Lawyer calls for Mugabe trial at The Hague
Andrew Meldrum in
Pretoria
Friday April 23, 2004
The Guardian
A leading international
lawyer yesterday called for Robert Mugabe to be
brought to trial for
state-sponsored torture, murder and rape amid fresh
claims that the
government in Zimbabwe is abusing its legal system to hold
on to
power.
Mark Ellis, from the International Bar Association, said there was
enough
evidence to bring Mr Mugabe before the international criminal court in
The
Hague.
"It is time that the international community took decisive
steps to assure
the suffering people of Zimbabwe that Mugabe and his cohorts
will be held
accountable for their crimes," he said.
"Files can be
opened now and evidence can be compiled to prepare for
the
trials."
The UN commission on human rights, now meeting in Geneva,
declined to take
action on the reports of abuses in Zimbabwe. But Mr Ellis
said the trend of
international justice was to make sure that there is no
impunity for rulers
or government officials. "We must show that even a
dictator cannot evade
international law," he said.
Stephen Irwin QC,
chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales, was one
of an international
delegation of lawyers who returned this week from a
visit to Zimbabwe. "What
is happening there is the destruction of a once
fine, working justice system
in order to hold on to political power," he
said.
The country's judges
were either being bought or threat ened into submission
to the Mugabe regime,
he said.
Mr Irwin said the Mugabe government had to significantly reform
or the
parliamentary elections due in March next year would be
"meaningless".
A new report by analysts at the International Crisis
Group, echoed Mr
Irwin's warning, saying that the upcoming elections "may be
the country's
last chance to avoid becoming a failed state".
Business Day
No Harare invite for PAC to liberation
bash
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Harare
Correspondent
HARARE Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu (PF) has not invited its key
regional ally,
SA's Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), to the meeting of former
liberation
movements in Harare that began on Wednesday.
A Zanu (PF)
source said a PAC invitation could have upset the African
National Congress
(ANC), which fears that the opposition party could import
the Zimbabwean
"virus" of wholesale land invasions.
Parties and groups invited to the
conference included Swapo of Namibia, the
Botswana Democratic Party, the
Movement for the People's Liberation of
Angola, Malawi's ruling United
Democratic Front and the Malawi Congress
Party (MCP), and Zambia's Movement
for Multiparty Democracy and the United
Independence Party (Unip). The MCP
and Unip were invited in their capacities
as former liberation movements and
ruling parties.
A number of other parties from Sudan, Tanzania, Lesotho
and Swaziland, as
well as from the US, Britain and Australia, were also
invited.
Although it also received an invitation, the ANC did not send
anyone from SA
to the meeting. It nominated deputy high commissioner in
Zimbabwe Kingsley
Sithole to attend instead.
PAC leader Motsoko Pheko
said his party was disappointed it had not been
invited.
Business Day
Politicians run for cover on the tough
decisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I
HAVE watched the unfolding saga in Zimbabwe cricket this past week with
an
increasing sense of dislike for politicians and their duplicitous
manoeuvres
and sidesteps.
What is happening is disgusting. Players are
taking moral stands while
governments, though quite happy to piggy-back on
the actions of players,
refuse to get their hands dirty.
The issue
started out as a dispute between the cricket union there and its
top
players.
The reasons for the dispute range from politics to a fundamental
lack of
professionalism.
But it's where international tours come in,
that double standards begin.
England and Australia are to tour Zimbabwe
this year and there is plainly
substantial opposition to those tours in
Zimbabwe and in those countries.
The England and Wales Cricket Board
(ECB) has made it clear it is reluctant
to hand what it sees as legitimacy to
a regime it regards as dubious, by
touring there.
But the ECB's hands
are tied by a decision emanating out of the
International Cricket Council
boardrooms, declaring that any country
defaulting on tours for reasons other
than concerns about safety and
security stands to incur huge fines.
If
the British government were to tell the ECB it cannot tour, those fines
would
not be incurred because the ECB would be under government
instruction.
But the British government won't do a thing. It makes quite
clear its
dislike for the Robert Mugabe regime and it uses the debate
surrounding
every tour as a chance to have its say and to denigrate that
regime.
But when it comes to putting its money where its mouth is, the
British
government is nowhere to be seen, claiming that it is the ECB's
decision to
tour or not.
The Australian situation is even
worse.
Cricket Australia has said it will tour because it believes in
the
philosophy that cricket must be spread worldwide.
As a result,
individuals are left to examine their consciences and decide if
they want to
tour or not.
Australian legspinner Stuart MacGill, has decided that he
cannot, in all
conscience, tour a country that he believes has denied people
their
fundamental human rights.
His government, while refusing to stop
the Australian players from touring
there, has jumped in boots and all on the
back of MacGill's courageous call
of conscience.
Their foreign
minister, Alexander Downer, was yesterday quoted slamming the
"abhorrent"
racial policy for selection of the national team. He called on
the
International Cricket Council to take action against Zimbabwe, saying
its
team was being selected on the basis of race, not merit.
Australian Prime
Minister John Howard is said to have congratulated MacGill
on his "strength
of character".
Well, those comments certainly beg questions.
If
Zimbabwe's policies are so abhorrent to them, why is the
Australian
government allowing that tour to go ahead?
And if, as
reported, Howard so admires MacGill's "strength of character" in
refusing to
tour, what does that say about his government's refusal to act
and their
strength of character?
I find it sickening and cynical, that governments
are perfectly willing to
make known their "abhorrence" and all those other
strong emotions, while
sitting back and letting cricket unions make the hard
choices all the while
knowing that the cricket unions stand to lose heavily
if they decide not to
tour.
On a purely sporting note, the Zimbabwean
cricket rebels must have had a few
uncomfortable hours watching the country's
second-stringers doing rather
well against Sri Lanka in the first limited
overs international.
With everyone in cricket expecting a complete
cake-walk for the Sri Lankans,
a win for the Zimbabwean team was certainly
not in the script.
What if they had won? Where would that have left the
rebels and their
bargaining position?
Interesting times.
Smit
is sports editor.
Apr 23 2004 07:31:56:000AM Business Day 1st
Edition
Comment from The Mail & Guardian (SA), 20 April
What the IMF
really said about Zim's economic performance
John
Robertson
Zimbabwe's government-controlled media made headline news
of the few
positive points that could be extracted from the International
Monetary Fund
's (IMF) press statement at the end of their two-week visit
last month. The
first points highlighted by the IMF team were skimmed over
for local
readers, if mentioned at all. These were the IMF's key
findings:
Zimbabwe's economy's deterioration in the past five years
had reduced its
gross domestic product by about 30% and it was still
contracting.
Inflation had doubled in each of the past three years to
reach 600% at the
end of last year. This had dire social consequences,
including high and
rising unemployment that made the poverty measures twice
as serious, and
school enrolments had been cut by 35% in
2003.
Structural changes in agriculture relating to land reform
negatively
affected agricultural production.
Foreign donors have
provided large amounts of humanitarian aid, but donor
assistance has been
curtailed because of concerns about the quality
of
governance.
Loose monetary policies had intensified
inflationary pressures. They had
also left interest rates highly negative in
real terms, which imposed a
heavy tax on savers, encouraged excessive
borrowing, and increased the
vulnerability of the financial
sector.
Flight to alternative assets had been caused by the excessive
liquidity
growth, and this had contributed to record increases in real estate
and
share prices and hoarding of goods. Exports had suffered because of
the
uncompetitive official exchange rate, and official imports were
severely
constrained.
Acknowledging that the government's
budgetary operations were almost
balanced last year, the IMF found this to be
because of higher sales-tax
collections after the mid-year price-control
liberalisation and further cuts
in government spending.
The IMF
team did welcome steps taken in the 2004 Budget, in the December
Monetary
Policy Statement and in more recent moves to strengthen banking
supervision.
It encouraged the authorities to accelerate and broaden these
efforts. The
IMF team was in the country to start the process of its
so-called Article IV
Consultation Report, a detailed economic statement of
each member country's
performance and prospects. Normally the information
gathered will be used to
set guidelines for the various forms of assistance
that the IMF might offer
to the country and the criteria that a recipient
country would have to meet
to qualify for the facilities. Conditions laid
down normally focus on the
basic issues directly affecting the stability of
a country's exchange rate.
This means that sources of inflation, such as
large Budget deficits,
distorted interest-rate structures, dual exchange
rates or the use of
borrowed funds for consumption rather than investment
would all be targeted
for correction. Once it has persuaded the country to
deal effectively with
these potential hazards, the IMF will typically show a
strong preference for
leaving market forces to determine exchange and
interest rates, hopefully
helped by a low inflation environment that has
been achieved by rigorously
applying strict fiscal and monetary policies.
Although Zimbabwe no longer
qualifies for the IMF's technical assistance,
the team listed a number of
recommendations to the Zimbabwe government.
These were:
To focus
monetary policy on taming inflation and on reducing pressure on the
exchange
rate, taking into account the vulnerability of the banking system;
To
gear fiscal policy to the support of tighter monetary policies;
To
use the exchange rate to decisively reinvigorate exports and contain
the
demand for imports, and to restart the comprehensive discussions that
link
private and public-sector efforts to meet Zimbabwe's economic
challenges.
While Zimbabwe's arrears to the IMF, which stood at
US$290-million at the
end of February, place the country beyond the reach of
IMF lending, the
staff team welcomed Zimbabwe's recent repayment of
$6-million and its
commitment to make quarterly payments of $1,5-million. The
IMF team closed
its press statement with the assurance that its executive
board will closely
examine the progress made on policies and payments when it
considers the
team's Article IV Consultation Report in July. The almost token
instalments
of $1,5-million a quarter that Zimbabwe has promised to pay off
its arrears
are intended to stave off the next stage on the road to
Zimbabwe's expulsion
from the IMF - the ultimate step in a sequence that
started with Zimbabwe
losing its right of access to IMF funds, then its right
to technical
assistance, and thereafter its voting rights as a member
country. The feared
compulsory withdrawal of Zimbabwe's membership now
appears to be on hold,
but much more progress will be needed before funds
will be offered or the
country's voting rights on the Board of Governors can
be restored. Records
show that Zimbabwe has been in continuous arrears to the
IMF since February
2001 and by the end of November last year, the arrears
amounted to
$273-million, (about 53% of its IMF quota). Of the total
amount,
$110-million was overdue to the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility
Trust.
The IMF revealed at the time that Zimbabwe was the first and only
country to
have protracted overdue obligations to this trust. Zimbabwe has
doubled the
measurable levels of poverty while shrinking the economy to only
70% of its
size five years ago. It now has to repay $120-million to this
facility. But
as export revenues have dropped by half as a result of
destructive policies,
the country can barely manage the quarterly token
instalment to keep its IMF
membership on life support.
John Robertson
is an economic consultant in Harare
JAG OPEN LETTER FORUM 22ND APRIL 2004
Email: justice@telco.co.zw; justiceforagriculture@zol.co.zw
Internet:
www.justiceforagriculture.com
Please
send any material for publication in the Open Letter Forum to
justice@telco.co.zw with "For Open Letter
Forum" in the subject
line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAG
OLF
258
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THOUGHT
FOR THE DAY
"It is good to have an end to journey toward;
but it is the
journey that matters, in the end."
--- Ursula Kroeber
LeGuin
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
1. Subject Land - MT Statement
There is still no official statement on
the recent very damaging press
reports.
The issue is not going away
and, almost to the contrary, the absence of an
official clarifying statement,
preferably from MT himself, is fermenting
increasingly destructive debate
well beyond our borders.
There is a dire need to prepare something
appropriate for media circulation
throughout Africa and the rest of the
world.
There is a feeling that this silence is almost sinister and it
raises a
serious question about the sincerity of the commitment to the
very
foundation principles of the MDC as a truly democratic organization
that
believes in the rule of law.
The press report also contradicts
the agrarian reform policy as enshrined
in the official policy documents.
This has added to the confusion and
provided ammunition for our critics who
now have every justification to
question the national leadership qualities of
the government in waiting.
Simon Spooner
"11 year's old - Thank
You"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
2. Subject The History of Justice
The Vice Chairman,
Justice for
Agriculture.
Dear Sir,
The Third Chimurenga started in February
2000. Jag started in about May 200
2 when the effects of the Third Chimurenga
concerned a group of people
enough to act in a legal manner which they saw
fit. The Quinnel case which
is to heard next month (27th May) is the product
of that concern.
However, it is always good to pause for reflection and
take stock of the
past. Cathy Buckle and other writers seem to have
documented many aspects
of the Third Chimurenga for Zimbabweans to read and
study at their leisure
in the future.
It would appear that the
Zimbabwe Joint Resettlement Initiative (ZJRI) made
an attempt to prevent some
of the activities that have occurred in Zimbabwe
over the last few years. I
believe that the Chairman of Jag was actually
involved in the ZJRI at one
stage. Would it not be a good time to examine
the composition and the
activities of ZJRI, and the time frames, to paint
a clear historical picture
of its part in the whole exercise?
Are there any ex ZJRI committee
members who could assist in supplying this
information, including the
Chairman of Jag? This information is likely to
form an integral part of the
web of intrigue which can now be analysed in a
completely detached manner.
Once some form of pattern is evident it may
well be used as the basis of the
Fourth Chimurenga - Real Justice for all
Zimbabweans regardless of their
status in political, religious, gender,
racial, financial, geographical,
employment or tribal terms. Your
assistance in supplying the facts about ZJRI
will be most appreciated.
Yours faithfully,
Fourth
Chimurenga.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
3. Subject Money or Principles
Dear Jag,
The Octogenarian W.F. Deeds
has written some words about the ECU's dilemma
about meeting its obligations
by playing cricket against Zimbabwe that we
all need to give some thought to.
It would appear that the cricketing
fraternity have now become the chosen
ones to experience the Third
Chimurenga because there is a little dosh at
stake of course - instead of
houses, farms, tractors, cattle, rose sheds,
tobacco, sheep, goats, diesel,
cars, irrigation, maize, chickens, lorries,
pick ups, TVs, furniture, etc.
as was found in the first round on the farms,
it is now just pure beautiful
unadulterated 'mali' this time. Much more
fun.
"By pushing aside principle and insisting that monetary
considerations come
first, we have made cricket look cheap.
We shall
find our own behaviour harder to explain."
I have met an ex Zimbabwean
lawyer, and a farmer who became disillusioned
with the CFU's arrogance
towards its members who had pointed out that there
was a matter of
"principle" at stake rather than a "monetary
consideration," some four years
ago. One had raised the full amount for the
equivalent of the Quinnel Case
some four years ago, but was advised that
the Director and others had it all
in hand.
My question is, did the CFU make agriculture or farmers "look
cheap?"
Judging by the quietness from that quarter right now it is not
totally
unreasonable to wonder how that "behaviour will be explained." The
Peter
Principle states that we all get promoted to our level of
incompetence.
Principally
Peter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All
letters published on the open Letter Forum are the views and opinions
of the
submitters, and do not represent the official viewpoint of Justice
for
Agriculture.
JOB OPPORTUNITIES: Updated 22nd April 2004
Please send any job
opportunities for publication in this newsletter to:
JAG Job Opportunities
<justice@telco.co.zw>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.
Advert Received 14th April 2004
Positions available immediately - for
both experienced houseworker and
gardener in the Umwinsidale area off the
Shamva Road. Must have reliable
references, be non drinkers and above all be
honest. Accomodation available
and good renumeration offered.
Please
contact Sue or Sarah on 04 494848 or 091 237
576
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
Advert Received 16th April 2004
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am looking for
a business partner to produce vegetables in a 10 ha
irrigated plot in
Botswana. The government of Botswana has just
recently leased me the plot at
P 23 000 (approx R34 000) per year. The
lease period is 25 years with an
option for a further extension of
another 25 years.
May I humbly ask
your association to help me in this regard. Please
contact me on the
reflected e-mail address and/or on the numbers
indicated below:
(27)
15 268 2376/2203
(27) 84 272 9148
(27) 83 299 0106
David
Norris
Dr David Norris
Quantitative Geneticist
Faculty of Science,
Health & Agricullture
University of the North
South Africa
Tel:
(27) 15 268 2376/2203
Fax: (27) 15 268 2892
e-mail: norrisd@unorth.ac.za
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.
Advert Received 17th April 2004
there must be farmers out there who had
experienced, accomplished
gardeners,
but who are now jobless. we are
looking for one such, five days a week for
large property. regret we cannot
offer accommodation. must have contactable
references.
please contact
andy, on 091-315-063 thanks,
jan
raath
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.
Advert Received 20th April 2004
PART TIME BOOK KEEPING AND OFFICE WORK
POSITION, WITH HOUSE, AVAILABLE FOR
COMPANY SITUATED AT MELFORT. PLEASE
PHONE FOR APPOINTMENT. TEL NOS. 073
2777 073 22595
CELL 011
615367
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.
Advert Received 21st April 2004
BOOKEEPER/ADMIN WAMTED
Bookeeper wanted to
work mornings (9 to 1) in the highlands area. Pastel
would be ideal but not
vital
please contact :
Patrick Cochran
Mobile - + 263 (0)91
274327
Tel - +263 (0)4 495 433
Email - tpc@mweb.co.zw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.
Advert Received 21st April 2004
"Procurement company looking for a
mornings only (& possibly 2 afternoons a
week) lady to work in their
office which is run by ex farmers:
Must have:
drivers licence
a
sense of humour
good secretarial skills
basic knowledge in booking
keeping
good telephone manner
Please contact Siobhan (Shavaun)
Hutchings on 011 410
347"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
For
the latest listings of accommodation available for farmers, contact
justiceforagriculture@zol.co.zw
(updated 18 June 2003)
The
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe
Monday
April 12th – Sunday April 18th
2004
Weekly
Media Update 2004-15
CONTENTS
1.
GENERAL COMMENT
2.
LAND GRAB CONTINUES
3.
INDEPENDENCE CELEBRATIONS
1.
General Comment
NOTHING
more aptly illustrates African countries’ hypocrisy in tackling the Zimbabwean
crisis more than their resistance to have Zimbabwe’s human rights record
discussed by the United Nations Commission for Human Rights in Geneva recently.
According
to media reports, all 15 African countries on the 53-member commission voted for
a “no action” motion that blocked a primary motion criticising Zimbabwe’s
evidently deteriorating human rights record.
Their
vote together with that of 10 Asian states, one South American country and a
European nation ensured that the motion raising the issue of Zimbabwe’s human
rights record was defeated by 27 votes to 24. There were two
abstentions.
So
elated was The Herald with this outcome (16/4) that it reported
the story under a false headline, No human rights abuse in Zim: UN. The
paper and its stablemates then used this distortion to vindicate the
authorities’ claims that reports of human rights violations in Zimbabwe were a
fabrication of Britain and its ally the US, who are allegedly against the
country’s agrarian reforms.
However,
the private media reports disputed such claims and continued to present more
fresh evidence of nationwide State-sponsored or state-condoned human rights
abuses in the country. For example SW Radio Africa and Studio 7 carried about 18
reports on rights abuses in Zimbabwe. These included the authorities’ violent
eviction of farm labourers at Charleswood and Kondozi farms. Similarly, the
private Press carried about six reports on rights violations, including farm
seizures.
Although
The Herald and The Manica Post (16/4) also reported the invasion
of Kondozi and Charleswood, they did not view the seizures in the context of
rights abuses. Instead, The Manica Post especially, celebrated the
takeover of Kondozi saying it was indicative of “government’s commitment
that there would be no going back on the policy and legal decision” to
acquire the farm. This blatant contradiction of a High Court interdict
preventing interference in the operations of Kondozi, also ignored the adverse
ramifications of the takeover on farm workers and instead claimed that the
invasion would create “jobs galore”.
ZBC
steered clear of the issue.
Meanwhile,
as this report went to Press The Daily Mirror (21/4) reported that the
authorities had deported a sports correspondent with the UK-based Daily
Telegraph newspaper, Mihir Bose, after his accreditation to cover the Sri
Lankan national cricket team’s tour of Zimbabwe was turned down. According to
the paper, Bose had allegedly provided incomplete information to the
authorities. The Herald (21/4) typically, reported that Bose,
“whose newspaper…is linked to the British government, had secretly entered
the country…to work ‘undercover’…”
2.
Land grab continues
The
facade of normalcy with which government has always tried to mask the chaotic
nature of its controversial land seizures peeled off again in the week to reveal
the nasty outlook of the exercise after the authorities made fresh aggressive
bids to take over Kondozi and Charleswood Farms in Manicaland.
As
SW Radio Africa (13/4) and Studio 7 (12 & 16/4) revealed, this onslaught
follows President Mugabe’s threat in June last year that government would take
over the two farms and more recent statements by Information Minister Jonathan
Moyo that the authorities would take “decisive and final corrective
measures over Kondozi”.
Not
only did government’s latest efforts smack of hypocrisy and vindictiveness, but
also exposed serious policy contradictions in the implementation of government’s
‘fast-track’ agrarian reforms.
Predictably,
the government media ignored the authorities’ violations of the law and human
rights under the guise of the so-called equitable redistribution of land. As
illustrated by The Herald (16/4) for example, they covered up the illegal
and violent nature of the raids and failed to question why government continued
to resort to this barbaric method to achieve its goals.
This
primitive use of force was all the more alarming since the raids were clearly in
contempt of court orders granted to the owners of the farms barring government
from interfering in their operations.
Instead,
The Herald downplayed the vicious manner in which armed State security
agents evicted workers at Kondozi Farm, ostensibly to pave the way for the
Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (ARDA). It merely reported that
ARDA “has started operations” at Kondozi after its previous
owners, the De Klerk family, who had “refused” to vacate it after
its acquisition by the government, “made way for the
Authority”.
Similarly,
the paper reported law enforcement agents as occupying Charleswood Farm and
ordering “defiant employees to leave” after its owner, MDC MP for
the area, Roy Bennet, “deserted the farm and the constituency opting for
his farm at Ruwa”.
ZBC
simply ignored the seizures altogether.
But
SW Radio Africa, which has for several weeks closely followed the developments
at the farms, disproved The Herald’s suggestion of civility in the way
state security agents threw out the farm workers.
The
private radio station’s determination to ferret out a more reliable story about
the invasions saw it diligently updating its audiences on the matter at least
four times during the week.
For
instance it reported (13/4) that “truckloads of soldiers armed with
AK-47’s and police units with dogs and baton sticks” descended on
Charleswood on Good Friday and forced all the farm workers and their families
out of the compound, assaulting and injuring several in the process. Some
workers who decided to stay were offered “short-term contracts and less
pay”.
The
Zimbabwe Independent
(16/4) corroborated the story and quoted farm workers who claimed that the
police beat them up with truncheons “while children and the infirm were
trampled in the melee”.
The
paper also reported that the Manicaland provincial administrator had allegedly
prevented the Red Cross from helping the stranded Kondozi farm workers.
SW
Radio Africa (15/4) also highlighted this.
The
station (14/4) revealed that the seizure of Kondozi had adversely affected the
surrounding community. It quoted journalist Peta Thorncroft as saying Kondozi
supported “more than…8,000 families” in the province, most of whom
were subsistence farmers contracted to sell their produce to the farm, which in
turn exported the products to the lucrative European Union markets.
In
fact, Studio 7 (15/04) reported that such negative repercussions of the takeover
had prompted a high-powered delegation, including 28 chiefs, from areas
surrounding Kondozi to travel to Harare hoping to meet President Mugabe
“to complain about the evictions” but instead ended up meeting
Vice-President Joseph Msika. The Zimbabwe Independent also revealed this.
Msika
reportedly ordered ARDA off Kondozi saying the original farm “management
must resume operations without interference” (Studio 7, 16/4, and The
Standard, 18/4). The Standard quoted Msika as having claimed that he
was unaware of “this latest land (Kondozi) acquisition neither is John
Nkomo (Land Reform and Resettlement Minister) – nor is the acting police
commissioner – only the police there were aware of this
invasion”.
Ironically,
while the government was hounding out the remnants of productive commercial
agriculture, the government media attacked Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo
for wanting the same rejected farmers to farm in his
country.
They
did this by rehashing previous private media reports claiming that a team of
white former commercial farmers had held talks with Obasanjo during a week-long
visit to that country during which the group discussed the possibility of
relocating there (The Herald, Chronicle, 15/4, and The Herald,
16/4).
But
instead of fairly reporting the matter, the two papers (15/4) abused their
professional roles by politicising the issue, depicting Obasanjo as a latter day
Judas Iscariot.
They
claimed that Nigeria’s move had “raised eyebrows and set tongues wagging
in diplomatic circles, given that General Obasanjo had been ‘a midwife’ involved
in moves to mend relations between Zimbabwe and Britain over the land
issue”.
To
sustain their attack on Obasanjo the papers falsely claimed that government had
not expelled the farmers but that they had instead spurned government’s
one-man-one-farm policy in favour of multiple farm ownership, “some of
which were idle and have been repossessed for redistribution among landless
blacks”.
They
deliberately ignored the fact that government had legislated against the
one-man-one-farm policy through section 9 (2)(a) (iii) of its 2004 Land
Acquisition Amendment. The section dismisses the owning of one piece of land as
constituting “valid grounds for any objection to the compulsory
acquisition of the land nor shall such criteria form the basis of
any claim or right in law…”
However,
unlike the government media’s heavily sanitised reports on agricultural
activity, the private media critically took stock of the pitfalls surrounding
government’s agrarian reforms.
For
example, the private media picked up an IRIN report (the UN’s Integrated
Regional Information Network) on the rapidly shrinking dairy industry because
some newly resettled farmers had given up on dairy production and had instead
turned to the cultivation of maize and soya beans (The Tribune, 16/4,
Zimbabwe Independent and The Standard).
The
Tribune
quoted one of the farmers as saying: “When I took up dairy farming I
thought it was an easy business, but hardly had I started, did I realise that
there was much more to it than leading cows into a milking
pen.”
The
Zimbabwe Independent,
on the other hand, quoted the National Association of Dairy Farmers (NADF)
spokesperson, Hilary Blair, as saying the new dairy farmers had been
disillusioned mainly because of their lack of experience and resources. This had
resulted in a slump in the production of milk on some farms by 25 to 45
percent.
Blair
said a dairy farmer “must be… a veterinary doctor, a nutritionist and must
be on duty 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.”
In
contrast, the government-controlled media merely carried damage control pieces
as was the case with The Herald (16/4) story, Milk shortage due
to operational problems – DZL. The story unhelpfully claimed, “Milk
producers continue to face various challenges related to drought, the cost and
shortages of critical inputs…” adding that Dairiboard Zimbabwe Limited
was running schemes to help dairy farmers with funds and infrastructural
developments.
3.
Independence celebrations
The
government media’s coverage of the country’s 24th Independence
anniversary further underscored their status as unbridled conduits of ZANU PF
propaganda. They merely regurgitated government assertions that the
24th anniversary was historic as it represented the peak of the
country’s socio-political and economic successes, as exemplified by the
repossession of land from the minority whites.
This
slavish coverage was clearly illustrated by the manner in which ZBC handled the
issue.
The
government broadcaster (ZTV, Power FM and Radio Zimbabwe) bombarded its
audiences with a total of 114 stories on the country’s independence in its main
news bulletins of the week. Of these, 41 (36 percent) reminded the public about
the importance of commemorating independence. The stories also challenged people
to “jealously guard the gains of the country’s liberation
struggle” and emulate the lives of the late liberation war heroes who
devoted their lives to the country.
Forty-three
(38 percent) were on the preparations for the countrywide celebrations, while 21
stories (18 percent) were reports of the actual event itself.
Nine
(8 percent) of them linked the country’s Independence to the government’s
self-proclaimed achievements, such as the resettlement of the landless.
In
addition, ZBC’s stations carried excerpts of old speeches made by the country’s
heroes during the war. Recent speeches made by President Mugabe were also aired.
Old liberation struggle songs were played on all ZBC’s radio stations.
The
frenzy culminated in an overnight live coverage of a musical show held in Hwange
on April 17.
But
this over-zealous allocation of airtime to the event did not translate into an
honest evaluation of issues, especially the effects of agrarian reforms, which
government and its media advertised as the hallmark of its achievements and
therefore a source for celebration.
Besides,
the broadcaster and the government Press were also blind to how government,
under the pretext of empowering the disadvantaged and safeguarding the country’s
sovereignty, had totally subverted Zimbabweans’ basic rights as a
people.
The
Manica Post
(16/4) made an ironic reference to it when the paper quoted ruling party
stalwart Oppah Muchinguri as having “defined independence as total freedom
of expression and respect for human rights” adding that “it
(independence) means freedom to associate, vote, own property, excel in
business, as well as respect for fundamental human
rights.”
However,
there was no attempt by the paper to measure such bland rhetoric against the
arsenal of hostile laws, such as the Access to Information and Protection of
Privacy Act (AIPPA), the Broadcasting Services Act (BSA) and the Public Order
and Security Act (POSA), which have massively eroded Zimbabweans’ rights.
Only
the private media tried to explore this area, although their analyses were often
distracted by the economic crisis rather than focussing on the wholesale erosion
of the country’s civil rights too.
The
Financial Gazette,
for example, quoted constitutional law expert Lovemore Madhuku as tracing
Zimbabwe’s woes from between 1980 and 1994 when Zimbabwe moved from “a
parliamentary system of enacting laws to a presidential system” as
illustrated by the fact that of the 17 amendments made to the Constitution since
independence most were focused on concentrating power in the hands of the
Executive.
Added
Madhuku: “It (the constitution) had detrimental effects on the economy and
the society in that there is no benefit of a free flow of ideas.”
Studio
7 (13 & 16/4) and SW Radio Africa (16/4) echoed similar views.
And
The Zimbabwe Independent story, You may rejoice, I must mourn also
referred to the systematic erosion of people’s freedoms by the government since
the attainment of independence in 1980. It noted that the ruling party
“has remained entombed in the revolutionary mantra that it alone brought
freedom and therefore it should be the custodian and dispenser of all freedoms
and rights. Anyone demanding extra rights outside the prescribed ones is
considered…an enemy of the state.”
This
observation found relevance in government media reports, which unquestioningly
allowed the ruling party to selfishly own the liberation struggle and
consequently monopolise independence proceedings. But surprisingly, the private
media accessed little comment on this brazen theft of an important national
event in the name of narrow political interests and the government media were
allowed to get away with the deification of the ruling party and the President.
The
Herald
(12/4), for example, depicted President Mugabe as a faultless revolutionary
legend, persecuted by his enemies for, among other reasons, his magnanimity,
forgiving nature, love for peace and unity, benefiting “previously
deprived Africans”, achieving social justice, and fighting graft
“everywhere, including in his own party and
government”.
The
Herald
(14,15,16&17/4), Chronicle (15/4) and The Sunday Mirror (18/4)
stories were tailored in the same way, either hallowing Mugabe’s achievements or
that of his party. The Sunday Mirror story especially simplistically
described Mugabe as “a legendary hero of all times” without
examining his contemporary record of governance.
Ends.
The
MEDIA UPDATE was produced and circulated by the Media Monitoring Project
Zimbabwe, 15 Duthie Avenue, Alexandra Park, Harare, Tel/fax: 263 4 703702,
E-mail: monitors@mmpz.org.zw
Feel
free to write to MMPZ. We may not able to respond to everything but we will look
at each message. For previous MMPZ
reports, and more information about the Project, please visit our website at http://www.mmpz.org.zw