| The ZIMBABWE Situation | Our
thoughts and prayers are with Zimbabwe - may peace, truth and justice prevail. |
Libya's leader is
trying to build alternatives to established bodies
like the United Nations to
achieve his own ends, writes Kathryn Sturman.
Since relations with
the Arab League soured in the late 1990s, Libyan
leader Muammar Gaddafi has
turned his attention toward building strategic
alliances in Africa. As a
pariah state under United Nations sanctions, Libya
sought recognition and
respectability in the arena of inter-governmental
meetings of African
leaders.
Five years later, the extent of Libyan influence within
the African
Union, Nepad and the Regional Economic Communities may be gauged
against a
history of less salutary military interventions and "petro-dollar
diplomacy"
throughout the continent.
To understand the role and
impact of Gaddafi's Africa policy, it is
first necessary to consider the
internal dynamics of the country that has
been ruled by decree for over three
decades.
Libya is a one-party state with no formal constitution or
independent
judiciary. Political trials are held in secret, with no due
process
considerations. The arbitrary arrest and torture of hundreds of
political
prisoners have long been documented by Amnesty
International.
The abduction and assassination of political
dissidents in exile has
also been reported. The state owns and controls all
media and censors
foreign programmes. Independent political parties and civic
associations are
illegal.
Independent trade unions and
professional associations do not exist,
workers' strikes are illegal and
women's rights are limited (for example,
they require permission to travel
abroad).
The Libyan armed forces are estimated to be 90 000 strong,
with 25 000
national service conscripts and a large number of militia
belonging to the
Revolutionary Guards Corps, the People's Cavalry Force and
the People's
Militia.
Libya has a large inventory of military
equipment, however, its
operational capabilities declined after the collapse
of its primary arms
supplier (the former Soviet Union) and the imposition of
UN arms embargoes.
Libya has allegedly been selling off some of
its old stock of light
weaponry to rebel movements in Africa, fuelling
conflicts in exchange for
access to natural resources.
For
example, "diamonds for guns" deals have allegedly been negotiated
in the
DRC.
Global Watch reports that the Liberian government is
exchanging timber
for illegal arms from Eastern Europe, via Libya, among
others.
This illicit trade contributes to the destabilisation, by
rebels
backed by Liberian leader Charles Taylor, of CTte d'Ivoire and Sierra
Leone.
During Gaddafi's leadership, Libya has been in conflict with
almost
all of its neighbours over the years. The list includes a four-day war
with
Egypt in 1977, territorial disputes with Algeria, Niger and Tunisia,
the
failed invasions of Chad in the 1980s and the withdrawal from the
Aozou
Strip by order of the International Court of Justice in
1994.
Military backing has been offered or given to various
incumbent and
rebel leaders, such as the late Zairean dictator, Mobutu Sese
Seko, in 1996
and more recently, MLC leader Jean-Pierre Bemba in the DRC and
elected
President Angé Felix Patassé of the Central African
Republic.
Cash-strapped governments, such as Zimbabwe and Malawi,
have also been
recipients of Gaddafi's largess during his motorcade tours of
Southern
Africa between 2000 and 2002.
The Libyan leader's
generosity to Sub-Saharan Africa has not been well
received at home. Race
riots in October 2000, in which an estimated 150
black migrants were killed
and thousands expelled from the country, showed a
rejection of Gaddafi's
opening of his country's borders to African workers
when an estimated
one-third of Libya's youth are unemployed.
At the same time, the
suspension of UN sanctions against Libya in 1999
raised economic
expectations, spurring Gaddafi to seek full acceptance, if
not
internationally or among Arab nations, then within Africa, a United
States of
Africa.
In February 1997 some 40 OAU foreign ministers gathered for
a council
of ministers meeting that was the first major conference in Tripoli
since UN
sanctions were imposed.
From then on, resolutions
calling for UN sanctions against Libya to be
lifted and/or flouted by African
countries were recorded at every head of
state and government
summit.
At the launch of the African Union in Durban in July 2002,
delegates
took note of the settlement of the Lockerbie case and "urgently
request[ed]
the Security Council to immediately lift these sanctions and
embargo imposed
on Libya which no longer have legal or moral
justification".
Gaddafi proposed to the OAU's Algiers summit of
July 1999, that an
extraordinary session be convened "to discuss ways and
means of making the
OAU effective."
Thereafter, he presented the
African heads of state gathered in Sirte
on September 9 1999 with his grand
vision for a "United States of Africa",
with a single army, currency and
powerful leadership.
The extent to which Libya bought into African
regional politics after
1997 is evident from the establishment of the
Community of Sahel-Saharan
States (CEN-SAD) in Tripoli on February 4
1998.
According to the official website (currently under
construction):
"CEN-SAD is a framework for Integration and Complementarity.
It intends to
work, together with the other regional economic communities and
the
Organisation of African Unity, to strengthen peace, security and
stability
and achieve global economic and social development."
In other words, the community positions itself as a regional
economic
community, like the other regional organisations recognised as the
building
blocks of African integration by the OAU Treaty Establishing the
African
Economic Community, 1991 (Abuja Treaty).
The Abuja
Treaty was intended to work through regional economic
communities from the
five regions designated by the OAU.
Those designated by the OAU in
the early 1990s were the Southern
Africa Development Community; the Economic
Community of Central African
States; the Economic Community of West African
States; COMESA and the Arab
Maghreb Union.
However, due to
political tensions, including between Morocco and its
North African
neighbours and the OAU over recognition of Western Sahara, the
Arab Maghreb
Union was paralysed by the mid-1990s and never signed the OAU
Protocol on
Relations.
The Arab Maghreb Union Secretariat was based outside OAU
territory in
Rabat.
Libyan links with ousted President Patassé
of Central African Republic
have also been mentioned.
Incidentally, President Patassé was removed from power during his
attendance
of the CEN-SAD Conference and less than three months after the
withdrawal of
"CEN-SAD" troops from Bangui.
However, signing of a protocol
establishing a Mechanism for
Preventing, Managing and Settling Conflicts in
Niamey in March 2003 will
likely serve as a mandate for the other side of
Libya's engagements in
Africa, namely military intervention.
Unlike the other regional economic communities and the AU, CEN-SAD
makes no
claim to uphold human rights, democracy or good governance in its
objectives.
Instead, it broadcasts support for the leaders who are widely
considered to
be most in breach of these principles.
If the original goals of
Nepad are to be realised to enhance the
development of Africa through
improvements in political, economic and
corporate governance, in partnership
with the developed world - then
CEN-SAD's capacity and political will to
implement these objectives requires
closer scrutiny and
debate.
.. Kathryn Sturman is a senior researcher at the
Institute for
Security Studies
Washington Times
Bush visit said to be 'tough' for Mbeki
By
Geoff Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
JOHANNESBURG — Tough talk
from Washington ahead of a visit to Africa by
President Bush next week is
creating problems for South African President
Thabo Mbeki, whose refusal to
speak out on Zimbabwe and other regional
crises stands in sharp
contrast.
Mr. Bush used his speech at the biennial meeting of the
Corporate
Council on Africa to call for the resignation of Liberian leader
Charles
Taylor and the establishment of an interim authority in Congo, where
human
rights groups say more than 3 million people have died in a
long-running
civil war.
Mr. Bush also criticized Zimbabwean President
Robert Mugabe's
government, which the United States and other Western powers
have refused to
recognize after fraud-tainted elections last year.
Also last week, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell described Mr. Mugabe
as a
"tyrant" and called on neighboring South Africa to adopt a tougher
stance on
Zimbabwe.
On Monday, it was announced that Mr. Powell will accompany Mr.
Bush to
South Africa.
A spokesman for Mr. Mbeki's government rejected
Mr. Powell's comments
and said South Africa would maintain its policy of
"quiet diplomacy" toward
Harare.
A source in Mr. Mbeki's ruling
African National Congress told The
Washington Times that the government was
deeply divided about Mr. Powell's
remarks as well as President Bush's
upcoming visit, the second to
sub-Saharan Africa by a U.S. president in
office. President Clinton's was
the first.
"This is going to be a
tough couple of weeks for Mbeki," the source
said. "He will have to smile and
will no doubt be delighted to be seen
hosting the world's most powerful
leader, but, behind the scenes, he will
need to work hard to hold his party
and even his close supporters together."
"The South Africans see this
continent as their own domain, and the
comments by Bush and Powell, calling
so directly for change in Liberia,
Congo and Zimbabwe, have shocked a lot of
people who are starting to realize
that their own refusal to take tough
action on thorny issues, especially
Zimbabwe, has created a vacuum, which
other countries, like the U.S., are
moving to fill."
Nelson Mandela
has said he does not expect to meet Mr. Bush after the
former South African
president opposed U.S.-led war on Iraq. South Africa
came out strongly
against the war, and recent talk about intervention in
Liberia is expected to
cause concern in Pretoria.
An antiwar coalition of 300 groups has applied
to the South African
police for permission to mount nationwide protests when
Mr. Bush arrives in
the country on Tuesday.
Mr. Bush's comment that in
Zimbabwe "the freedom and dignity of the
nation is under assault" is likely
to cause the most difficulty in meetings
with Mr. Mbeki, who has refused to
publicly criticize Mr. Mugabe.
Mr. Mugabe's economic policies, including
a coercive land-reform
program, have led to the fall of the local currency
unit from 58 to the U.S.
dollar three years ago to 2,700 to the dollar at
present.
The United Nations estimates that 70 percent of the country's 12
million
people live under conditions of famine and that more than 2 million
black
Zimbabweans have sought refuge in South Africa.
Despite several
South African initiatives to encourage Mr. Mugabe, 79,
to either step down or
enter negotiations with opposition leader Morgan
Tsvangirai and his Movement
for Democratic Change, there has been little
progress.
At the
beginning of June, the MDC led a weeklong strike and called for
new
elections, but the government responded by charging Mr. Tsvangirai
with
treason and jailing him for two weeks before he was released on
bail.
Mr. Tsvangirai said in an interview that the presence of the U.S.
leader
in Africa would help draw international attention to Zimbabwe's
plight.
In contrast to South Africa's position, the governments of
Uganda,
Botswana and Senegal — also on Mr. Bush's itinerary — have made clear
they
do not support Mr. Mugabe or his policies. President Festus Mogae
of
Botswana repeatedly has called for a return to democracy in Zimbabwe
and
said in a recent television interview that the country's problems
were
caused by a "drought of good governance."
The U.S. government has
indicated that it might be willing to underwrite
substantial aid for a
recovery program in Zimbabwe if Mr. Mugabe allows
internationally supervised
elections in which he does not stand as a
candidate. But the only South
African response to the idea came from Deputy
Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad,
who told a local newspaper, "We would like to
discuss this with the U.S. and
find out what they mean."
Mr. Bush also will visit Nigeria, where he will
deliver the keynote
address at a summit on cooperation between Africa and the
United States.
Cape Times
Government downplays US 'military sanctions'
July
03 2003 at 05:09AM
By Jeremy Michaels, Charles Phalane &
Sapa-AFP
The government has downplayed the United States' suspension of
R50-million
in military aid to South Africa ahead of a landmark visit by US
President
George Bush next week, but analysts say the move is "tantamount to
military
sanctions" and adds to the list of contentious issues between
President
Thabo Mbeki and the American leader.
In a move to put the
squeeze on countries that were not co-operating with
Washington's bid to
sidestep the International Criminal Court (ICC), the US
announced late on
Tuesday night that it was suspending $47-million in
military aid to 35
countries that were refusing to give Americans immunity
from prosecution by
the tribunal.
Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Aziz Pahad said on
Wednesday that the
decision would not adversely affect Bush's visit since
South Africa had
known well in advance about the July 1 US deadline to sign
article 98 of its
American Service Members Protection Act of
2002.
"This matter is in the process of discussion and it will not have
an impact
on the visit.
"It is one of the issues that will be on the
agenda when the (Bush)
delegation comes," Pahad told a news conference in
Pretoria.
But Pahad's estimates of the aid, which he put at about
$3-million,
contrasted sharply with official figures given to the Cape Times
by the
defence ministry.
Sam Mkhwanazi, spokesperson for Defence
Minister Mosiuoa Lekota, put the aid
figure at $7,6-million, more than double
Pahad's estimate.
Political analyst Chris Landsberg said that while the
US sanctions were
clearly "not targeted at SA", they underscored the uneasy
relationship
between the world's superpower and South Africa, a regional
powerhouse.
South Africa knew it had to relate to the US as the global
superpower, while
the US in turn knew that "even if it wanted to find a
substitute for SA as a
pivotal regional player, it cannot find that
alternative, so they have to
relate to each other.
"Both South Africa
and the US would like a more problem-free basis for their
relationship, but
this is tantamount to military sanctions and it shows that
the US wants to
relate to other global players, but only on its terms,"
said
Landsberg.
"America is so carried away with its global power, it
just doesn't know how
to respect others."
The US fears that the ICC -
which will try cases of war crimes, crimes
against humanity and genocide -
would be used for politically-motivated
prosecutions of US
citizens.
It therefore came up with Article 98 to compel countries to
agree to exempt
the US from the ICC. If countries refused to sign, they
forfeit military
assistance from the US.
South Africa is the only
country on the itinerary for Bush's Africa visit
that has not signed the
exemption. Botswana, Senegal, Nigeria and Uganda
have all retained military
assistance by signing it.
Pahad said some countries had negotiated for
waivers and exemption from
signing by holding bilateral talks with the
US.
Pahad said the cabinet had not yet discussed the matter, but Foreign
Affairs
Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma had indicated to parliament that
under its
obligations to the ICC, South Africa could not sign.
South
Africa was looking at ways to tackle the concerns raised by the US.
However,
a clearer understanding of the way forward would emerge from the
meeting
between Dlamini-Zuma and her US counterpart Colin Powell.
Landsberg said
that while there were significant irritants in the
relationship between SA
and the US - the invasion of Iraq and the crisis in
Zimbabwe, among others -
there would be "a lot of egg-dancing" between Mbeki
and Bush.
"They
won't say nasty things in front of each other, they'll say them when
it's all
done," he said.
Nobel peace laureate and former US president Jimmy Carter
and Spanish judge
Baltasar Garzon said on Wednesday that they supported the
international war
crimes court, despite Washington's decision to suspend
military aid to
countries that do not exempt US citizens from
prosecution.
The support from Carter and Garzon, who led international
efforts to
prosecute former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet for war crimes,
came on
the first anniversary of the ICC's existence.
"It is my hope
that as the court begins its work, the sight of mass
murderers and others
being held accountable will send a strong message to
the United States about
the power of law and collective international
action," Carter wrote in a
letter published on Wednesday.
The high-profile Garzon said "sooner or
later countries such as the United
States will realise that the best option
for peace is the ICC and they will
join our ranks".
The European
Commission expressed regret on Wednesday at the US decision to
suspend
military aid.
"We regret what the United States is doing," said a
spokesperson for
External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten.
He
added that at least 90 countries had resisted United States "pressure"
over
the ICC.
"We want as well to express our admiration" for all the
countries seeking to
make the fledgling tribunal an "international success",
he said.
The European Union (EU) strongly backs The Hague-based court,
the world's
first permanent international tribunal to try cases of war
crimes, crimes
against humanity and genocide.
European countries
preparing to join the EU said on Wednesday that they
would continue to back
the newly created ICC despite the US decision to
slash their military
aid.
"We regret that the American Congress has taken this decision but
the
position of Slovakia has not changed," Slovakian Foreign Minister
Eduard
Kukan said.
Six countries set to join the EU in 2004 - Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania,
Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia - have been targeted by the
sanctions.
Bulgaria, which hopes to join the 15-nation bloc in 2007, is
also on the
sanctions list.
IOL
Bush plans to steer clear of African hotspots
July 03
2003 at 06:18AM
Washington - There are plenty of hotspots in
Africa, and American President
George Bush will be steering clear of them on
his five-country tour of the
continent next week.
Bush will be
focusing on countries that have made headway in democratic
development -
South Africa, Nigeria, Senegal and Botswana - and in Uganda he
will highlight
the country's success in reducing the HIV/Aids infection
rate.
Salih
Booker, executive direction of Africa Action, says he is not surprised
that
the president is avoiding countries wracked by war.
"If he goes to bad
news places, he raises expectations that he will commit
himself to finding
solutions," Booker said.
So Bush won't be going to Liberia, Congo and
Sudan, all of which have been
plagued by civil strife for years.
In a
somewhat different category is Zimbabwe, where arbitrary rule by
the
government has impoverished the population and caused political unrest.
The
United States does not recognise Zimbabwe's government, led by
President
Robert Mugabe.
Ahead of Bush's Monday departure, he and top
aides have been weighing the
possibility of dispatching US troops to Liberia
as part of a multinational
force to help stabilise the situation.
The
administration has said it will be impossible to bring peace to Liberia
so
long as President Charles Taylor remains in power.
The three-year civil
war has claimed thousands of lives and displaced an
estimated 1 million
people. The country has been at peace for only brief
periods since 1989, with
Taylor widely seen as the culprit.
During his trip, Bush is expected to
be dogged by questions about US policy
toward Liberia, particularly in
Senegal and Nigeria, both relatively close
to Liberia.
"Everybody is
going to be asking about it," says Princeton Lyman, a former
ambassador to
Nigeria and South Africa.
No conflict since World War 2 has claimed more
lives than the Congo war,
which began in 1998. An estimated 3,3 million
people have died, victims of
ethnic hatreds, competition for resources and
outside intervention.
The conflict has taken place largely in eastern
Congo, across the border
from Uganda, where Bush will be conferring with
President Yoweri Museveni.
Ugandan military involvement in Congo, recently
ended, is seen here as a
contributing factor to the Congolese
tragedy.
The UN Security Council recently approved the creation of a
French-led
emergency force for Congo and also extended the mandate of a
separate UN
peacekeeping force.
In Sudan, more than two million have
died since 1983 but the country has
made large strides toward peace in recent
months.
"Sudan is getting closer to a real win," says former Assistant
Secretary of
State Chester Crocker. The progress is largely the result of US
and African
diplomatic efforts.
The conflict matches the
Muslim-dominated north against the Christian and
Animist south.
There
are 48 sub-Saharan countries, and the National Security Council expert
on
Africa, Jendayi Frazer, explained the rationale for the five Bush settled
on
in an interactive online "Ask the White House" forum on Wednesday.
"South
Africa is the largest trade partner in sub-Saharan Africa. Nigeria is
the
continent's most populous country with 120 million people," she said.
"We
also wanted to visit a country that is primarily
francophone
(French-speaking) so we are going to Senegal, West Africa's
longest-standing
democracy. We will visit Botswana, the country with Africa's
strongest and
fastest growing economy.
"And we will visit Uganda,
which is the only country in the world to have
reversed the AIDS prevalence
rate."
For all the continuing death and destruction on the continent,
analysts
agree that the situation was probably worse a few years
ago.
"The balance sheet is a lot better but there is still a lot of
fragility,"
says Crocker. Success stories include Sierra Leone, Angola, Ivory
Coast and
the 2000 peace agreement between Ethiopia and
Eritrea.
Herman Cohen, a former assistant secretary of state, says Rwanda
remains
unstable nine years after the horrific genocide of 1994 when 800 000
were
killed in a matter of weeks.
He says peace cannot be assured
until a government led by the Hutu majority
takes power, replacing the
minority Tutsi-led government. - Sapa-AP
Daily News
Bush, Mbeki clash looms
United States
President George W Bush is set to clash with his South
African counterpart
Thabo Mbeki over Washington’s insistence that South
Africa plays a leading
role in ensuring the formation of a transitional
government in Zimbabwe ahead
of fresh elections, a move Mbeki says he is not
willing to
pursue.
Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Assistant
Secretary of State
for African Affairs Walter Kansteiner have called for
President Robert
Mugabe’s exit from power and the formation of a transitional
administration
that would organise a fresh presidential election following
Mugabe’s
disputed re-election last year.
Bush, who embarks on
his first ever African safari from 7 to 12 July,
will meet Mbeki in Pretoria
where the resolution of Zimbabwe’s political
stand-off will top their
agenda.
Bush will also visit Nigeria, Uganda and
Botswana.
But even before the Pretoria summit begins, signs of a
rift on how to
end Zimbabwe’s political crisis are emerging between Mbeki and
Bush, and
analysts warn that Mbeki appears determined to play Mugabe’s
advocate during
the talks, a move that could widen their rift on
Zimbabwe.
On Tuesday, Kansteiner said the US would discuss South
Africa’s role
in the setting-up of a transitional government and the
subsequent holding of
a fresh vote in Zimbabwe, a task which Mbeki has said
he is not willing to
take up.
“We, in fact, are encouraged by
what we hope is the beginning of a
dialogue inside Zimbabwe between the key
parties and players (and) that that
dialogue will lead to some kind of
transitional framework that will enable
the people of Zimbabwe to have their
voice heard in an election that is
internationally monitored and that is free
and fair,” Kansteiner said.
“The South Africans have a very
important role to play in that and
they are playing it. We want to talk about
that and we want to see how we
can help.”
Powell last week and
earlier this week indicated that Washington was
ready to lead international
donors in mobilising economic aid to rescue
Zimbabwe, also sapped by an
economic meltdown triggered by the political
crisis, if ZANU PF and the
opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
agreed to form a transitional
government.
Powell urged Mbeki to take a more active role in ending
the stalemate
between ZANU PF and the MDC, which started “peace” talks last
year but then
abandoned them.
But Mbeki on Tuesday indicated his
unwillingness to take up any role
in pressuring Mugabe to agree to resume the
talks, opting to continue with
his widely condemned quiet diplomacy on
Harare.
Speaking from Jamaica, where he was attending a summit of
Caribbean
leaders, Mbeki said he would not pressure Mugabe into holding
fresh
elections.
“It’s incorrect really to be
saying that we should stand outside the borders of Zimbabwe and decide
what
the Zimbabweans should do about their own country,” he said.
Asked
whether he would push Mugabe to hold elections to ensure a
peaceful
transition of power, Mbeki said: “That’s their decision. The future
of
Zimbabwe needs to be decided by the Zimbabweans.”
Suggesting that
calls by the US for him to be more active in resolving
Zimbabwe’s crisis were
misplaced, Mbeki said: “If South Africa and another
country teamed up to
decide policy in the US, everybody would lock us up.
They’d think we were
crazy.”
Political analysts yesterday said it was unlikely that
Mbeki would
change his soft stance on Mugabe after meeting Bush but would try
to
convince the US leader that Mugabe was
more-or-less ready for
some talks.
Harare advocate Archibald Gijima, echoing the views of
most analysts,
said it was unlikely that Bush would convince Mbeki to take a
more vigorous
approach against Mugabe. “Mbeki is likely to show himself to be
independent
and as a no-pushover and this will complicate matters. Mbeki’s
approach to
Zimbabwe so far discloses him as a person with a hidden
admiration for the
wiles of Mugabe, hence his softly-softly approach,” he
said.
“But Bush will ask for a more result-oriented approach, and
Mbeki
fears to take that approach.
“They will agree that there
are problems in Zimbabwe but Mbeki will
try to justify Mugabe’s regime. The
signs of growing differences are already
visible.”
The analysts
said a cornered Mugabe always gave an indication that he
was willing to talk,
although he also always did not implement the decisions
of such talks, as
shown by several summits held on Zimbabwe in the past
three years of
heightened crisis.
“You have only to look at Abuja where agreements
reached with the
international community were later ignored by Mugabe as he
pushed his own
agenda to seize land, one of the causes of the current
economic crisis,” a
bank analyst said.
He was referring to
international talks in the Nigerian capital two
years ago which agreed a
programme of land reform that needed to be followed
by Harare for it to win
international financial aid for the reforms. Mugabe
later tore up the accord
and seized productive land, triggering the country’
s worst
famine.
Efforts to get comment yesterday from Mbeki’s spokesman
Bheki Khumalo
on the
apparent rift between Washington and
Pretoria over the resolution of
Zimbabwe’s crisis were fruitless. Khumalo was
reported by aides to be out of
his office. Efforts to contact South African
Foreign Minister Nkosazana
Dlamini-Zuma and her spokesman Ronnie Mamoepa were
also unsuccessful.By
Farai Mutsaka
Chief Reporter
Daily News
Three former judges join UK immigration
THREE former Zimbabwe High Court judges who resigned at the height
of clashes
between the government and the Bench over the rule of law and
property rights
on farms seized by the government from white farmers without
paying
compensation have joined Britain’s immigration authority as
adjudicators, The
Daily News established yesterday.
A spokeswoman for the British
High Commission in Harare confirmed that
former justices James Devittie,
Michael Gillespie and David Bartlett were
now working for Britain’s
immigration department.
The former judges resigned from the Bench
between 2001 and 2002,
without disclosing the reasons they were stepping down
for, although both
left after handing down judgments viewed by many to have
been unpalatable to
the government.
The high commission official
who was responding to questions by this
newspaper said, “Mr David Bartlett,
Mr James Devittie and Michael Gillespie
were appointed as immigration
adjudicators by the UK’s Immigration Authority
last year.
“These
positions are filled through open competition. Any British,
Irish or
Commonwealth citizen, with appropriate legal qualifications and
experience
can apply.’’
Nearly all of Zimbabwe’s former Bench led by former
chief justice
Anthony
Gubbay, which was highly regarded for its
professionalism and fierce
defence of justice and the rule of law, have now
either resigned or left
through old age after several bitter clashes with
President Robert Mugabe
and his government especially over the government’s
controversial land
reforms.
Mugabe and his ruling ZANU PF viewed
judgments by the Gubbay Bench
demanding that they implement just and
transparent land reforms as an
attempt to forestall redistribution of land in
the country, a charge the
Bench denied. Mugabe called on judges he said were
opposed to his land
reforms to resign while some pro-government militants
were allowed to harass
and intimidate the judges.
When he
resigned, Gillespie said he was doing so because he could not
continue
sitting on the Bench when the government was attempting to
compromise the
independence of the judiciary and bend the rule law to suit
its political
goals.
Gillespie also blamed the executive of encouraging the
breakdown of
the rule of law by frequently disobeying court orders it felt
were not in
line with its political programme.
The judge wrote:
‘’The judges have been threatened publicly by war
veterans with attacks upon,
and occupation of their homes.
“A judge, finally, who finds himself
in the position where he is
called upon to administer the law only as against
political opponents of the
government and not against government supporters
faces the challenge to his
conscience: that is whether he can still consider
himself to sit as an
impartial court.”
The government denied the
charges levelled against it by Gillespie.
Devittie did not give reasons why
he was stepping down but resigned weeks
after a election victory in Buhera
North constituency by Mugabe loyalist
Kenneth Manyonda against opposition
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
party leader Morgan
Tsvangirai.
Devittie nullified the election result because of
violence during the
campaign period by ZANU PF supporters. Two MDC activists
Tichaona Chiminya
and Talent Mabika were murdered during the run up to the
election allegedly
by war veteran Tom Kainos “Kitsiyatota” Zimunya and state
Central
Intelligence Organisation operative Joseph Mwale. Devittie also then
ordered
the Attorney General to prosecute Mwale and Zimunya who were
identified as
the alleged murderers. The two are still to be prosecuted
almost two years
after Devittie’s recommendation that they be brought before
the courts.
Bartlett, who also did not give reasons why he was leaving the
bench,
resigned after he had ordered the Attorney General’s office in
November 2001
to investigate Parliament Speaker and Mugabe confidant Emmerson
Mnangangwa
over allegations that he illegally authorised the release of a
hard core
criminal from jail when he was Justice Minister.
However, a government inquiry released early this year exonerated
Mnangagwa
of any wrong doing.
By Pedzisai Ruhanya
Deputy
News Editor
Daily News
Commuter omnibus operators hike fares
COMMUTER omnibus operators in Harare and Bulawayo have hiked fares
by up to
150 percent, citing rising operational costs and the exorbitant
price of fuel
on the black market, which most public transporters yesterday
said was their
main source of diesel and petrol.
In a move commuters said would
only worsen their plight, public
transport operators raised fares by between
100 and 150 percent and warned
they could further hike the fares to cushion
their businesses against the
spiralling cost of vehicle spare parts and
fuel.
A snap survey by The Daily News yesterday morning showed that
most
commuters who before the fare hike were paying around $300 for a single
trip
from residential suburbs into Harare city centre were being asked to
fork
out between $500 to $800 for a trip.
In Bulawayo most
public transporters were demanding $600 for a single
trip into the city
centre from surrounding residential areas.
“We are buying fuel on
the black market and we just have to increase
our fares to make a profit. The
price of spare parts has also gone up
considerably and we cannot wait for
government approval before increasing
our fares,” said commuter omnibus owner
Felix Mangura.
“We might increase it to $1 000 but
we
are still consulting on that,” added Mangura, whose buses ply the
Marlborough
to Harare city centre route.
Local Government Minister Ignatius
Chombo, who is supposed to sanction
public transport fares, could not be
reached for comment on the matter by
the time of going to print last
night.
Officials of the Confederation of Zimbabwe Commuter Omnibus
Services
(ZCOS) – which groups together public transporters and normally
negotiates
fare changes with Chombo’s ministry – professed ignorance over the
latest
fare increases by its members.
A ZCOS official Felix
Papaya said:
“We have not heard anything like that. As far as we
are concerned our
members have not increased their charges and we have not
discussed anything
like that.”
The fare increase by urban public
transport operators follows hard on
another fare hike by long distance and
rural bus operators who raised their
charges by 33 percent.
The
long distance bus operators also cited rising costs of running
their
businesses and the fuel shortage which has forced most of them to buy
diesel
and petrol from the black market, where prices are more than five
times
official prices set by the government.
Zimbabwe, which is grappling
with its worst foreign currency crisis
since independence from Britain 23
years ago, is facing its most critical
fuel shortage because there is no
foreign currency to pay for oil imports.
A barter deal between
Zimbabwe and Libya for oil in exchange for prime
investment opportunities for
Tripoli in the Southern African nation’s
economy which stalled earlier this
year, is said to have been resuscitated
after a visit to Libya by President
Robert Mugabe.
But Tripoli is still to resume pumping oil to
Harare.
Commuter transport operators told this newspaper that a new
fuel
rationing system introduced by the government last week, under
which
operators must show road fitness certificates in order to get coupons
for
petrol or diesel, had only helped worsen the situation as most did not
have
the certificates and were resorting to buying fuel from the black
market.
A commuter bus conductor said: “Over 60 percent of the
vehicles on the
road do not meet the requirements to get fuel coupons and
they will only be
able to get fuel on the black market.
“Most
vehicles do not have certificates of fitness so they will not
receive the
coupons.”
Bulawayo United Passengers’ Association (BUPTA) chairman
Strike Ndlovu
said: “Such operators should face the wrath of law. It is not
lawful to
charge $600 and as BUPTA we have tried to press the city council to
put some
by-laws in place that will compel all
operators to
stick to reasonable fares.”
Staff Reporters
Daily News
Zimbabweans reeling from fuel shortages
bite
Prior to 2000, tobacco raised over US$500 million (Z$412
billion) in
foreign currency annually. Midway into the 2003 selling season,
tobacco has
brought in just slightly above US$30 million (Z$247
billion).
More than six months since a fuel supply deal collapsed,
Libya has
once again come to the rescue of President Robert Mugabe by
reviving a
barter agreement on oil with Zimbabwe.
“Experts from
the two governments, including Energy and Power
Development Minister Amos
Midzi, met to review the bilateral co-operation
path, and the ways to
reinforce that co-operation in oil and investment in
various economic
fields,”
a joint statement said without giving further
details.
Libya last year renewed a US$360 million (Z$296.6 billion)
fuel deal
with Zimbabwe in exchange for beef, tobacco and sugar but the
supply line
was cut after Zimbabwe failed to meet its end of the
bargain.
While the stopgap measure may temporarily alleviate fuel
shortages,
long-term fuel security is not guaranteed.
Hardest
hit by the fuel shortages are labourers, especially poor
households in
Zimbabwe’s high-density suburbs.
Chipo Chikosha is a single mother.
Every day she gets up at 3:30 am
and by 4 am is on the road, walking a
distance of 20 km from the suburb of
Glen Norah in the capital, Harare, to
the city centre where she works as an
office orderly at a law
firm.
“I cannot afford the fare of Z$300 charged by the commuter
omnibuses,”
she said. With a salary of Z$50 000 per month, Chipo pays her
rent and buys
food. Despite a government regulation stipulating that
passenger omnibuses
may only charge fares of
between Z$60 and
Z$300 for urban routes, commuters in Harare and
Bulawayo have to contend with
fares ranging from Z$300 to Z$1 000.
The prohibitive fares have
meant that highways from residential
suburbs into downtown Harare stream with
bicycles and pedestrians walking to
work every morning and home again in the
evenings.
Two years ago the government reduced the import duty and
sales tax on
bicycles to encourage more people to cycle to work, as passenger
vehicles
were grounded owing to the chronic shortage of fuel.
It
is now common to see trucks and tractors with trailers transporting
people to
and from town. The government has tried to ease the problem by
introducing
urban train services.
The train service, dubbed “Freedom Trains”,
charges
government-gazetted fares
and was expected to cushion
commuters from unscrupulous bus owners who
overcharge. However, passengers
have raised concerns over safety and
complained of overcrowding.
An economist with the Zimbabwe Economic Society said the trains were
being
run at a loss by the state-owned National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ).
“The
scheme will put the NRZ into more debt,” the economist said.
Zimbabwe needs around US$400 million (Z$392.6 billion) to meet its
fuel needs
annually. Much of this money used to come from agriculture,
especially
tobacco, which until 2000 was the country’s main foreign currency
earner.
Prior to 2000, tobacco raised over US$500 million in foreign
currency
annually.
Midway into the 2003 selling season, tobacco has brought
in just
slightly above US$30 million. Newly resettled farmers are yet to
raise their
production to pre-2000 levels.
Production on the
“new farms” has also been stalled by shortages of
fuel and inputs. The
Zimbabwe Farmers’ Union, a body of mostly peasant and
small-scale farmers,
recently made an appeal to the government to have fuel
supplied to the new
farmers. But while the majority of people have to do
without transport, those
who control the hugely profitable parallel market
in scarce goods and hard
currency are enjoying boom times.
A garage owner identified only as
Chirasha said they sell hardly a
quarter of their allocations through the
pump at the official price of
Z$450. “We have customers who are prepared to
buy in bulk at Z$1 500 per
litre,” he said.
Chirasha added that
after filling only a few cars, petrol attendants
tell the remaining customers
the pumps are dry. The rest of the fuel is then
pumped out at night to be
stored and sold at unknown destinations. Some fuel
dealers are selling fuel
in foreign currency at US 75 cents a litre.
Newspapers are awash with adverts
saying “bulk fuel available”. A new scam
involves towing clapped-out cars to
fuel stations where they are parked
until fuel is available. Once the car has
been filled, it is immediately
towed to a secluded spot and drained. The
fuel, bought at Z$450 a litre, is
then resold at Z$1 500 to desperate
motorists. The police have begun
monitoring the situation and a few arrests
have been made.
Earlier this month the government introduced fuel
coupons for commuter
taxis and omnibus operators. The move followed an
announcement that the
state is to ban all vehicles from carrying petrol and
diesel in containers,
to prevent parallel marketeering.
–
IRIN
Daily News
Zimbabwe gobbles up R75 m facility
ZIMBABWE has already gobbled up 68 million rands of a 75
million-rand
facility it has with the South African Reserve Bank, it was
learnt this
week.
The funds are said to have been used to buy fuel, and for
electricity
repayments and
importation of food.
South African Finance Minister Trevor Manuel told that country’s
National
Assembly in Cape Town early this week that the facility had been in
existence
since June 1987.
According to the South African Press Association
(SAPA), Manuel made
the comments in a written response to a question from a
member of the
National Assembly.
“Zimbabwe has used up almost
R68 million (Z$7.276 billion) of the R75
million (Z$8.025 billion) overdraft
facility the South African Reserve Bank
has granted it,” SAPA quoted Manuel
as saying. He said the Reserve Bank of
Zimbabwe had also lodged securities in
the value of R82.5 million (about
Z$8.827) for the facility, which “matures”
on 31 December 2003.
It was not immediately clear what sort of
securities Zimbabwe’s
central bank could have used for the
facility.
Zimbabwe has been experiencing a severe foreign currency
crisis in the
past three years because of plunging exports and the flight of
donors and
foreign direct investors wary of government policies that have
eroded the
rule of law and property rights.
The International
Monetary Fund (IMF), from which most international
financial institutions
take their cue, suspended balance of payments support
to Harare in 1999
because of unsustainable economic policies.
The Bretton Woods
institution has given Zimbabwe up to 6 December 2003
to deal with its
economic problems and come up with “workable economic”
policies or it will
review the country’s status in the institution. Zimbawe
faces possible
expulsion from the IMF if it continues with its ruinous
economic
policies.
Banking sector officials yesterday said the exhaustion of
the country’
s facility with the South African central bank half way through
the 2003
financial year was an indication of the worsening hard cash squeeze
in
Zimbabwe, for which they said there were no immediate solutions in
sight.
The southern African nation has continued to experience
foreign
currency outflows from its capital account, which amounted to US$347
million
(about Z$285.9 billion) in November last year, and has continued to
default
on its foreign obligations. Zimbabwe’s foreign commitments now stand
at
US$1.4 billion.
Executives in Zimbabwe’s banking sector said
with the country’s
foreign currency inflows continuing to decline, it would
be difficult for
the Harare authorities to repay the money owed to South
Africa.
They said Zimbabwe had the option of seeking a breathing
period to
secure the funds or asking for the amount of money it could utilise
from the
facility to be increased.
“We have said Zimbabwe is
plunging deeper into debt, but these
revelations by Manuel show that we are
now probably below the bottom end,” a
bank executive told The Business Daily.
“The options from here are very few.
It’s either we will buy time, seek for
the extension of the facility or
default, of which the latter is not a viable
option as we have seen with the
IMF and other multilateral
agencies.”
There was no immediate comment from the Reserve Bank of
Zimbabwe
yesterday, with the central bank’s deputy governor said to be
attending
meetings.
Business Reporter
Daily News
US taking out carrot and stick once again
IN ONE of my articles to a local paper I wrote thus: “Well-said,
Powell, but
you miss the point on undertones about United States economic
interests in
Zimbabwe. Although they intend to bring ‘prosperity’, they are
causing
havoc.”
I will not touch on what President Robert Mugabe or Zanu PF
have done
wrong. This is an exclusive to US President George W Bush and his
Secretary
of State Colin Powell. And I have not switched camps because I do
not belong
to any camp.
America is a new colonial and military
power of the 21st century; not
accidentally but deliberately. This has been a
scheme that has been in place
for quite a while and documented within the
last 10 years.
This is where I am concerned about America’s thrust
when they focus
their attention
to Zimbabwe and Africa in
general.
According to a document titled Rebuilding America’s
Defenses
(ww.rebuildingamericasdefences.org
Having led the West
to victory in the Cold War, America faces an
opportunity and a challenge:
does the United States have the vision to build
upon the achievement of past
decades? Does the United States have the
resolve to shape a new century
favourable to American principles and
interests?
What we require
is a military that is strong and ready to meet both
present and future
challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully
promotes American
principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts
the United States’
global responsibilities.”
One would be tempted to think what the
heck, it’s only some individual
patriotic Americans exercising their freedom
of speech. Yes and no. Yes,
they are American citizens, indeed, expressing
their thoughts and no, these
are no ordinary American citizens.
The crafters of this document are right-wing governing Republican
hawks.
Donald Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defence and Paul Wolfowitz his
deputy.
Several of the other authors of the document are influential policy
advisers
of the current Republican government.
These and other Republican
hawks drive the policy direction of Bush’s
government. For
instance, the infamous pre-emptive doctrine is contained in
this
report.
It’s the policy that was used to strike Iraq. The
justification of the
pre-emptive strike was that Iraq possessed weapons of
mass destruction.
However, until now nothing been found. Instead they are
using the argument
that all the same a dictator has been overthrown without
telling us the
chaos currently happening in Iraq as well as the silence over
civilian
casualties.
So basically, here is a liar who has been
caught lying but is not
ashamed to stand in front of the world with a
straight face.
Powell raises concerns about the rule of law. When
the US invaded
Iraq, that was a breach of international law. The US opted out
of the
International Criminal Court in order to protect its soldiers who
committed
crimes.
The US has been and is still helping fund
rebels and revolts against
governments all around the world.
In
the US homeland, they have been arresting and detaining visible
minorities
without charges under the guise of national security. A report
from the
Toronto Star, Canada’s largest newspaper, reports that the Bush
government
refuses to disclose the number of people it incarcerated.
Attorney-General John Ashcroft stopped giving out the total after it
reached
about 1 200 way back in November 2001.
Dalia Hashad of the American
Civil Liberties Union believes the number
is now 3 000 or more and more men
were still disappearing.
A blistering report by the US Justice
Department’s own internal
watchdog has accounted so far for 762
men.
These men were singled out by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and
jailed an average of 80 days, some up to eight months. Some
had been picked
up on unsubstantiated tips or paranoid whims.
Just recently, they have been inciting Iranian students to
revolt.
Unfortunately, their involvement has had a negative impact on
the
demonstrations. In their bid to portray the Iranian ruling mullahs
as
villains, the Americans now are.
The carrot-and-stick
principle that Powell proposes is very ludicrous
and derogatory to a people’s
status. It assumes that money is the fixer of
everything. Never. And Bush and
Powell know that too. You can’t buy us so
cheap, Bush and
Powell.
Sure, there are problems in Zimbabwe, but I do not think
that we need
America to come and interfere in our affairs. As events and time
have shown,
only the power of the people can solve the problems of Zimbabwe.
Not
American money and politics.
First and final, America only
cares about its own interests. When Bush
was asked during the 2000
presidential campaign whether he would consider
sending military help to
Rwanda, he said he wouldn’t because it was not of
strategic importance to the
US.
So now with a re-election around the corner, what is he coming
to
Africa for? Specifically why has he chosen to pinpoint Zimbabwe? Is
Zimbabwe
the worst-case scenario in Africa?
This is not to imply
that there are no serious problems in Zimbabwe.
It’s just that I am trying to
emphasis how Bush wants to extend his hands to
Zimbabwe. As well, he wants to
access the Zimbabwe’s resources and plunder
them.
If they need
Zimbabwe’s
resources, they are very welcome but they have to come
through the
front door.
We need to conduct our politics and
commerce in our own terms just
like the US.
Also, is it not wise
for the US to save money and close its embassy in
Harare if it does not
recognise the current government? America needs money
as it reels under the
largest
(US$500 billion – Z$412 trillion) budget deficit seen in
decades.
n Kuthula Matshazi is a Zimbabwean based in Canada
Daily News
AU must make a stand
THE African Union
(AU) will next week have another chance to put its
high ideals to the test by
boldly condemning Harare’s naked abuse of power
and flouting of
internationally accepted norms of good governance.
The AU will meet
in Maputo next week for its second summit, its first
major meeting since the
39-year-old Organisation of African Unity was
transformed into the AU, a body
whose aim is to maintain peace and promote
economic development on the
continent.
Next week’s Mozambique summit coincides with the first
visit to the
continent of American President George Bush, who has not minced
his words in
condemning the blatant repression of its people by a government
that is
determined to hold on to power at all costs.
It would be
a shameful act on the part of Africa’s leaders if they
failed to take a stand
on the basic issues that have been highlighted by
those bodies that have been
voluble in their criticism of the rights abuses
in Zimbabwe.
The
continent’s leaders have allowed themselves to be drawn into a
racial trap
over the Zimbabwe crisis, with condemnation of human rights
abuses, the
erosion of the rule of law and sheer bad governance
being
dismissed
as attacks on Zimbabwe’s sovereignty by racist
Western colonialists.
Yet these are issues that are critical to a
continent that is working
hard to shrug off the stigma of perennial violent
conflicts, lawless
dictators and horrific human rights abuses.
They are especially crucial for the AU, which has adopted as its
economic
programme the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD),
which is
anchored in the
observance by African governments of the rule of
law and good
governance to reverse the continent’s economic decline, endemic
poverty and
costly civil wars.
African leaders will best serve
their own cause and the cause of
democracy in ZImbabwe if they publicly and
firmly denounce Harare for
failing to live up to the principles espoused by
the AU and NEPAD.
An organisation whose self-given mandate is to
maintain peace on the
continent and provide the impetus for Africa’s growth
cannot remain silent
on one of its members’ blatant disregard for the basic
rights of its
citizens.
The Zimbabwean government has suspended
its people’s right to freely
disseminate information, assemble and express
themselves through legislation
that outlaws basic freedoms given to
Zimbabweans by the country’s
constitution.
Violent government
supporters have made it impossible for some
Zimbabweans to exercise their
right to belong to or support a political
party of their choice and even to
read newspapers of their choice.
As human rights watchdog Amnesty
International pointed out in a letter
sent to three southern African leaders
recently, Harare is in breach of the
continent’s own African Charter, to
which Zimbabwe is a signatory and which
gives Zimbabweans the right to free
association and assembly as well as
expression and dissemination of their
opinions.
By continuing to be publicly politically correct about
the ZImbabwe
crisis, African leaders have allowed President Robert Mugabe’s
government to
merrily continue with its tyranny, even giving the impression
that it has
the support of the rest of the continent.
Because of
the AU’s continued public silence, Mugabe’s regime has been
able to
arrogantly ignore promises made to African leaders on its land
reform
programme and repressive legislation it has pledged to
significantly
amend.
The AU must begin to make it clear to
Mugabe that his regime’s antics
will not be tolerated, otherwise history will
dismiss it as a toothless and
hypocritical failure.
The
consequences of this failure will be serious for NEPAD and for
Zimbabwe’s
closest neighbours, which are already playing host to hundreds of
thousands
of the country’s economic refugees.
If the AU fails to vigorously
meet the challenge presented by
Zimbabwe, it will merely become another
albatross around the continent’s
neck.
Daily News
Bakare criticises fellow clergy for
silence
ZIMBABWE Council of Churches (ZCC) president Sebastian
Bakare
yesterday called on Zimbabwe’s Christian leaders to stand up
against
political violence, human rights abuses and worsening economic
hardships in
the country.
Bakare, who is the bishop of the
Anglican Church’s Manicaland diocese,
criticised the deafening silence by
many of the country’s clergy in the face
of open abuse of power by
individuals and groups linked to the government.
“People linked to
the government have abused other people and we as
church leaders are
witnesses to that. But I am surprised that at times you
have remained quite,”
Bakare told delegates at the ZCC’s annual conference
held in Harare
yesterday.
The ZCC groups together most of Zimbabwe’s main
Protestant
denominations with the Roman Catholic Church accorded observer
status to the
ZCC conference.
The outspoken Bakare said: “What
are you doing to ensure your
followers feel safe in these hardships? People
are being assaulted on a
daily basis and the violence appears to be
increasing, but you have
continued to remain distant witnesses as if you live
on another planet. Let’
s unite and condemn what is wrong in our
society.”
Zimbabwe’s human rights situation has deteriorated as the
government
resorts to strong-arm tactics to quell rising discontent against
its rule
fuelled by a biting economic crisis, the worst to hit the southern
African
nation in 23 years of independence.
Violence and
lawlessness on commercial farms seized by the government
from white farmers
without paying compensation has only worsened the
situation.
The
World Economic Forum last month ranked Zimbabwe among the
worst
governed
and most corrupt countries out of 21 African
countries it reviewed.
The Zimbabwe Human Rights Forum, the largest umbrella
body for human and
civic rights organisations, said in a report last month
that human rights
abuses had escalated in the country in the first six months
of this year
with state security agents allegedly taking a leading role in
perpetrating
human rights violations.
The government, which last
month deployed heavily armed soldiers and
police to crush opposition-led mass
protests against its rule, denies
charges it is autocratic or that it has has
abused people’s freedoms and
rights.
But many Zimbabweans have
castigated the country’s church leaders for
largely remaining silent while
mostly pro-government militias have wreaked
havoc across the country hunting
down and beating or even killing opposition
Movement for Democratic Change
(MDC) supporters.
Bakare said: “Our nation has established a
culture of violence that
continues incessantly. Murder, gang rapes, various
forms of torture,
harassment, destruction of property – all these evil acts
reflect a society
where both the law and law enforcement agents have ceased
to be a resource
for its citizens. Some people have become a law unto
themselves. The church
has remained a witness.”
Bakare said the
church in Zimbabwe risked becoming irrelevant to
society unless religious
leaders boldly stood to defend justice, truth and
peace.
Several
church leaders rose to endorse Bakare’s statement but many of
them privately
told The Daily News that they feared they would be victimised
themselves if
they spoke out against human rights violations by
pro-government
groups.
The political impasse between the ruling ZANU PF and
opposition MDC
parties was also hampering efforts to heal the nation, some of
the church
leaders said yesterday.
United Methodist Church
bishop Herbert Sekete said in his church they
were dealing with issues of
political violence by condemning it and also by
ensuring safety, food and
treatment to those injured because of political
violence.
A
priest from Harare said fear of being labelled enemies of the
government had
hamstrung attempts by the ZCC to confront the government on
human rights and
governance issues.
The priest, who spoke on condition of not being
named, said: “Most ZCC
employees
are afraid of being labelled by
the government. That fear and
reluctance to be frank on
critical
issues has severely affected the ZCC’s response to problems
affecting
Zimbabwe. Staff Reporter
Daily News
Blacked out!
We have had no electricity
in the Mufakose area bordered by Mutamba
Avenue and Crowborough Way for nine
days now. The Zimbabwe Electricity
Supply Authority (ZESA) has given no
explanation or apology. Would ZESA have
the courtesy of explaining the
problem and saying when the electricity will
be turned back
on.
Irate Customer
Mufakose
Daily News
Governments that do not tolerate the opposition are not
democratic
To oppose or not to oppose is a question already
answered by the
label “the opposition party”, which even the Zimbabwe
Broadcasting
Corporation, under the influence of the Minister of Information,
happily
announces during its bulletins. And so it is that in a democracy,
which
Zimbabwe is said to be by those who do not fully understand the term,
the
opposition is there to oppose.
The questions to answer
are:
(a) Oppose whom? Oppose the incumbent, from top to bottom.
The
opposition has to oppose all that can be opposed about the
sitting
government.
(b) Oppose how? By all democratic means
available to the opposition
party.
(c) Oppose for what purpose?
In order to look good in the eyes of the
electorate for them to get rid of
the incumbent at the next election; to be
able to form the next government
and to allow the electoral runner-up to be
the opposition party. Thus, the
opposition party’s official job is to fight
tooth and nail to be the
government and the opposed.
4 Oppose when? Oppose as long as there
is a sitting government to be
opposed.
These seem to me to be
very simplistic guidelines for the opposition
party and our main opposition
party has understood these few points from its
formation.
However, we have had a government whose democratic credentials are at
best
questionable, which has not grasped the idea that when the opposition
is
opposing, they are actually doing what they are paid to do.
The
opposition opposes in order to replace. They cannot replace unless
the
opposed is removed, eliminated, gotten rid off, brought down, chased out
of
office, etc. Whatever term you want to use, the meaning is remove
and
replace.
But in the Zimbabwean style of democracy, the idea
of democracy is
described, even by those with professorships in some academic
subject, as
treason. However one tries to describe the word
treason,
the word “unlawful” creeps into the description. The word
“opposition”
does not.
Any opposition which does not aim to
replace what it opposes must not
be paid to serve in a democracy. Any
government which does not tolerate the
official opposition is not
democratic.
The ZANU PF government is not a democratic
government.
MugBe
Harare
SABC
Mbeki assures Carribean leaders of African
progress
July 03, 2003, 09:45
Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, said the concerns
about issues of
peace, stability, democracy and human rights in Africa are
on
track.
Mbeki addressing the summit of the Caribbean Regional
Economic
Community (CARICOM) in Jamaica, in his capacity as chairperson of
the
African Union, said the the recent formation of a new and
inclusive
transitional government of national unity in the Democratic
Republic of
Congo (DRC), will spearhead the volatile country to democracy.
Mbeki said:
"The leaders of the people of Zimbabwe are engaged in dialogue to
find a
solution to that country's political, economic and social
problems."
"Burundi is on course, moving towards the day when
its people
will exercise their right to elect their own government, free of
military
rule. Work is progressing to constitute a peaceful settlement in
Liberia and
neutralise the elements that have brought instability to large
parts of the
region of West Africa," Mbeki said.
Mbeki
acknowledged that much remained to be done to build a
peaceful, democratic
and prosperous Africa. He called for unity and
solidarity between the
Caribbean and Africa, CARICOM and the African Union.
"Together, we have the
task to decide what we should do to engage one
another in a practical way, to
use our intellectual and material resources
to confront the common challenges
of poverty and underdevelopment in Africa
and the Caribbean," Mbeki
said.
The African diaspora
Mbeki said the
second Ordinary Assembly of Heads of State and
Government of the African
Union will take place in Maputo, Mozambique in a
week's time. One of the
agenda items is to look at the role of the African
diaspora. The
Summit will also discuss the question of the
concrete measures on the
implementation of unity.
He pledged his support for the
Carribean's preparation to host
the 2007 Cricket World Cup. "We would be very
happy to share our experiences
and I believe that our common objective must
be that this tournament, hosted
by the people of the Caribbean, must be even
better than the one that Africa
hosted earlier this year," Mbeki
said.
"We will leave Montego Bay, Jamaica, the land of Marcus
Garvey
and other African heroes and heroines, and depart from the Caribbean
later
today and return to Africa. With your permission, we will tell your
brothers
and sisters across the Atlantic that the leaders and people of the
Caribbean
are determined to intensify the struggle, acting together with the
leaders
and peoples of Africa, to ensure that our common dream for the
renaissance
of the peoples of African descent is no longer deferred," Mbeki
told the
summit.
News24
Zim not on AU summit agenda
03/07/2003 10:06 -
(SA)
Liesl Louw, Media24 Africa Office
Johannesburg - The
Zimbabwe crisis is not on the official list of African
flashpoints under
discussion at next week's African Union heads of state
summit in
Maputo.
Dr Jakkie Cilliers, executive director of the Institute for
Security Studies
in Pretoria, said the leaders were expected to "completely
avoid" the
subject during the summit, which kicks off next
Thursday.
President Robert Mugabe will be among the 40-odd heads of state
to attend.
"South Africa has ensured a unified stance in Africa on
Zimbabwe where one
did not exist before," Cilliers said on Wednesday during
an information
session about the summit.
"The AU now regards it an
internal matter."
In terms of the AU constitution, the organisation may
only intervene when a
head of state is elected unconstitionally. AU observers
have declared
Zimabwe's presidential elections "free and fair".
Has
compromised AU's credibility
A diplomat from a leading G8 nation said it
was clear African leaders "will
once again disappoint the international
community" when it comes to
Zimbabwe.
He said the AU's handling of
Zimbabwe had compromised its credibility.
But, Cilliers believes it would
have been "unrealistic" for a "gathering of
weak Afrian countries" to unite
against Mugabe.
"Mugabe is the leader of a liberation struggle, with much
prestige, who
played a major role in history."
Cilliers believes if
the AU criticises Mugabe during the summit he would
simply walk
out.
At a previous summit in Durban last year, Mugabe apparently attended
the
entire event without uttering a word.
Cilliers believes that, in
time, the international community will put
Zimbabwe on the back burner when
it comes to its relationship with the AU.
"The AU is the only structure
that exists, so they don't have much choice."