Diaspora.
He writes for a number of newspapers, particularly zimbeat, www.zimbeat.com and since 2002 he has been a contributor to SW Radio Africa where he presents a political commentary program.
Nyashanu is also the U.K. spokesperson of the Zimbabwean opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
In addition to this, Nyashanu is one of the founding members of, and spokesperson for, the Diaspora Vote Action Group, which took the Zimbabwe government to court in an effort to secure the right to vote for Zimbaweans living outside the country.
In a series of ongoing emails and telephone conversations that started in January 2006, Matthew Nyashanu spoke about the Diaspora Vote Action Group and the hardships journalists are facing in Zimbabwe.
What motivated the Diaspora Vote Action Group to take the Zimbabwe government to court?
We were motivated by the fact that despite getting independence in 1980, many Zimbabweans living in the Diaspora were unable to exercise their basic fundamental right of choosing the leader they preferred. Other countries in the region, countries like Mozambique, for example, have been able to put such arrangements in place.
Who else was involved in these efforts?
The court case was actioned by seven people namely Matthew Nyashanu, Makusha Mugabe, Emily Madamombe, Lincoln Makotore, Jefta Madzingo, Brian Makuzva and Farai Maruzani.
How did you go about it?
We set up a website and we received a lot of support in the form of signatures from Zimbabweans in the Diaspora. We also had a very wide press coverage, which helped us to reach far and wide in terms of building a support base. The only problem we had was that of paying legal costs but we managed to fork the money out of our own pockets.
Although the Zimbabwe government still would not allow Zimbabweans living abroad to vote, I believe that our campaign was successful. Our action exposed, to the world, one of the many ways the Zimbabwean people are being oppressed by President Robert Mugabe's regime.
How did your participation in this affect you and your family?
The participation further strained my relationship with the Zanu PF administration and I am viewed as a traitor especially for suing them from U.K., the former coloniser and number one enemy to Zanu PF. Because of that and because of my broadcasts and writings I am one of those not allowed in the country by the regime.
What would happen to you if you returned?
Anyone trying to fight for justice and anyone trying to inform the international world about the dark side of President Mugabe's rule is likely to face the wrath of the ailing regime.
In Zimbabwe just before Christmas, last year, a number of journalists were arrested. More journalists have been arrested again this year. What, in your view, is the Zimbabwe government's motivation for these and other arrests?
The journalists were arrested because the Harare administration is under immense pressure following their unplanned land seizure and the establishment of political thuggery in the country. Zanu PF is looking very insecure especially after demolishing the shelters of poor urban dwellers and moving them to remote and unsanitary places like Hopely Farm.
These arrests are a well-calculated strategy to put on hold the free flow of information -- especially the information disseminated by the independent press. The government is hoping to create a vacuum of information on Zimbabwe and, in this way, make sure that the inhumane way, in which it is treating its citizens, remains a secret. This is also meant to induce fear in all journalists and human rights activists wishing to square up with the regime.
Although these arrests may induce fear in the media fraternity, in another way they will make journalists to grow stronger in their quest to expose the wrong activities of this despotic regime.
What would you advise journalists currently living and working in Zimbabwe?
The way forward for journalists in Zimbabwe is to keep the pressure on by reporting all the abuses coming from this regime. The journalists should also, where possible, file stories with international media organizations to make sure that the regime is exposed for what it is.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
He is a member of the Zimbabwean Association of Journalists in the Diaspora.
He writes for a number of newspapers, particularly zimbeat, www.zimbeat.com and since 2002 he has been a contributor to SW Radio Africa where he presents a political commentary program.
Nyashanu is also the U.K. spokesperson of the Zimbabwean opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
In addition to this, Nyashanu is one of the founding members of, and spokesperson for, the Diaspora Vote Action Group, which took the Zimbabwe government to court in an effort to secure the right to vote for Zimbaweans living outside the country.
In a series of ongoing emails and telephone conversations that started in January 2006, Matthew Nyashanu spoke about the Diaspora Vote Action Group and the hardships journalists are facing in Zimbabwe.
What motivated the Diaspora Vote Action Group to take the Zimbabwe government to court?
We were motivated by the fact that despite getting independence in 1980, many Zimbabweans living in the Diaspora were unable to exercise their basic fundamental right of choosing the leader they preferred. Other countries in the region, countries like Mozambique, for example, have been able to put such arrangements in place.
Who else was involved in these efforts?
The court case was actioned by seven people namely Matthew Nyashanu, Makusha Mugabe, Emily Madamombe, Lincoln Makotore, Jefta Madzingo, Brian Makuzva and Farai Maruzani.
How did you go about it?
We set up a website and we received a lot of support in the form of signatures from Zimbabweans in the Diaspora. We also had a very wide press coverage, which helped us to reach far and wide in terms of building a support base. The only problem we had was that of paying legal costs but we managed to fork the money out of our own pockets.
Although the Zimbabwe government still would not allow Zimbabweans living abroad to vote, I believe that our campaign was successful. Our action exposed, to the world, one of the many ways the Zimbabwean people are being oppressed by President Robert Mugabe's regime.
How did your participation in this affect you and your family?
The participation further strained my relationship with the Zanu PF administration and I am viewed as a traitor especially for suing them from U.K., the former coloniser and number one enemy to Zanu PF. Because of that and because of my broadcasts and writings I am one of those not allowed in the country by the regime.
What would happen to you if you returned?
Anyone trying to fight for justice and anyone trying to inform the international world about the dark side of President Mugabe's rule is likely to face the wrath of the ailing regime.
In Zimbabwe just before Christmas, last year, a number of journalists were arrested. More journalists have been arrested again this year. What, in your view, is the Zimbabwe government's motivation for these and other arrests?
The journalists were arrested because the Harare administration is under immense pressure following their unplanned land seizure and the establishment of political thuggery in the country. Zanu PF is looking very insecure especially after demolishing the shelters of poor urban dwellers and moving them to remote and unsanitary places like Hopely Farm.
These arrests are a well-calculated strategy to put on hold the free flow of information -- especially the information disseminated by the independent press. The government is hoping to create a vacuum of information on Zimbabwe and, in this way, make sure that the inhumane way, in which it is treating its citizens, remains a secret. This is also meant to induce fear in all journalists and human rights activists wishing to square up with the regime.
Although these arrests may induce fear in the media fraternity, in another way they will make journalists to grow stronger in their quest to expose the wrong activities of this despotic regime.
What would you advise journalists currently living and working in Zimbabwe?
The way forward for journalists in Zimbabwe is to keep the pressure on by reporting all the abuses coming from this regime. The journalists should also, where possible, file stories with international media organizations to make sure that the regime is exposed for what it is.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Tuesday, 4 July 2006
[Interview] Conrad Nyamutata, Zimbabwean journalist
Over the past five years, the Zimbabwean government has been routinely detaining, torturing and harassing journalists as part of an on-going campaign to stop them from reporting on human rights issues, the economic crisis in Zimbabwe and the escalating opposition to President Robert G. Mugabe's rule.
Repressive legislation such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (2002) has made it a crime to practice journalism without a government license.
At the same time, journalists who include Geoff Nyarota, Nqobile Nyathi, Lloyd Mudiwa, Basildon Peta, Caroline Gombakomba and others have been placed on a list of people whose passports are to be seized should they try to leave or enter the country. The Mugabe regime accuses them of being traitors and of threatening the country’s national interests.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa reports that in June last year, President Mugabe signed the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Bill, which allows journalists to be jailed for up to 20 years for publishing falsehoods. The law, among other things, prohibits the making, publicly and intentionally, of any false statement about or concerning the President or Acting President if the person knows or realises that there is a risk or possibility of engendering feelings of hostility towards or causing hatred, contempt or ridicule of him, whether in his official or personal capacity.
In addition to all this, the ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs are currently deliberating on draft regulations that will require Zimbabweans to obtain exit visas before they can be allowed to travel outside the country.
Critics say the new passport laws are aimed at immobilizing journalists, human rights activists and opposition political party leaders in order to prevent them from highlighting government repression and human rights violations. The laws have been described as a serious and unacceptable assault on people’s freedom of movement.
The Index on Censorship, (November 2005) reports that at least 90 Zimbabwean journalists, including many of the country’s most prominent reporters, now live in exile, making them one of the largest groups of exiled journalists in the world. Some of the exiled journalists left as a direct result of political persecution, others because the government’s crackdown virtually erased opportunities in the independent press.
Ambrose Musiyiwa interviewed Conrad Nyamutata, one of the journalists, via email.
How long did you work as a journalist in Zimbabwe?
I worked as journalist for about 10 years. First, for The Herald and then for The Daily News. I was a correspondent for a few other external organisations as well.
While at The Daily News, I was arrested and charged with criminal defamation; threatened by Joseph Chinotimba, the war veterans’ leader; and, our offices and printing presses were bombed.
Fortunately for me, Chinotimba accosted and attacked the wrong person at the Harare Magistrates' Court, thinking it was me.
I have no idea what became of the criminal defamation charge as I was released and told I would be called by way of summons. All this was a result of a perfectly legitimate and accurate series of stories, about [opposition political party] Movement for Democratic Change members suing President Mugabe before a court in the United States.
There were just too many happenings at The Daily News because we crossed swords with the mighty.
How did all this come about?
The Daily News was the first media institution to mount a sustained campaign against Zanu PF leadership. We took the regime head-on and without fear, on a daily basis. Our sales and readership shot up because what we were doing was unprecedented.
And of course we paid the price.
The arrests, I talked about, the beatings and the bombing. And ultimately being shut down. But as staff we remained united. Adversity created firm bonds amongst us; it was like huddling in a corner during a fierce thunderstorm and springing back into action after the storm.
What made you decide to leave the country?
I left Zimbabwe because I didn’t feel safe working in such an environment anymore.
I had just carried out an investigation, which heavily implicated the C.I.O. and the police in the bombing of the M.D.C. offices in Harare a few years back.
The trouble is that, with such a partisan or, to be more precise, complicit police, you could not feel safe or protected at all as a citizen. My informants told me it was time to go. You ignore such intelligence at your own peril.
Are you still working as a journalist?
Today, I work remotely from the media. I work for the British Red Cross' refugee support services in Leicester [in the United Kingdom].
But I must mention that I am exceedingly proud to have worked for The Daily News, which, historically, will always be a landmark in the democratisation project. That project is continuing, and I salute all who are taking it further. Zimbabwe will be free again.
Do you see yourself ever working as a journalist again?
Maybe in the long term.
I see myself back in the communications and media field, but serving the voluntary sector.
You were working on a documentary recently. How did that come about?
A few months ago, I was invited by Safe Media, a new film production company in Leicester, to produce a three-minute documentary. It was to be part of a set of four documentaries produced by refugees and asylum seekers about their own experiences in this country or related themes.
The theme of my documentary embodied a few strands: the general perception of refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants by the media, local people and employers. I was challenging the how immigrants or foreign professionals now settled in the U.K. are perceived. I was poking at, not the proverbial glass ceiling, but the "glass wall" that bars such skilled persons from jobs they can perform. It challenges prejudice.
The documentary was naturally premised on my own experiences as a foreign journalist now settled in this country. It is about many other journalists, very good journalists for that matter, from abroad now living here, who have failed to secure employment in the field simply because they are foreign. It is about all skilled migrants denied top jobs in top companies because of prejudice.
I absolutely abhor the sentiment that dirty jobs should be reserved for foreigners or migrants, no matter how skilled or educated they are.
What were the other documentaries about?
One was about the controversial issue of tagging of asylum seekers, and the other was about problems encountered by a refugee/husband in reuniting with his wife. The other was about a musician Ebi, an Iranian asylum seeker. Sigli Ahmed, a Ghanaian, did the one on tagging. Boris, a Serbian did the one about Ebi and Idil (family reunion).
How are refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants perceived by the media, local people and employers in this country?
There is a deliberate misrepresentation of the refugee and asylum seeker by certain section of the local media.
For instance, there were outrageous claims in the past about asylum seekers killing the Queen's birds, the swans, and also false reports that they were eating donkeys. All were found to be untrue.
But even more serious is the wilful blurring of lines between who is an asylum seeker, a refugee, an illegal immigrant or a terrorist. The media seeks to band them together to create confusion and generate animosity against anyone who is foreign.
Why do you think this is happening and what effect is it having?
It's all about the ideological construction of the immigrant by the media. That inevitably results in racism, xenophobia and social exclusion.
Because the immigrant, whatever his status, would have been constructed as unworthy, that exclusion extends to employment; immigrants are then seen as people deserving of the lowly paid jobs. Jobs which local people do not want to do. And yet many foreigners are better educated than some local people.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Repressive legislation such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (2002) has made it a crime to practice journalism without a government license.
At the same time, journalists who include Geoff Nyarota, Nqobile Nyathi, Lloyd Mudiwa, Basildon Peta, Caroline Gombakomba and others have been placed on a list of people whose passports are to be seized should they try to leave or enter the country. The Mugabe regime accuses them of being traitors and of threatening the country’s national interests.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa reports that in June last year, President Mugabe signed the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Bill, which allows journalists to be jailed for up to 20 years for publishing falsehoods. The law, among other things, prohibits the making, publicly and intentionally, of any false statement about or concerning the President or Acting President if the person knows or realises that there is a risk or possibility of engendering feelings of hostility towards or causing hatred, contempt or ridicule of him, whether in his official or personal capacity.
In addition to all this, the ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs are currently deliberating on draft regulations that will require Zimbabweans to obtain exit visas before they can be allowed to travel outside the country.
Critics say the new passport laws are aimed at immobilizing journalists, human rights activists and opposition political party leaders in order to prevent them from highlighting government repression and human rights violations. The laws have been described as a serious and unacceptable assault on people’s freedom of movement.
The Index on Censorship, (November 2005) reports that at least 90 Zimbabwean journalists, including many of the country’s most prominent reporters, now live in exile, making them one of the largest groups of exiled journalists in the world. Some of the exiled journalists left as a direct result of political persecution, others because the government’s crackdown virtually erased opportunities in the independent press.
Ambrose Musiyiwa interviewed Conrad Nyamutata, one of the journalists, via email.
How long did you work as a journalist in Zimbabwe?
I worked as journalist for about 10 years. First, for The Herald and then for The Daily News. I was a correspondent for a few other external organisations as well.
While at The Daily News, I was arrested and charged with criminal defamation; threatened by Joseph Chinotimba, the war veterans’ leader; and, our offices and printing presses were bombed.
Fortunately for me, Chinotimba accosted and attacked the wrong person at the Harare Magistrates' Court, thinking it was me.
I have no idea what became of the criminal defamation charge as I was released and told I would be called by way of summons. All this was a result of a perfectly legitimate and accurate series of stories, about [opposition political party] Movement for Democratic Change members suing President Mugabe before a court in the United States.
There were just too many happenings at The Daily News because we crossed swords with the mighty.
How did all this come about?
The Daily News was the first media institution to mount a sustained campaign against Zanu PF leadership. We took the regime head-on and without fear, on a daily basis. Our sales and readership shot up because what we were doing was unprecedented.
And of course we paid the price.
The arrests, I talked about, the beatings and the bombing. And ultimately being shut down. But as staff we remained united. Adversity created firm bonds amongst us; it was like huddling in a corner during a fierce thunderstorm and springing back into action after the storm.
What made you decide to leave the country?
I left Zimbabwe because I didn’t feel safe working in such an environment anymore.
I had just carried out an investigation, which heavily implicated the C.I.O. and the police in the bombing of the M.D.C. offices in Harare a few years back.
The trouble is that, with such a partisan or, to be more precise, complicit police, you could not feel safe or protected at all as a citizen. My informants told me it was time to go. You ignore such intelligence at your own peril.
Are you still working as a journalist?
Today, I work remotely from the media. I work for the British Red Cross' refugee support services in Leicester [in the United Kingdom].
But I must mention that I am exceedingly proud to have worked for The Daily News, which, historically, will always be a landmark in the democratisation project. That project is continuing, and I salute all who are taking it further. Zimbabwe will be free again.
Do you see yourself ever working as a journalist again?
Maybe in the long term.
I see myself back in the communications and media field, but serving the voluntary sector.
You were working on a documentary recently. How did that come about?
A few months ago, I was invited by Safe Media, a new film production company in Leicester, to produce a three-minute documentary. It was to be part of a set of four documentaries produced by refugees and asylum seekers about their own experiences in this country or related themes.
The theme of my documentary embodied a few strands: the general perception of refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants by the media, local people and employers. I was challenging the how immigrants or foreign professionals now settled in the U.K. are perceived. I was poking at, not the proverbial glass ceiling, but the "glass wall" that bars such skilled persons from jobs they can perform. It challenges prejudice.
The documentary was naturally premised on my own experiences as a foreign journalist now settled in this country. It is about many other journalists, very good journalists for that matter, from abroad now living here, who have failed to secure employment in the field simply because they are foreign. It is about all skilled migrants denied top jobs in top companies because of prejudice.
I absolutely abhor the sentiment that dirty jobs should be reserved for foreigners or migrants, no matter how skilled or educated they are.
What were the other documentaries about?
One was about the controversial issue of tagging of asylum seekers, and the other was about problems encountered by a refugee/husband in reuniting with his wife. The other was about a musician Ebi, an Iranian asylum seeker. Sigli Ahmed, a Ghanaian, did the one on tagging. Boris, a Serbian did the one about Ebi and Idil (family reunion).
How are refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants perceived by the media, local people and employers in this country?
There is a deliberate misrepresentation of the refugee and asylum seeker by certain section of the local media.
For instance, there were outrageous claims in the past about asylum seekers killing the Queen's birds, the swans, and also false reports that they were eating donkeys. All were found to be untrue.
But even more serious is the wilful blurring of lines between who is an asylum seeker, a refugee, an illegal immigrant or a terrorist. The media seeks to band them together to create confusion and generate animosity against anyone who is foreign.
Why do you think this is happening and what effect is it having?
It's all about the ideological construction of the immigrant by the media. That inevitably results in racism, xenophobia and social exclusion.
Because the immigrant, whatever his status, would have been constructed as unworthy, that exclusion extends to employment; immigrants are then seen as people deserving of the lowly paid jobs. Jobs which local people do not want to do. And yet many foreigners are better educated than some local people.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)