CFU REPORT 4 FEBRUARY
2003
Message to Members from President of Commercial Farmers
Union
I was called to Ministry by Minister Made to attend a meeting
this afternoon, 4th February 2003. I was accompanied by my Vice President,
Director and Senior Economist and we met with Ministers Made, Jonathon Moyo and
other Government Officials.
A discussion took place over a proposed Memorandum of
Understanding, introduced by Government in response to a written request for
clarity by myself. No progress or agreement was reached contrary to what may be
reflected in the media.
It would appear Governments position is inflexible and gives
rise to sceptism of their sincerity to find a way forward as a result of recent
meetings requested by the Minister. I therefore perceive a lengthy process
before any understanding will be reached.
Colin Cloete
President
4th February 2003
Police blamed over protestor's death
Andrew Meldrum in
Harare
Wednesday February 5, 2003
The Guardian
A young Zimbabwean
has died as a result of alleged police torture after he
was arrested at the
Zimbabwe-Pakistan match in November for campaigning
against
ADVERTISEMENT
the World Cup cricket matches being played here.
His
mother Ellen Mayambirwi is reported to have said that Edison Mukwazi,
29,
died in hospital on Sunday from lung and liver injuries inflicted
by
police.
Mukwazi and two others were arrested by police at the
Harare Sports Club
where they were distributing leaflets describing the human
rights abuses
committed by President Robert Mugabe's government.
They
were campaigning for the World Cup matches to be moved away from
Zimbabwe
because of Mugabe's human rights record. They were held by police
for
suspected public disorder and while being held they were allegedly
tortured
before being released without charges.
Mukwazi was a dedicated supporter
of the opposition party, the Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC). He had
been the chairman of the party's youth wing
in Harare.
He is survived
by his wife and a two-week-old daughter.
The alleged torture was not
Mukwazi's first experience of mistreatment at
the hands of police. In 2001 he
was one of 13 MDC youths who were arrested
by police for allegedly killing a
member of Mugabe's ruling Zanu PF party.
They were badly beaten and dumped in
the middle of the dangerous
Gona-Re-Zhou National Park. Later they appeared
in court but were set free.
In recent weeks at least 10 members of the
MDC, including two members of
parliament and one lawyer, have reported
electric-shock torture by police.
Their charges have been supported by
medical examinations which confirm
injuries consistent with their harrowing
accounts of torture.
In response to the public outcry about the rising
number of allegations of
state torture, the Zimbabwe police last week
announced they would
investigate the charges that they tortured an opposition
member of
parliament, Job Sikhala. But the opposition leader Morgan
Tsvangirai
dismissed that as a "whitewash".
He said the police could
not be trusted to investigate themselves over a
single allegation and called
for an independent judicial inquiry into all
the torture allegations which he
said should be led by a retired judge.
Tsvangirai, who is currently on
trial for treason along with two of his
party officials for allegedly
conspiring to have Mugabe assassinated, also
called on the United Nations and
other international organisations to launch
investigations into the reports
of state torture
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:48 PM
Subject: Murder on murrayfield farm
Please phone 011-215525 and follow this up. This
is the sort of violence (MURDER) that occurs with impunity. These guys are
murderers of an innocent man and they are released out of
custody.
In another incident two weeks ago - there were five
other men that were beaten to
pulp with irrigation risers by the so called war vets on
Gorojena Farm, (Igava) , (victims - Precious and Victor Masuka, Manyeva Mgarire,
Godfrey Magondo) transferred from Marondera Hospital to .....? (refuse to tell
anyone) last Tuesday. We have tried to locate them at Pari, Hre. and
Chitungwiza Hospitals - where are they? In a mortuary now ? In another
incident in the same area Marondera East, Shingi, a mentally
unstable young man, was stoned
to death by a group of self styled land
liberators for walking across their lands (Dindingwe Farm, Igava Road,
marondera). The mother of the deceased was told that if she reported to the
Police she would be killed herself.
WHO CARES ?? Not the cricketers or the Zimbabwe
Cricket Union and certainly not that hypocritical Ali Bacher.
Kerry Kay, Human Rights and HIV/AIDS Activist.
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 9:47 PM
Subject: murrayfield farm
Dear Kerry.
re: incident on
Murrayfield.
20/01/2003 Emmanuel Foster was murdered by approx. 10
youths.
He was chased into the dam and stopped from getting out until
he drowned. Reason given was that cattle had been into the settlers tomatoes.
Police however could find no evidence of this accusation.
6 youths were arrested.
CR No 64/01/03.
4 accused have since been released on $200,000 bail, we
believe paid by owner of tomatoes Mr Mahofu. Two of the accused are relatives of
Mr Mahofu.
Hope this is enough.
Yours, Jimmy.
VOA
Food Shortages Worsening in Zimbabwe, Says World Food
Program
Sabina Castelfranco
Rome
04 Feb 2003, 17:55 UTC
The
World Food Program says it plans to provide food for more than a quarter
of
Zimbabwe's population this year. But the agency says a humanitarian
crisis
has been averted in other parts of southern Africa, at least for the
time
being.
The World Food Program says dry weather combined with a
dramatically reduced
amount of land under cultivation has led to a worsening
food crisis in
Zimbabwe. The coordinator of WFP programs in southern Africa,
Judith Lewis
said people in Zimbabwe will continue to face food shortages in
the coming
year, and the situation could get worse.
"We are looking at
certainly over half of the population who are vulnerable
and need some type
of assistance," said Ms. Lewis. "And then when you look
at what is available
in the market, people that still have assets [or] money
go to the market and
there is nothing to buy, there is no bread, oil, sugar,
salt - just very hard
to find. And so, what our fear is that over the next
coming months if
something radical is not done in that country, we are going
to look at
potentially a whole country of hungry people."
Zimbabwe used to be the
breadbasket of southern Africa. The WFP said that
the current food crisis was
caused by drought and the re-distribution of
white-owned commercial farms to
inexperienced blacks, who have left many
fields fallow. The result has been a
huge drop in agricultural production.
The World Food Program said the
severe food crisis in southern Africa has
eased somewhat in five other
countries. Officials who have just returned
from a mission in the area say
they have managed to avert serious famine,
thanks to the quick reaction of
humanitarian workers and aid agencies.
But the U.N. agency has estimated
more than 15 million people are in need of
food assistance across the
region.
The World Food Program estimates that it will have delivered
nearly 1.5
million tons of emergency food aid by March to hungry people in
southern
Africa. It says millions of the most vulnerable people in the worst
affected
areas have benefited from international food aid.
WFP
officials also expressed serious concern about the AIDS pandemic in
these
countries. They say it is causing the death of thousands of
productive
people, mainly women, who are the pillars of the family and
community. The
U.N. agency called for a global effort to fight AIDS, which it
says is
wrecking the livelihoods of millions in southern Africa, while making
future
famines more likely
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 OPEN LETTER
FORUM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
1: J. L. Robinson
S. Hawgood Esq.,
CFU,
Marlborough.
My dear
Stoff,
Matabeleland farmers gathered on Friday 31st January, 2003 for an
update
from our President, Mr. Gavin Conolly, on the general state of play in
the
CFU, following the President's Council meeting on the Tuesday. The
members
in entirety were more than surprised to hear that Mr. Conolly, who
had
been accepted as one of the two nominated members for Regions some
weeks
ago, with no objections, was now no longer deemed Fit to Command, in
the
eyes or minds of the Regional Chairmen. Based on this objection, a
truly
democratic process had to be carried out, and being a gentleman,
Mr.
Conolly declined to partake in the proceedings I am told. A large
number
of farmers in this region now have serious reservations about the
Good
Faith of Council.
I shall attempt to cover the problem as best as
I can, and seek your
indulgence as one of the Bright Young Men, of the Ruling
Elite.
In May 2002, I was personally advised by a senior member of the
staff at
CFU that Mr. Peter Goosen, the then Vice President of Matabeleland,
was
viewed as rather unsuitable to come forward to Council, should
Mac
Crawford stand down. Later I was told that Mr. Peter Goosen, had
been
described as a "confrontational, bible punching radical." Peter
Goosen,
being a gentleman subsequently resigned as Vice President. Goosen
had
already served the CFU in his capacity as Chairman of Ostrich Producers
in
the past.
In August of 2002, we saw the dismissal of Benjamin
Freeth by the
Director, as instructed by Council. I asked myself if perhaps
Freeth also
fitted into Goosen's category, and was there for a rather
unsuitable sort
of fellow for Our Union.
October 2002, saw the
resignation of the Director and the President.
November 2002 saw the most
spectacular CFU Council Meeting ever on record
I believe. Mr. Gavin Conolly,
acting with a mandate from his region, and
getting his first taste of CFU
Council, had come to support Mr. Crawford's
nomination for election as
President (in Crawford's absence.) It seems
that Conolly only had a couple of
members supporting his candidate. Of
much more interest was `a block of the
rest' who insisted that the Old
President be reelected, at almost any cost, I
am told. Far more
interesting was the determination of Council Novice
Conolly, and that of
`the rest'- after eight hours or more, the situation
remained unresolved!
This fierce debate gives many farmers great
encouragement, I may add.
But now comes the tricky bit. Conolly, the
gentleman, was given a choice
by `the block.' Put the Old Boy back in and
they will put the Matabele in
as Vice President (quite an old trick from the
past I am told) or else
they will put the existing Vice President in, and
find a Bright Young Man
from The Ruling Elite as Vice. So intent they were on
their mission, the
block had nominated the sitting Vice President for both
President and Vice
President, and had nominated yourself as the Bright Young
Man, as a
possible Vice President, to cover for all eventualities. The bottom
line
from `the block' was that Crawford would not get their nod, as
President,
at ANY COST. (Conolly, the gentleman did not get quite the same
feeling of
encouragement out of the debate, it seems.)
Any
reservations Conolly the gentleman, might have had were to be
confirmed last
week. Conolly motored up to Harare using his precious
petrol, and then
motored home - enabling him to survey the wonderful
`agrarian reform' that
`the block' is busy implementing, perhaps?
Once again, putting aside some
more problems that you may have created for
the CFU, I extend my heartiest
congratulations to `you and your block' on
brilliant strategy - Brooke, Monty
and even Rommel would concur, I'm sure.
I have saved the main thread of the
problem to the end. As far as I am
aware, starting with the `radical retired
feather baron Goosen'; moving on
to the `failed enunciator Freeth'; and then
on to the `gentleman Conolly';
and finishing off with the `CFU Loyalist
Crawford' - there is one common
thread. Unless I am mistaken, I believe that
they are all Committed
Christians.
I simply ask you, as a Bright Young
Man from the Ruling Elite, if you are
aware of how blatant, and brazen the
actions of `the block'against these
four gentlemen have
become?
Yours
faithfully,
J. L.
Robinson.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice
for Agriculture mailing list
To subscribe/unsubscribe: Please write to jag-list-admin@mango.zw
xax
Communiqué from David Conolly (Chairman of Justice for Agriculture).
The
Land Issue: JAG's Perspective
Justice for Agriculture, 4 February
2003
SUMMARY
Justice for Agriculture arose as a result of the
dissatisfaction amongst
many farmers with the CFU's policy of dialogue. Since
its inception, JAG
has fought legal battles and provided advice that has
assisted innumerable
farmers. It gave rise to the concept of the loss
document for restitution
for farmers, and is in the process of devising a
coherent vision for the
future of Zimbabwean agriculture. In contrast, the
CFU have unswervingly
pursued the route of dialogue with the government, to
little gain. JAG
would like to invite the CFU and all comers to an open
debate at ART farm
to discuss the matter of dialogue with a government who
demonstrably do
not have the best interests of agriculture at
heart.
COMMUNIQUE FROM DAVID CONOLLY
It has come to my
attention over the last couple of weeks that there is a
certain amount of
confusion amongst commercial farmers pertaining to the
land issue in
Zimbabwe. I feel it prudent that JAG's policy should be
clearly stated in
order to solve the problem, rather than add to the
confusion.
To
understand this policy it is necessary to look back a couple of years
so that
we can best understand how to secure the future.
In 1998, there was a
land donors' conference at which all parties reached
an agreement and signed
a document. However, the Zimbabwe Government
reneged on its commitment, and
the agreement was never implemented. A
while later the Supreme Court of
Zimbabwe ruled that the Zimbabwe
Government had no land resettlement
programme, and the chaos in the
country was unlawful. The Zimbabwe Government
was given 6 months to
address this problem. Huge pressure was brought to bear
on C.F.U., who
believed that following a confrontational legal route was
unsuitable. At a
special congress in March of 2000, it was decided that the
dialogue route
should be pursued, despite Government's reneging on the 1998
agreement,
and evident disregard for the process of dialogue.
The
Zimbabwe Joint Resettlement Initiative (Z.J.R.I.), of which I was a
committee
member, was set up in order to implement this process. During
the first 8
weeks of meetings, it became eminently clear that we were
dialoguing in a
one-way street. Government was attempting to implement
policies that had been
rejected by the people in the referendum of
February 2000. I fast realised
that this was not a land issue but an issue
of maintaining power at any cost,
including ignoring all the norms of good
governance. I resigned from Z.J.R.I.
and a while later the Abuja accord
was signed. Within 48 hours, the Zimbabwe
Government reneged on most of
the signed clauses and the mayhem on the farms
intensified.
In May 2002, Government used parliament to change the land
acquisition act
regarding the issuing of Section 8 orders. I approached
C.F.U. and
suggested it was now time to return to the courts of Zimbabwe as
the
Government had shown no good will in the dialogue process. Furthermore,
in
order to give the impression to the International community that they
were
a law-abiding Government, they were now changing laws that
effectively
made C.F.U. members into criminals for the act of producing
food,
employing people, and living in houses that they had built. After
much
discussion, the C.F.U. opted to continue the demonstrably flawed
dialogue
route, and have been true to this commitment reached at the
special
congress of March 2000, despite the fact that they now represent less
than
half the number of members they boasted in that year.
On touring
the country, I found a number of like-minded farmers who were
dissatisfied
with this policy, and JAG was formed on the 15th June 2002.
We decided we
would stand by the Constitution of Zimbabwe and the UN Bill
of Human Rights,
and challenge such unconstitutional laws as the revised
Section 8, as well as
publicising the chaos on commercial farms as broadly
as possible.
It
was also apparent to us that Government had realised its power was
threatened
by title deeds, an internationally recognised document held by
all commercial
farmers and which is the foundation stone of all
self-sustaining economies
around the world.
We advised farmers to avoid any deal that was outside
the laws and
constitution of Zimbabwe that might result in the loss of
title,
compromising their legal rights. We suggested the route to
tactical
withdrawal, which put the farmer back in control of his own destiny
and
would enable him as a citizen of Zimbabwe to take part in
Zimbabwe's
future once this period of madness had passed.
The response
from farmers was that this position was untenable given the
scale of losses
they had suffered, and the concomitant difficulty in
re-establishing
themselves on farms. This gave rise to the first brick of
the JAG loss
document, which revolves around restitution. We believe
restitution and
production go hand in hand, and see restitution as having
two parts. Firstly,
the diary of events will help you to hold accountable
the people of means who
are responsible for your predicament. They will be
required to contribute to
your restitution. Secondly, your loss of profits
will give to the
international community your track record and enable them
to use any donor
funding most effectively. JAG has already started
canvassing the
international community using these strategies. However, it
is clear that
there will not be one cent until we see a return to
responsible governance
and this time of madness has past.
The next brick in the JAG loss
document is that of compensation. There are
many farmers who have no
inclination or desire to return to farming, and
they are entitled to
compensation. It is JAG's vision that in the not too
distant future there
should be 20 000 Commercial Farmers in Zimbabwe who
possess title for their
land, and have a guarantee of transferral of title
with sale of the
property.
This then leads us into JAG's final area of involvement. When
responsible
governance returns, it is essential that there is a recovery plan
for
agriculture. This requires us to have a vision of where we would like
to
see Zimbabwean agriculture in 5 years time, and work out the mechanisms
to
build the bridge between then and now. This will encompass all
interested
parties, and requires extensive collaboration with the rest of
civic
society. Once we have this vision, we will come to realise that we are
no
longer fighting not to lose, but rather to win.
I have touched on
many issues and maybe raised more questions that
answers. I propose to
address these, and to challenge the C.F.U. to an
open debate at Art Farm in
the next two weeks so that the widespread
confusion over the land reform
programme might be laid to rest once and
for all.
David
Conolly
Chairman of Justice for
Agriculture
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice
for Agriculture mailing list
To subscribe/unsubscribe: Please write to jag-list-admin@mango.zw
Financial Times
EU expected to renew travel sanctions on
Mugabe
By Judy Dempsey in Brussels
Published: February 5 2003
4:00 | Last Updated: February 5 2003 4:00
The European Union is
today expected to renew travel sanctions against
Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's
president, and other members of his government,
ending weeks of internal
wrangling over the southern African country accused
of human rights
violations.
EU ambassadors also intend to scrap plans for an
EU-Africa summit in
Lisbon in April but will probably not oppose Mr Mugabe
attending a
Franco-African summit in Paris at the invitation of President
Jacques
Chirac.
Several countries, including Britain, Sweden and
the Netherlands, said
they would stay away from the Lisbon summit if Mr
Mugabe was invited.
Several African countries said they would boycott it if
he were not.
Britain, meanwhile, has informed France it would not
object to Mr
Mugabe turning up in Paris since it did not involve the
EU.
Diplomats were yesterday trying to put a brave face on a
sanctions
policy that has allowed Mr Mugabe and his ministers to travel to
Europe if
it were linked to maintaining a dialogue with Harare.
Yet they admitted the delay in reaching agreement over extending
sanctions
and calling off the Lisbon summit - yet failing so far to stop Mr
Mugabe
travelling to Paris - was an indictment of EU foreign policy.
"It
shows our sanctions policy against Mugabe is flawed. It shows the
miserable
state of the EU's common, foreign and security policy," said one
senior
diplomat.
Some countries, including Sweden, tried to tighten the
sanctions
regime before the Paris summit. They wanted to include an exemption
clause
whereby the 15 countries would vote by a qualified majority, not the
normal
unanimity method, on whether to allow Mr Mugabe to attend meetings
in
Europe.
Paris was willing to accept the exemption clause,
provided it received
guarantees that countries would not use it to block Mr
Mugabe attending the
Franco-African summit.
Several countries,
but not Britain, were unwilling to give any such
guarantees.
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 OPEN LETTER
FORUM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
1: William Robinson
S. Hawgood Esq.,
CFU,
Marlborough.
Dear
Stoff,
I am taking my mother to visit her brother in Kwazulu Natal today.
Her
brother was a dairy farmer in our district, Umzingwane, since 1957, and
was
chased off his farm in August last year. My mother was evicted from
her
home of some fifty years in March 2002, when we were illegally evicted
with
the Officer In Charge, ZRP Esigodini, Inspector Mapfua present. That is
my
simple story, there are two thousand others, mostly far worse, and
Martin
Olds springs to mind immediately.
I read the Daily News
yesterday, where we farmers were ridiculed in word,
in a similar fashion to
the cartoon in the Independent last week.
Yesterday I sought an audience with
Mac Crawford, and found that he was in
consultations with Cedric Wilde and
Gavin Conolly, so I did not butt in.
I will put it to you, Stoff, along with
Colin and Doug - straight. If you
do support this chaotic land reform
programme you naturally have a right to
your own personal views. We are now
entering a desperate phase in terms of
food, and many people face starvation.
The CFU will now be held responsible
for supporting this programme, which has
failed.
I ask you to go back to your support base, of about seventeen
members in
Council, (as depicted in the November Council meeting) and make a
simple
choice. Stand up and support the agrarian reform that Government
has
implemented - openly in the Press, and accept that it has created
a
disaster that we as Zimbabweans must now face. Alternatively, you
can
distance yourselves from the monumental cock up in terms of food
security,
and say that you do not support it from TODAY. The third
alternative is to
act in a gentlemanly manner, and resign with dignity,
accepting that you
have dialogued in GOOD FAITH and have been very badly let
down.
I hope that you can accept what I have written today, from me, IN
GOOD
FAITH. I must conclude that the people and the farmers of this country
need
leadership, and a good plan to get through the next year, and also
great
courage and faith.
I pray that you will have the strength,
courage, and wisdom to make a good
decision as soon as possible, for the good
of our country.
Best
wishes,
Willy
Robinson.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice
for Agriculture mailing list
To subscribe/unsubscribe: Please write to jag-list-admin@mango.zw
nonpareilonline.com
Greg Jerrett: Being human is
tragic enough
02/05/2003
Last Saturday, seven astronauts died
when the Space Shuttle
Columbia re-entered the atmosphere and broke up,
raining debris over Texas
and Louisiana. No cause for the shuttle's
destruction has been pinpointed,
but one thing is clear: Each of those
astronauts died in the service of
mankind with the spirit of exploration
invigorating everything they did.
Or so we might assume. I
didn't know any of the Columbia
astronauts before Saturday. I cannot say for
certain I knew that a space
shuttle was in orbit. Chances are slim I could
have remembered a news
broadcast on the subject of the space shuttle prior to
8 a.m. Saturday
morning.
While Columbia went missing, 40
people were killed and 60 were
injured when a passenger train collided with a
goods train in Zimbabwe. The
trains derailed and a flammable liquid in the
goods train caught on fire.
I am absolutely certain I heard
nothing of that on the news
until an associate of mine went looking for a
story with a higher death toll
than Columbia that had gone
unreported.
In the entire history of American space
exploration, 23 people
have died since the 1960s while attempting to enter
space - arguably one of
the most noble of human endeavors. Before Columbia,
there were no deaths
related to space travel since Challenger exploded
moments after takeoff in
1986.
The names of those who have
given their lives in the name of
science and exploration are enshrined at the
Kennedy Space Center in Florida
on a wall of rememberance.
Tragedy is a term invented by the Greeks to describe a type of
theatrical
performance in which terrible things happen to great people.
There is no term
to describe terrible things happening to little people.
Perhaps the Greeks
were sophisticated enough to recognize that it is only
when people of
greatness are destroyed does it matter in the grand scheme
of
things.
One would be hard-pressed to find a mention of
the 100 people in
Zimbabwe who were killed or injured Saturday. It was not a
tragedy worthy of
24-hour cable news. Some might even say it was not of
consequence to
Americans. Maybe that is true. Perhaps the problems of
third-worlders
shouldn't concern us. We have bigger fish to
fry.
Right now, we are talking about mothballing the space
program
and the International Space Station for months, perhaps years,
because
Columbia was destroyed on re-entry. Countless shuttle flights have
taken
place successfully since the beginning of the program. Shuttle flights
have
become so routine that they rarely merit more than a brief mention on
any
news program beyond the routine notation.
The same was
true before the Challenger incident. When
Challenger exploded, I was in my
12th grade physics class at A.L. We were
not watching the launch. That hadn't
been customary for some years by then,
even in the one class where it would
seem most educational. When the
accident was announced by our principal, we
were all shocked, but I believe
that was because we had taken the successful
launch of Americans into space
for granted and Challenger was a fateful slap
in the face - the very
definition of tragedy.
I cannot
decide what is sadder. Is it sadder to die scrabbling
for a meager existence
in a barren country where living well and dying
horribly go equally
unnoticed?
Is it sadder to die after a successful space
flight to which no
one paid any attention only to be lauded as a hero for
dying on re-entry?
Given my druthers, I would rather not die,
but life has meaning
because it ends. If I could choose the kind of death I
will face, I would
choose to die after spending my last weeks in space. We
should honor
Columbia by continuing on. Find the problem, fix the problem and
keep
sending astronauts to space.
So take a moment to
honor the astronauts of Columbia this week,
and if you get a chance, take a
moment to think about 40 nameless, faceless
Africans who died without
mention, fanfare or notice.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil
staff writer. His column runs on
Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be reached
at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or at
gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.
cricmania
Wednesday February 5, 8:51 PM
ICC to rule on Zimbabwe
match on Thursday
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - The World Cup
technical committee will decide on
Thursday whether England's match against
Zimbabwe can be switched to South
Africa, cricket's world governing body said
on Wednesday.
In the latest step in a row that has dogged preparations
for the tournament,
England's cricket board officially requested on Tuesday
that the February 13
game be moved from strife-torn Zimbabwe because of
mounting concerns over
security.
"The meeting of the Cricket World Cup
technical committee, to consider the
England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB)
request to reschedule its match
against Zimbabwe from Harare, will take place
on Thursday afternoon (1430
GMT) in Cape Town," the International Cricket
Council (ICC) said in a
statement.
The row blew up in December when
British ministers urged the England team to
boycott the match in protest at
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, who it
accuses of rigging his re-election
last year and compounding a food crisis
by seizing white-owned
farms.
English cricket chiefs initially resisted government pressure, but
changed
their mind after players expressed concerns over their own safety and
asked
for the match to be switched to South Africa, where most of the 54
matches
will be played.
Should the request be rejected, England would
forfeit the match, a move that
would leave them with only a slim chance of
reaching the next round.
THREE JUDGES
Both England and
Zimbabwe have the right to appeal against whatever the
technical committee
decides, through one of three judges from South Africa,
Zimbabwe and
Kenya.
The committee is made up of ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed,
World Cup
executive director Ali Bacher, ICC commercial manager Campbell
Jamieson,
ex-South African umpire Brian Basson, former India batsman Sunil
Gavaskar
and ex-West Indies pace bowler Michael Holding, whose whereabouts
were
unclear.
"We are trying to establish Michael Holding's
whereabouts at the moment,
he's not believed to be in South Africa," ICC
spokesman Brendan McClements
told Reuters. "The committee has a quorum of
four and it can make a majority
decision."
The ECB's call to switch
venues threatens to throw the tournament into
turmoil, which could in turn
undermine South Africa's campaign to host the
continent's first Soccer World
Cup in 2010.
New Zealand have already refused to play their February 21
match in Kenya's
capital Nairobi, due to safety concerns fuelled by a suicide
bombing in
November that killed 16 people in the coastal resort of
Mombassa.
McClements said New Zealand had not applied to the technical
committee to
move their Nairobi fixture, indicating that the match would not
be on
Thursday's agenda. New Zealand has said it may appeal to the
Swiss-based
Court of Arbitration in Sport.
AUSTRALIA
CONCERNS
Australia's team have also expressed safety concerns over
playing their
February 24 match in Zimbabwe's second city Bulawayo but said
on Tuesday
they would go ahead with the match, resisting renewed pressure
from their
own government to boycott.
Australia, who made their
decision after meeting their country's high
commissioner to Zimbabwe, remain
tournament favourites and would stand a
better chance than England of getting
through to the second round if they,
too, forfeited points in
Zimbabwe.
South African statesman and former President Nelson Mandela
joined the fray
on Wednesday, telling England and New Zealand they should
play the matches
as the ICC told them last week after security inspections of
Zimbabwe and
Kenya.
"If we refuse to follow what the international
body says, we introduce chaos
in cricket," he told reporters in
Johannesburg.
Britain and Australia's leaders have led a campaign for
sanctions against
Mugabe in a row that has split the Commonwealth on roughly
racial lines.
South Africa advocates a less confrontational approach to
its northern
neighbour, and fellow Commonwealth members India and Pakistan
say they are
happy to play in Zimbabwe.
OutlookIndia
Australia considering fly-in/fly-out option for
Zimbabwe game
JOHANNESBURG, FEB 5 (PTI)
The Australian Cricket
Board (ACB) is considering fly-in/fly-out
option as one of the ways to honour
its commitment to play their World Cup
league match in Zimbabwe, it was
revealed today.
Australia have expressed their apprehension over
the security
situation in Zimbabwe but, unlike England, they have not
requested the
International Cricket Council to shift the Bulawayo venue of
their February
24 match out of the country.
ACB Chief Executive
James Sutherland said as of now it was ready to
play in Harare but the
players today voiced serious concerns at a meeting
with Australian High
Commissioner to Zimbabwe, Jonathan Brown, in
Potchefstroom and inquired about
the possiblity of rescheduling the match.
Sutherland said the
option of Australia flying into Zimbabwe on the
morning of the game then
flying back to South Africa at night was very much
a
possibility.
"I wouldn't want to rule anything out," Sutherland
said.
"At the moment we've got a programme that shows us coming in
three or
fours days beforehand, I think, and that's really the focus. But
there's no
denying we need to explore other contingencies if that's the
appropriate
course." The World Cup Technical Committeee is meeting tomorrow
to decide on
England's request to shift their Februay 13 game in Harare to
South Africa
and on their decision will also depend the future course of
action by
Australia.
"There's no hiding from the fact that the
players do have some
concerns about Zimbabwe and what we're trying to do is
make sure that they
have as much information as possible in front of them
before we go to
Zimbabwe," said Sutherland.
WayMoreSports
Mandela: Games should stay in Zimbabwe
Feb.
5, 2003. 11:50 AM
JOHANNESBURG (AP) - Former South African
president Nelson Mandela
stepped into the debate over England's World Cup
cricket game in Zimbabwe on
Wednesday saying the game should go ahead in
Harare and not be moved to
South Africa.
Otherwise, he said,
world cricket would degenerate into chaos.
The England players want
their Feb. 13 game in Harare moved to South
Africa, fearing that violence
will break out if opponents of President
Robert Mugabe's regime disrupt the
game.
The game's world governing body, the International Cricket
Council,
says that Zimbabwe is safe enough to handle six World Cup games and
has
decided not reschedule any.
But the England players have
persuaded their own board to have a
change of heart and the England and Wales
Cricket Board will ask the ICC's
technical committee to review security in
Zimbabwe at a meeting in Cape Town
on Thursday.
Mandela, who
says he will go to South Africa's games to cheer the host
team on, says that
the six Zimbabwe-based games shouldn't be moved.
"They must respect
what the international cricket committee says,"
Mandela told reporters
outside his home. "We must show discipline. If we
refuse to follow what the
international body says, we introduce chaos in
cricket.
"They
have examined the matter they have conducted research and so on.
They know
what is dangerous for cricketers. If they say cricketers must go
to Zimbabwe,
must go to Kenya, that is what they must do."
With the game
scheduled for Thursday of next week, the ICC has until
Sunday - the opening
day of the championship - to decide whether to move it.
The English
board made no request to switch the games when the ICC
executive board twice
met last month and no changes were made to the
schedule. After hearing the
case of captain Nasser Hussain and his players
and stating that the situation
in Zimbabwe had become worse in the last few
days, however, the English board
changed course.
ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed and World Cup
executive director Ali
Bacher are on the technical committee along with ICC
commercial manager
Campbell Jamieson, former South African umpire Brian
Basson, Indian batting
great Sunil Gavaskar and former West Indies fast
bowler Michael Holding.
If the technical committee upholds
England's plea to move the game,
the matter then goes to a full meeting of
the ICC executive board.
Six of the 54 World Cup games are being
staged in Zimbabwe and, when
the English players were in Australia for the
recent Ashes series,
anti-Mugabe protesters slipped letters under the doors
of their hotel rooms
threatening that they would disrupt their
game.
Canada is playing its games in South Africa.
Some Australian players also expressed concerns about their game in
Zimbabwe
Feb. 24. After a meeting with their representatives and federation
on
Tuesday, Australian Cricket Board chief executive James Sutherland said
they
remained committed to playing in Bulawayo but could reconsider if
the
security situation got worse.
Townsville Bulletin
Press group blasts ICC
From correspondents in
Brussels
06feb03
THE International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has
attacked cricket
chiefs for insisting that Zimbabwe is safe for reporters to
cover the World
Cup.
The press campaign group also lobbied media mogul
Rupert Murdoch to lift
cash penalties linked to tournament television rights
which the IFJ said are
placing money above safety.
"Zimbabwe is anything
but a safe venue for journalists," IFJ general
secretary Aidan White said in
a letter to Malcolm Speed, chief executive of
the International Cricket
Council.
"Over the past two years we have seen numerous acts of violence
against
media, a wholesale legal assault on independent journalism and the
creation
of an atmosphere of intimidation against the exercise of free
reporting,
whether by foreign correspondents or local journalists," White
said.
"You appear to show no consideration for the difficulties facing
journalists
who will be expected to cover cricket events scheduled for
Zimbabwe."
The IFJ has protested at what it calls "gagging orders" demanded
of visiting
sports journalists by the government of President Robert Mugabe,
stopping
them from reporting on anything unrelated to the cricket World
Cup.
The lobby group said it had also written to News Corp chief Rupert
Murdoch,
demanding he lift penalty clauses which could force cricket
authorities to
pay $2 million a game for loss of broadcast
revenues.
"These penalties should be waived so that a judgment about
participation and
reporting of these matches can be taken according to the
imperatives of
safety without fears of financial damage," White wrote in his
letter to
Murdoch.
On Tuesday, the IFJ condemned a "campaign of
intimidation" against
Zimbabwe's top independent newspaper, the Daily
News
Daily News
Leader Page
ICC has anointed the devil with olive
oil
2/5/2003 8:45:10 AM (GMT +2)
By Cyprian
Ndawana
To host or not to host fierce debate has raged for over a
month. At
long last, all arguments and counter-arguments have been put to
rest. There
are no more "ifs and buts", it is now confirmed that Zimbabwe
will host six
of the preliminary Cricket World Cup matches.
Although the matches are now taking place, with Harare and Bulawayo
hosting
three each, the government needs not gloat over the hosting. It must
not
scratch the roof of the sky with happiness.
While it appears at
face value as if the government scored a major
diplomatic victory, a century
(to borrow from cricket jargon), a closer look
at the whole issue reveals
that there is absolutely nothing to write home
about. If ever there is
anything the government scooped, it amounts to
nothing but a pauper's
victory.
With the Cricket World Cup coming to Africa for the first
time, it
delights only the devil that a lawless country like Zimbabwe gets
the honour
to host some of the matches. It is an open secret that the
government is
second to none when it comes to oppression. The State
machinery, aided by
the blood-thirsty militia, is on the rampage, mauling all
forms of
dissension.
Ever since 2000, when the government was
resoundingly thumped in the
referendum, it has been red in tooth and claw.
Its tolerance has been so low
that those who lost limb and leg count
themselves lucky as many lost their
lives. They were crushed to death by a
government roller coaster which has
completely lost respect for human
life.
The highly politicised police force, clad in riot gear and
armed to
the teeth, has become a law unto itself. It operates in such a
high-handed
manner that even the Mayor of Harare, the capital city, is not
allowed to
conduct his civic functions. He gets arrested for holding
stakeholder
meetings with residents. The police trail him even into the
council chambers
for the simple reason that he belongs to the opposing
political party.
The country has been turned into a hell on earth
for all who differ
with the government's line of thinking. A number of
draconian laws, whose
aim is to thwart opposing views, were fast-tracked
through Parliament.
Colonial ruler Ian Douglas Smith's Law and Order
(Maintenance) Act fizzles
into child's play compared to the Acts the regime
legislated.
There is not even a semblance of peace in the country.
With Members of
Parliament being arrested wily-nilly and their families
living in grave
fear, there is no peace to talk about. While civic
organisations are not
allowed to operate freely, the holding of
demonstrations invokes the wrath
of the police which only the devil can mete
out.
The arrest and harassment of some labour unions and
National
Constitutional Assembly leaders clearly demonstrates the absence of
freedom
and peace in the country.
The country is suffering from
a self-made economic stagnation due to
the government's political
intolerance. The commercial agricultural sector,
which was a major economic
activator, was destroyed, hence the hunger and
starvation that now prevails.
The villagisation of commercial farms has
predictably resulted in thorns and
thistles growing where crops and
vegetables used to grow.
A
severe shortage of basic foodstuffs has no end in sight. Whatever
the donor
community brings in, the government shamelessly dishes out to its
faithfuls
in a desperate bid to resuscitate its dwindling support base.
The
politicisation of food distribution is evident in all constituencies
where
by-elections are to take place. If the government had its way in
the
distribution of fuel, it goes without saying that it could be employing
the
same segregation as in food. Peace and freedom do not co-exist
with
lawlessness and violence. What we have here is a naked disregard of
human
rights. The regime, which President Mugabe aptly coined the "war
cabinet",
has blood on its hands. It is inflicting untold misery and
suffering on the
people. There is neither freedom nor peace to talk
about.
Against the backdrop of the prevailing lawlessness,
harassment and
torture, it is grossly insensitive on the part of the
International Cricket
Council, the World Cup organisers, to give Zimbabwe the
nod to host. By
allowing the matches to go ahead, the ICC has shown an
insensitivity which
is inconsistent with humanity: they anointed the devil
with olive oil.
Posterity will judge them harshly for staging
matches in a country
whose soil is socked with human blood.
ninemsn
Aussie cricketers consider all options
Australia's
cricket team may spend just half a day in Zimbabwe if its
controversial World
Cup cricket match there goes ahead.
Increasingly fearful team members
asked about moving the February 24 match
against Zimbabwe in Bulawayo away
from the troubled country at a two-hour
meeting.
But the Australian
Cricket Board (ACB) said that, for now, the game will go
ahead
there.
Its future could hinge on the International Cricket Council's
response to a
request from English cricket chiefs to have England's match in
Zimbabwe's
capital Harare on February 13 moved to South Africa.
Ricky
Ponting's players voiced their concern when they met Australia's
High
Commissioner to Zimbabwe, Jonathan Brown, ACB chief executive
James
Sutherland and players association president Tim May in
Potchefstroom.
"There's no hiding from the fact that the players do have
some concerns
about Zimbabwe and what we're trying to do is make sure that
they have as
much information as possible in front of them before we go to
Zimbabwe,"
said Sutherland.
May added: "The simple situation at the
moment is that the Australian
cricket team is going to Zimbabwe. Obviously
there's a process to take place
and if there are any dramatic changes or
whatever, we'll be appropriately
positioned to take such action as we see
fit.
"The players have inquired about the possibility of rescheduling but
that's
not to say that the players have asked to have the game
rescheduled."
The most likely option for Australia is to follow England's
lead in applying
to the World Cup technical committee for a relocation.
Contingency plans are
already in place for late venue changes but they were
not designed to be in
response to boycott threats.
Another possibility
for Australia is flying into Zimbabwe on the morning of
the game then flying
back to South Africa that night.
"I wouldn't want to rule anything out,"
said Sutherland.
"At the moment we've got a program that shows us coming
in three or fours
days beforehand, I think, and that's really the focus. But
there's no
denying we need to explore other contingencies if that's the
appropriate
course."
Australia will learn through England's
application whether teams can be
granted venue changes upon request, or
whether they will be forced to either
play or forfeit competition
points.
"I suppose that's a consideration that works in our favour,"
said
Sutherland.
"There's still 20 days to go.
"But
irrespective of whether there are matches beforehand or not - and I've
said
this all along - if the Australian Cricket Board at any stage is
not
comfortable with the safety issues around the players and officials then
we
will pull out.
"On the day we arrive in Bulawayo, if we are not
comfortable with the safety
and security issues, we will pull out, we won't
play the game."
ABC Australia
Zimbabwe game still in doubt as ACA hedges
bets
Australian Cricketers Association (ACA) chief executive Tim May
says
Australia could still pull out of its World Cup cricket game
against
Zimbabwe in Bulawayo on February 24.
May made his comments
after Australian officials apparently confirmed the
game would be going ahead
after a meeting between themselves, players, and
Australia's high
commissioner to Zimbabwe in South Africa overnight.
The ACA boss said
security in Zimbabwe would continue to be reviewed after
attending the
meeting along with Australian Cricket Board (ACB) chief
executive James
Sutherland.
"One thing we do have on our hands is do we have time - the
game is like 20
days away," he said.
"There's no use rushing any
dramatic decisions. We'll take on board all the
information we can possibly
get to make the most correct decision."
Earlier the ACB had confirmed
that Australia remained committed to the
Zimbabwe fixture "at this stage"
following the two-and-a-half hour meeting
with high commissioner to Zimbabwe
Jonathan Brown.
The meeting was reported to have convinced the Australian
players that the
political situation was not serious enough to threaten their
safety.
"There is no hiding from the facts the players do have some
concerns about
Zimbabwe and what we are trying to do is make sure that they
have as much
information in front of them before they go to Zimbabwe,"
Sutherland told
reporters.
"We are committed to working through a
process with our players and making
sure they have all the information in
respect to safety and security. At
this stage, we are committed to playing in
Zimbabwe."
Australian concerns had mounted on Monday after the Department
of Foreign
Affairs and Trade (DFAT) warned fans to steer clear of World Cup
matches in
Zimbabwe, warning of possible violent protests.
England
request
And the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) made a formal
request to the
International Cricket Council (ICC) on Tuesday to switch its
team's match
against Zimbabwe in Harare on February 13 to South
Africa.
"The Australian Cricket Board has always said that our primary
concern is
with the safety of our players and our officials and they are the
issues we
are facing," Sutherland added.
"From a players' point of
view, they are cricketers and their focus is on
what is the biggest event in
world cricket and what they really want to do
is play good
cricket."
Australia captain Ricky Ponting said earlier on Tuesday that he
and his team
trusted the cricket authorities to make the correct
decisions.
"It's in the back of our minds and I guess the sooner we know
as players
what's going on the better," Ponting said. "But saying that we've
got full
faith in the processes in place and the ACB and the ICC to make the
right
decision."
Sutherland said Australian officials would be
considering all their options
before the match in Zimbabwe and could still
change their existing plans to
fly into the country three to four days before
the Group A game.
"There's still 20 days to go and irrespective of
whether there are matches
there (in Zimbabwe) before hand or not if the ACB
is not comfortable with
the safety issues around the players and officials
going to Zimbabwe then we
will pull out," said Sutherland.
"We've made
the right decisions in the past and I'm sure we'll make the
right decisions
in the future."
ninemsn
Zimbabwe doesn't want forfeit: Marsh
Zimbabwe's
Australian coach Geoff Marsh doesn't want his side to advance
through the
World Cup on the back of points awarded against countries not
prepared to
play in the strife-torn country.
"The last thing you want is to get
points from a forfeit in a World Cup,"
Marsh told News Limited newspapers
from Zimbabwe.
The former Australian opener coached the Australian side
to their World Cup
triumph four years ago.
He has been coaching in
Zimbabwe for the past six months.
"We would be very disappointed to get
points from forfeits," Marsh.
He made his comments as England
made a formal request for its match in the
Zimbabwe capital Harare on Feb 13
to be shifted to South Africa and
Australian players requested information
about a similar relocation of their
Feb 24 fixture.
Zimbabwe could
advance to the Super Six stage of the contest if they gain
full points from
forfeits by England and Australia and then beat Namibia
and
Holland.
But Marsh said going ahead on forfeits would be a hollow
way to advance.
ECB finally say no to Harare
Guardian Unlimited staff
Tuesday February
4, 2003
The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) has made an official
request to
switch the team's World Cup match against Zimbabwe to South Africa
because
of mounting concerns over security.
As reported earlier today on
Guardian Unlimited, the ECB finally backed
their players - after weeks of
hesitation - by calling on the International
Cricket Council (ICC) to move
the February 13 game in Harare.
"Prior to this request from the ECB, no
country has sought a review of the
ICC decision to stage games in Zimbabwe,"
said Malcolm Speed, the ICC chief
executive, in a statement.
The ECB's
objection will be considered by the six-man technical committee of
the ICC,
which on Sunday assumed responsibility for the competition from the
full ICC
board. They are expected to consider the matter on Thursday at a
meeting in
Cape Town.
The fixture, which is due to be played in Harare on February
13, has been
the subject of increasing controversy. On Sunday, Nasser
Hussain, the
England captain, reiterated his side's unwillingness to play
there. He
suggested that if the decision wasn't made for the cricketers, they
would be
prepared to take matters into their own hands.
It is believed
that the ECB has not been reassured that the match can be
conducted in an
entirely safe fashion, despite the assurances that the ICC
have drawn in an
independent report written last week by Kroll, an
international firm of
security experts.
Australia's players could make a similar call after
discussing the safety
situation with Australia's High Commissioner to
Zimbabwe later today.
The Australian foreign minister, Alexander Downer,
said on Sunday that the
security situation in Bulawayo could not be
guaranteed. The Australian high
commissioner in Zimbabwe had reported that he
could not get a guarantee from
the local police that they would not
over-react to the inevitable
demonstration.
The head of the ACU and a
representative of the Australian players are
making another security check on
ZImbabwe, and the Australian government has
suggested that it will compensate
the ACU for any loss in revenue that it
might incur.
If Australia
follow suit, it would throw the tournament schedule into
turmoil just five
days before the opening game on Sunday, with New Zealand
already refusing to
play in Kenya, also on safety grounds.
The members of the technical
committee who will decide England's fate are:
Sunil Gavaskar, Ali Bacher,
Michael Holding, Malcolm Speed, Campbell
Jamieson and Brian Basson.
ECB support Hussain over Zimbabwe
Simon Briggs - 5 February 2003
The
cancellation of England's controversial World Cup tie in Harare looked
a
foregone conclusion last night after the England and Wales Cricket
Board
announced a formal request for the match to be moved to a safer venue
in
South Africa.
Now that the ECB have finally acknowledged the depth
of their concerns over
security in Zimbabwe, it is almost unthinkable that
the players will end up
travelling to Harare. Even if the International
Cricket Council keep
refusing to reschedule the match, the team's employers
have agreed that the
venue is unsafe, and that should be enough for them to
down tools.
The debate now is essentially about points: will the ICC
allow England to
play Zimbabwe in Bloemfontein, giving them a chance to
register an early
win, or will Nasser Hussain's team be forced to forfeit the
match?
While the ICC technical committee have agreed to consider
England's case
tomorrow, there is every chance that this saga will rumble on
until Sunday,
the final deadline beyond which it will impossible to make the
switch.
Insiders suggest that the ECB will receive another rebuff at
tomorrow's
meeting, which will be addressed by board chief executive Tim Lamb
in the
company of two lawyers. The six-man technical committee includes
Malcolm
Speed, the ICC chief executive who has maintained a hard-line stance
on the
issue, as well as tournament director Ali Bacher. Neither man is
expected to
back down, and their mood is likely to set the tone of the
meeting.
Even if things pan out as expected, there would still be one
more option for
the ECB, who could take their case to the panel of appeals
judges monitoring
the tournament. Justice Albie Sachs, a South African
previously appointed to
lead last year's ICC inquiry into the Mike Denness
affair, could well be the
man who ends up making the final call.
It is
now a week since the England players issued their carefully-worded
statement
of concern over Zimbabwe, and team captain Nasser Hussain
yesterday commended
the board for supporting their stance. "The ECB and our
representatives have
been talking on a daily basis and working well
together," he said. "That's
why our players have said nothing, because they
didn't want to cause any
troubles - it's such a sensitive issue."
Hussain was himself reluctant to
go into the issue of player boycotts last
night, presumably on the grounds
that such a statement might be perceived by
the ICC as an attempt to force
their hand. But he did note that "things have
happened in the last few days
in Zimbabwe", alluding partly to the movements
of the Australian High
Commission in Harare.
Australian diplomats spoke to their team last night
in Potchefstroom, in a
meeting also attended by James Sutherland, chief
executive of the Australian
Cricket Board, and player representative Tim May.
As Australia are not due
to play in Bulawayo until Feb 24, they will be able
to follow the progress
of England's case before making any decision of their
own, although the
initial indication after last night's meeting broke up was
that the fixture
would go ahead.
"We are committed to working through
a process with our players and making
sure they have all the information in
respect to safety and security," said
Sutherland. "At this stage, we are
committed to playing in Zimbabwe."
In yesterday's press conference,
Hussain also hinted that the security
situation in Zimbabwe might be
deteriorating.
On Monday, opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai appeared in
court to plead
not guilty to charges of plotting to assassinate President
Robert Mugabe. He
was released on bail, but the case is likely to be running
for much of the
World Cup. The scenes outside the court, where baton-wielding
police refused
entry to journalists and manhandled a member of the British
High Commission,
do not bode well for Zimbabwean law and
order.
Hussain said: "The situation for England's cricketers is different
from any
other part of the world simply because of the amount of press and
the
feeling we have at home about this game. This has become more than just
a
game of cricket in Zimbabwe; it is a huge issue."
© The Electronic
Telegraph
ABC News
Change of heart
England board calls for Zimbabwe security
review
Posted: Tuesday February 04, 2003 7:27 AM
Updated: Tuesday February
04, 2003 12:47 PM
Nasser Hussain: "The Zimbabwe issue is a very
delicate one." Tom
Shaw/Getty Images
PORT ELIZABETH, South Africa (AP)
-- England's cricket board changed course
Tuesday and asked World Cup
organizers to consider moving its game out of
Zimbabwe for security
reasons.
Having staunchly supported the International Cricket Council's
stand to keep
the Feb. 13 match in Harare, the England and Wales Cricket
Board made a
formal request to the ICC's technical committee to review the
"safety and
security situation" in Zimbabwe.
Confirmation of the
request, which stopped short of actually asking for the
game to be relocated,
came from ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed.
Speed said it was the first
time a country has sought to review the ICC
executive board's decision to
stage the match in Zimbabwe.
Australia could follow suit, with officials
of the Australian Board and its
players representatives meeting later in the
day.
"Prior to this request from the ECB, no country has sought a review
of the
ICC decision to stage games in Zimbabwe," Speed said.
Speed
said the ECB request is provisionally scheduled to be heard by the
ICC
Cricket World Cup technical committee in Cape Town on Thursday, 6
February.
The hearing will take place in private with the decision of the
committee
being made public following the hearing.
With the game
scheduled for Feb. 13, the ICC has until Sunday -- the opening
day of the
championship -- to decide whether to move it.
Team captain Nasser Hussain
and his players had called on the ICC to move
the game fearing that
demonstrations by opponents to President Robert Mugabe
would disrupt the
match in Harare and lead to violence.
The ECB made no request to switch
the games when the ICC executive board
twice met last month and cricket's
world governing body, convinced that the
six games in Zimbabwe were safe,
made no changes to the schedule.
With time running out, the ECB's
management board had to decide on Monday
whether to appeal to the ICC's
technical committee to move the game on
safety grounds.
Six of the 54
World Cup games are being staged in Zimbabwe and, when the
English players
were in Australia for the recent Ashes series, anti-Mugabe
protesters slipped
letters under the doors of their hotel rooms threatening
that they would
disrupt their game.
Meanwhile, Hussain and his team were playing their
first warmup game against
Eastern Province in the township of Motherwell,
just outside Port Elizabeth.
The England captain said he was happy to
concentrate on cricket again.
"The Zimbabwe issue is a very delicate one.
I think we (players) should try
and stay out of it and the leave the
administrators to try and sort it out,"
he said.
"Our representative,
Richard Bevan, is constantly talking to the (ECB) board
and the ICC. There's
a lot going on every day.
"We want to get on with the cricket. The World
Cup is a major tournament.
Everything will unravel in the days to
come."
Bevan, managing director of the Professional Cricketers'
Association,
believes that the Australian Cricket Board may come under
pressure to change
its mind and ask for the defending champion's Feb. 24 game
in Bulawayo to be
moved to South Africa.
He noted that Australia's
ambassador to Zimbabwe, Jonathan Brown, had warned
Aussie fans to keep away
from any demonstrations or political gatherings.
The Australian government,
like the British one, has called on its players
to boycott the game citing
human rights atrocities by Mugabe's regime.
According to reports, worried
players are due to confront ACB chief
executive James Sutherland and general
manager Michael Brown and, together
with their own representative, Tim May,
were due to meet ambassador Brown at
Potchefstroom, 140 kilometers (87 miles)
southwest of Johannesburg later
Tuesday.
"The real concern is not just
with the safety of the players but the way the
police would deal with the
demonstrations," Bevan said. "I understand the
Australian High Commission
have received evidence of significant build-up in
potential demonstrations
during their game in Bulawayo.
"I believe the High Commission was trying
to receive some sort of guarantee
from the authorities that they would not be
using excessive force. I don't
believe they could find that sort of
guarantee," Bevan said.
"I think that has possibly led to a significant
change to the advice to the
Australian Cricket Board."
Meanwhile, New
Zealand Cricket chief executive Martin Snedden flew to South
Africa on
Tuesday hoping to persuade the ICC to changes its mind and move
the Black
Caps game against Kenya in Nairobi to South Africa on
safety
grounds.
The ICC confirmed last week that the Feb. 21 game
would go ahead despite
calls by the New Zealand players and their federation
to move it after a
terrorist explosion in Mombasa last November killed 15
people, three of them
tourists.
Snedden responded that the players
would forfeit the game, which would mean
the loss of four points. But the NZC
says it may turn to legal action to try
and get the match moved.
ABC Regional Radio, Perth
Go to http://www.abc.net.au/perth/stories/s777193.htm
to listen to the
interview in RealAudio
A view from
Zimbabwe
Presenter: John McNamara
Tuesday, 4 February 2003
Iden
Wetherell, editor of "The Zimbabwe Independent" has been named the
World
Press Review's International Editor of the Year and is prepared to
stand up
for editorial independence in Magabe's Zimbabwe.
Mr Wetherell firmly believes
the Cricket World Cup should NOT be played in
his country.
He joins
John McNamara to discuss from his perspective the state of Zimbabwe
and what
is like operating as an independent voice under Mugabe's regime.
Iden
Wetherell
(Extract from a Zim. Letter)
Lets not milk the Cows tonight
"I can now add Dairy Maid to my increasing list of new skills that I
have
acquired since we were prevented from farming. For those who take
an
interest in our lives you will be pleased to know they are far from
boring.
We are almost settled in Mutare but have had another mishap with the
horses.
We leased L's farm in Headlands and all was going
swimmingly until
a group of settlers arrived led by Major Kawere and his hit
man Mhiripiri
and gave us 24 hours to leave. They told the young manager to
leave and
locked the house and took the keys so now we start the whole
process again
of looking for grazing and finding accommodation for the labour
it seems the
warvets and ourselves are going to keep each other company for
ever. In the
midst of all this the entire labour force on Lk (Z's
brothers
farm) went on strike so there was an urgent appeal for us to rush
out and
milk the cows. It was wonderful to see so many wonderful volunteers
from
milkers to silage cutters and even people in the kitchen to make sure
we
were well fed. Milking the cows was no easy job and we ended up covered
in
cow pooh don't know where we were going wrong but we seemed to get
it
everywhere. We had some hilarious moments but I wasn't looking forward
to
the second shift and was most relieved that the police intervened rooted
out
the trouble causers and got the Lk Labour back to work,we even
had
the Member in Charge in the milking pit. That night as we crowded
into
Pl's bar for a well earned drink and I looked at the smiling faces
covered
in cow dung my heart nearly burst with pride where in the world would
you
find such wonderful people and now so many of us have left or are
leaving.
We are soon learning the system of buying our essentials in Mutare
and
Gaydia bartered today getting our bread for 200 dollars a piece plus
fresh
milk. so it was a double whammy. After all my waitressing I am
thinking of
opening up a coffee shop in Chimoio a chance to show off my
cappuchino
skills I am looking for a coffee machine
and an investor!!!! We
are all thrilled with X's O level results which
show she survived the
stress of the moves and managed to concentrate.
Lots of love and see you
in the diesel queue."
Names edited out for protection