The ZIMBABWE Situation Our thoughts and prayers are with Zimbabwe
- may peace, truth and justice prevail.

Back to Index

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Professor Mugabe (honoris causa)

Robert Mugabe gets an honorary professorship for diplomacy - and a host of
role models to choose from

John Sutherland
Monday August 1, 2005
The Guardian

The last couple of weeks have been very bad for my profession (professoring,
that is). First Professor Albus Dumbledore had something very unpleasant
happen to him at the end of HP6 that can't be mentioned until everyone has
read the book.
Then, last Wednesday, as the Guardian reported, "China conferred an honorary
professorship on Robert Mugabe from its Foreign Affairs University." The
appointment was "in recognition of his excellency's outstanding research and
remarkable contribution in the work of diplomacy and international
relations". Given his excellency's recent efforts with the bulldozer, a
chair in urban planning might have been appropriate. But Zimbabwe's
president is a man of many scholarly parts.

Outstanding research must be rewarded, but Mugabe's title is unusual. One is
familiar with emeritus professors (ie dead but won't lie down); adjunct
professors (don't give up the other job, this one won't last); titular
professors (call yourself professor, but don't expect more money); endowed
professors (particularly piquant when named after someone like Murdoch,
Archer or, in my case, Lord Northcliffe).

America, true to the egalitarian zeal of its founding fathers, appoints
everyone in the business a professor, with assistant and associate
professors at the bottom, one up from latrine cleaners. At the top are "off
scale" (ie fat cat) professors - one notch down from God.

Honorary doctors are 10 a penny - everybody from Ken Dodd to Jeremy Clarkson
can lay claim to that devalued distinction. What galactic campus, I wonder,
awarded Dr Who his honorary degree?

Mugabe was awarded an honorary doctorate in laws from Michigan State
University in 1990, which is presumably why he feels free to doctor the
Zimbabwean legal system as he sees fit. Perhaps the MSU legal faculty
perceives that he's done outstanding research in its discipline as well.
There have been demands from the student body that he be un-doctored (see But the MSU administration seems disinclined to take
action. President for life, doctor for life, professor for life.
Universities, like tyrannies, never make mistakes.

Honorary professors are, I think, rare verging on unique - the unicorn of
the academic menagerie. Very appropriate in this case. It is true, of
course, that the online "notMensa" cheekily awards what it is pleased to
call honorary professorships in return for theses submitted on topics such
as flatulencology (check out But no one would seriously
argue that farting ranks with remarkable contributions to diplomacy (or law)
as practised by his excellency Professor Robert Mugabe LLD.

Flattering as it is, the title "honorary professor" for someone from
Mugabe's part of the world may carry uncomfortable overtones. The apartheid
South African state had a racial category called "honorary whites". It was
particularly useful when dark-hued Asian business people and politicians
happened to be visiting. The English cricketer Basil d'Oliveira, alas, did
not qualify. He was blackballed.

In the administration of his new responsibilities Professor Mugabe (honoris
causa) has various role models to choose from. In his inaugural lecture he
may decide to adopt the gobbledegook style of the late and much lamented
Professor Stanley Unwin. Something along the lines of: "In the belovely
Zimbabwean land, there was a great dictatory called Muggabee, or something
like that, and all the people had great suffery because of Toby Blur's
racyist politickoing."

The newly elevated premier is well into his 80s. The absent-minded professor
pose might suit him and cover up the debilities of age. He could study
Professor Brainard, inventor of Flubber. Dotty Professor Branestawm is
another possibility. The Mugabe hair, however, will have to be ruffled
somewhat. The rolling eyes are perfect. The heroic professorial style may
also appeal. Indiana Jones is a professor (anthropology, Harvard) as is
Robert Langdon (symbology, Harvard). It is Professor Langdon who cracks the
Da Vinci code and brings the Catholic church to its knees (so to speak).
Lots of turbulent priests in Zimbabwe. And Indiana's bullwhip has a certain

Most likely is that Mugabe will follow the noble tradition of punitive
professoring. There is, one feels, more of Snape than Dumbledore in his
makeup. One foresees a reincarnation of the flagellomaniac Professor
("Whacko!") Jimmy Edwards. Plenty of whacko on the way in the townships of
Zimbabwe, no doubt.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Zim Online

Zimbabwean businessman fights in UK court to recover seized firms
Mon 1 August 2005

      JOHANNESBURG - South Africa-based Zimbabwean businessman Mutumwa
Mawere is fighting in British courts to recover his companies seized last
year by President Robert Mugabe's government.

      Mawere is challenging before the British High Court a law that allows
the Zimbabwean government to expropriate companies that owe money to the
state without the consent of shareholders.

      Mawere last September lost control of SMM Holdings, a multi-billion
dollar asbestos producer in Zimbabwe, after the government seized it after
accusing Mawere of failing to remit huge amounts of foreign currency to the

      He is arguing that the government seizure of SMM Holdings and African
Associated Mines was illegal and wants the court to deregister a Zimbabwe
government-appointed businessman, Arafas Gwaradzimba, as a director of a
UK-based company that owns a major stake in his Zimbabwean companies.

      He is challenging the Reconstruction of State-indebted Insolvent
Companies Act and the Resolution of State-indebted Financial Institutions
Acts that were both used by the Zimbabwean government to seize his assets.

      The two laws allow debts owned to the state to be converted into
state-owned equity, disregarding the rights of shareholders.

      Mawere was last year accused of defrauding the Zimbabwe government
after he allegedly failed to remit huge sums of foreign currency. An attempt
to extradite him to Zimbabwe from South Africa to face fraud charges failed
after he successfully fought against the extradition in the courts. -

Back to the Top
Back to Index

New Zimbabwe

Constitutional amendment spells doom for economy

Zimbabwe's government is planning to make constitutional amendments in
relation to property and land ownership. Law expert, Dr Alex Magaisa warns
the move could be the final death knell for Zimbabwe's battered economy

By Dr Alex T Magaisa
Last updated: 08/01/2005 14:13:20
THE proposed constitutional amendment in relation to property ownership will
effectively close one of the few remaining opportunities for economic
revival in Zimbabwe.
In an age of the free market and open economy, Zimbabwe is regressing by
adopting frightening characteristics of the discredited closed economy. In
this article, we assess the basis of this landmark change and the effect it
is likely to have on the economic fortunes of the country. Clause 16B of the
Constitutional Amendment (No. 17) Bill is one that any self-respecting
parliament should never permit if the legislative body privileges the
economic interests of the country. It is an assault not only on fundamental
freedoms but also on the economy of the country. Contrary to the beliefs of
its proponents, the nationalisation of land is based on a fallacious
understanding of the nature of African society and is quite simply, poor
economic policy.

It is necessary to give a simplified summary of the key legal and practical
effect of Clause 16B of the Constitutional Bill. First, it effectively
enables the nationalisation of all agricultural land and gives power to the
state to compulsorily acquire land "for whatever purpose". There is
therefore no limit to the purpose for which land may be acquired by the
state and presumably it may even be taken for private interests. This is
vague and exposes the process to abuse. Secondly, it prohibits any claims
for compensation for acquired land except in respect of improvements. Third,
it ousts the jurisdiction of the courts in respect of challenges against
compulsory acquisition and only permits challenges against the valuation of
improvements. These are highly dangerous clauses, encroaching as they do, on
one of the fundamental rights, which play a key role in the economic
situation of any country.

The rationale for nationalising agricultural land has not been clearly
defined but it is clearly a retrogressive step. One question that arises is
whether or not at a conceptual level the institution of private ownership is
alien to African societies as there is a view that seems to suggest that
traditional African society is inherently communal. At the heart of the
problem in contemporary Africa is the apparent conflict between the
so-called traditional (African) and modern (Western) values. It is often
suggested that while traditional society values communal ownership, Western
society privileges individualism and private ownership. At the national
level, this value of communal ownership is expressed in the form of
nationalisation with the state purportedly acting as the guardian of people
and custodian of property for the people. It is often argued that there is
no place for individualism in African society, and because communal
ownership is purportedly for the good of all members of society, we must
make it the foundation of our relationship with property. This is not only
wrong but it is at variance with the realities of modern African societies.

Opponents of private ownership conveniently forget that the so-called
traditional African society is not static. Likewise, the values of that
society are not fixed in time but are dynamic and change in form and
character in response to changes in society. From that perspective, it is
clear that African society is not what it was in the 19th century and
similarly its values have changed. The values of individualism and private
ownership have been embraced by both rural and urban Zimbabweans and
co-exist with the remaining aspects communalism that may still be the basis
of relations between people. The acquisition and protection of ownership of
things are some of the key characteristics of Zimbabwean society today. Both
movable and immovable assets are the subjects of Zimbabweans' desire to own
and protect in individual capacities. When the state justifies
nationalisation with reference to traditional values, it is taking society
to an age that many can hardly relate to. Whatever our denials we, including
the leaders have embraced the so-called western value of private ownership.
By this constitutional amendment, the sate is simply imposing a system that
is discredited, alien and at variance with modern society's values.

Given the fashionable reference to all things Chinese as the alternative, it
is perhaps ironic that Zimbabwe is going in the opposite direction compared
to our Eastern friends. In 2004, the Chinese parliament endorsed landmark
changes to the Constitution to enable, for the first time since the 1949
Revolution, to protect the right to private property. This represented the
decline of a key tenet of communist China, which by and large demonstrates
the Chinese' calculated embrace of capitalist characteristics, albeit with
caution. The disaster that followed nationalisation of land in Tanzania
under Mwalimu Nyerere is well documented. One could be tempted to remark
that Zimbabwe is experimenting. It is not. By this amendment, it is simply
learning from others' mistakes to make similar ones.

The Chinese and others have embraced private ownership because empirical
evidence shows that it is a necessary tool for promoting economic
development. Pressure for reform came also from the Chinese business
community, whom ironically, we are trying to attract. The ability to own
things drives the human being to be inventive and to invest labour and
capital into more production and efficiency. Ownership facilitates freedom
as it gives a person personal jurisdiction of his property.

The state fails to realise that besides skill and experience, the white
commercial farmers were able to carry out viable business on the farms
because they had title to the land. The availability of title meant that
they were able to participate in the financial markets as commercial
businesses, thereby benefiting from the instruments designed specifically to
meet their needs. This falls away with nationalisation - effectively wiping
out the economic value of land in the markets. The amendment will
undoubtedly cause a major setback to any economic turnaround efforts. It
sends out the message that Zimbabwe is not prepared to embrace free market
economics and protect investor rights. Who would want to invest in a country
where his security of title is constantly under threat?

In all industrialised and emerging economies, the right to private property
is held in high esteem and given ample protection. The right of the state to
acquire land is generally accepted but the state is held accountable for its
actions and laws that affect property rights. In this respect Clause 16B has
serious defects.

First, by ousting the jurisdiction of the courts it is effectively violating
the time-honoured principle of separation of powers between parliament, the
executive and the judiciary. This separation is crucial for the purpose of
maintaining checks and balances against the abuse of power by any of the
branches of government. The Judiciary acts as a bulwark against the
encroachment into the rights of citizens by the Legislature and the
Executive. This more pertinent in many African countries in cases where the
Legislature is effectively captured by the Executive that is often too
powerful. In Zimbabwe, the Constitution already confers rights to approach
the courts for redress and ousting that jurisdiction goes against the
constitutional order. Worse is that Clause 16B tries to remove the right to
the protection of the law that is protected under Section 18 of the
constitution. The amendment fundamentally disturbs the institutional
arrangements that are necessary for the protection of the right to property.

Secondly, two of the paragraphs seek to legitimise the acquisitions of land
without compensation that have already taken place or might take place
before the clause becomes law. This is known as an ex post facto law, that
is, a law that seeks to apply to events that occurred before its enactment.
There is in most civilised states a general prohibition against passing such
laws, which are essentially retrospective. They are unfair because they seek
to take away rights to which citizens were legitimately entitled at the
relevant time. Law must be certain to all citizens and it is unjust to place
one at a disadvantage after the event has passed. In some countries this
prohibition applies only to criminal laws but there is no reason why a
similar approach should not apply to civil laws.

In the same vein, clearly, this retrospective amendment goes against the
legitimate expectations of citizens. Under the Constitution, they had
legitimate expectations to approach the courts of law for redress at the
time of acquisition. They also had legitimate expectations to receive fair
compensation for their property. This amendment cannot now purport to take
away those legitimate expectations - it would be a clear violation of
international human rights law. The danger of allowing a change of this
character will in future open the way for the state to violate the law with
reckless abandon, only to provide a cover of legitimacy by enacting
retroactive constitutional amendments.

In conclusion, the amendments will do more harm to the country in the long
term that the framers seem to conveniently overlook at this stage. The
confidence of investors will decline further while the credit rating of the
country and businesses will be drastically reduced. The land question is not
simply a political matter nor is land simply needed for sentimental reasons.
It is a key economic issue and sadly, this amendment is based on misdirected
economic policies. The real revolution will manifest when people who get
land are given title to it - to use it as they wish and when a person has
freedom over their property, he is more likely to put it to better use.

Not when it is at risk of compulsory acquisition without recourse to the
courts. James Madison once stated that, "In framing a government which is to
be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must
first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place
oblige it to control itself." In Zimbabwe, by ousting the judiciary as far
as land is concerned, clearly the Executive is rejecting control. Parliament
must think long and hard before passing this dangerous amendment into law
for it is a mortal danger to the economy.
Dr A T Magaisa specialises in corporate & financial services law. He can be
contacted at

Back to the Top
Back to Index

New Zimbabwe

Daily News' demise: was it an inside job?

By Staff Reporter
Last updated: 08/01/2005 14:46:34
THE Daily News' demise could have been an inside job, according to
sensational claims by some of the company's directors.

It has also emerged that managers at Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe
(ANZ) -- publishers of the banned newspaper -- rowed over the paper's
non-registration which directly led to its closure, New can

Electronic mail exchanges between the paper's senior managers and majority
shareholder, Strive Masiyiwa, reveal serious concerns at the decision not to
register the paper in line with new legislation passed in May 2002.

The Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Aippa), which was
passed in May 2002, gave media organisations up to December of that year to
register with a government appointed commission.

All other papers but The Daily News and its sister paper, The Daily News on
Sunday, registered.

The decision not to register led to internal rifts within The Daily News,
and the paper's editor Geoffrey Nyarota was unceremoniously dismissed on
December 30, 2002, after he openly expressed disquiet with the management's
decision to defy the law.

Although The Daily News became an "illegal" newspaper on 1 January 2003, it
was only shut down in September 2003 after the Supreme Court ruled the paper
was illegally publishing. The Supreme Court said The Daily News had gone to
court with "dirty hands", having defied a law which media groups say is

However, correspondence exchanged from January to September, 2003, between
executives, directors and shareholders of ANZ reveals some fatalistic legal
advice given to senior managers and an arrogant defiance in areas, which
gifted the government with an opportunity to shut down The Daily News.

In an unpublished e-mail, Judith Todd, a former director at ANZ, expresses
the view that ANZ chairman Samuel Sipepa Nkomo and former Zimpapers chief
executive Matthews Kunaka, drafted in as a director, had a death wish for
the company.

In one e-mail, dated January 6, 2003, addressed to Norman Nyazema, the
chairman of Masiyiwa's Independent Media Group (IMG), Todd blasted: "The
Daily News is one of the few lifelines to sanity we have left. I do not want
to be complicit in allowing it to be destroyed."

Todd further reveals growing intolerance to dissent within the management,
likening it to Zanu PF. She said: "'The ruling party' and 'the majority
shareholders' have a distinctly similar ring and a totally identical
purpose: simply to shut out any dissenting views. I do not understand how
Sam Nkomo has been able to accrue and wield such power, such destructive
power as it turns out, without the knowledge let alone consent of the

Just before Nkomo's appointment, Nyarota had commissioned a series of
stories linking him to corruption at the Mining and Industry Pension Fund
(MIPF). He had been forced to resign but the case was dropped before plea
after his co-accused Trevor Carelse-Juu skipped the country ahead of a
police probe.

Stuart Mattinson, one of the ANZ directors who backed the company's decision
not to register was tackled by Masiyiwa in September 2003 after the paper's
legal challenge collapsed. He insisted that the government would have closed
the paper down anyway.

However, he revealed there was internal strife among top managers, and that
there was poor or no legal advice at all to help them in dealing with the
crisis at the company.

Said Mattinson: "I am most concerned that we appear to have been caught
unawares and our response has not been fully considered, indeed it seems
that we have left our executive team to decide on strategy, determine a
legal position and tactics and at the same time deal with the illegal and
thuggish tactics of those who would like to see us permanently closed."

However, Mattinson was unrepentant over the botched court challenge, or the
legal faux pas, saying: "Our principled stand is not the cause of our
closure, it simply gave our enemies an opportunity to attack us, had this
course of action not been available to them, then I have absolutely no doubt
that they would have engineered some other 'quasi legal' ruse to close us

The latest revelations will add succour to Nyarota's claims that internal
bungling, possibly deliberate, had led to The Daily News' closure. The
publisher of the Zimbabwe Independent and the Standard, Trevor Ncube, has
also voiced similar concerns.

Said Ncube: "I believe that this could all have been avoided had Nkomo
agreed to join (then Financial Gazette proprietor Elias) Rusike and myself
in our decision to register our newspapers and then launch a constitutional
challenge against this Act."

According to Nyarota, ANZ management "gambled on a matter of principle and
relied solely on a suicidal battle against a regime notorious for its
determination not to uphold the rule of law."

Former Information Minister, Jonathan Moyo, who was one of the drafters of
AIPPA claimed in an interview on Afro Sounds FM last Thursday that The Daily
News would be in operation if its managers had registered it.

"Without a doubt, the paper would be selling on the streets," Moyo said to
questions on the Zimbabwe Today programme. "The Daily News managers had
enough time from May 2002 to launch an appeal with the courts before the
December deadline but they chose defiance. Even when they were operating
illegally from January 2003, we did not close them down and waited for the
courts to decide on their fate and that decision came in September 2003."

Moyo, now an Independent MP for Tsholotsho, however insists that the Media
and Information Commission is now abusing its position by refusing to grant
The Daily News a licence.

Nkomo insists that Nyarota is bitter, and that he was fired because he was
running the company's finances down. He says no positive or negative action
on ANZ's part would have stopped the government from shutting the paper

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Canberra Times

poor of Zimbabwe
Monday, 1 August 2005

WITH one or two exceptions, the political and economic development of
post-colonial Africa makes for bleak reading. And none makes for a more
pessimistic study than Zimbabwe, strait-jacketed by the tyrannical rule of
Robert Mugabe and gripped by economic chaos and widespread human suffering.
Corrupt and authoritarian rule is not just peculiar to Africa, of course,
but the continent has become a byword for despotism, exacerbated, it has to
be said, by 19th- and 20th-century European colonisers whose primary aims
were economic enrichment and geo-political advantage. They drew borders
without regard to ethnic considerations, played tribes off against each
other to entrench their rule, and didn't resile from employing force and
superior military technology to put down any threat or opposition to their
rule. There can be little surprise that many African nations have had
difficulty overcoming this largely toxic colonial inheritance, or the
inherently anti-democratic traditions of tribal rule. The often sorry
history of modern Africa is replete with the political king figure, or "big
man" of some promise who invariably goes on to demonstrate Lord Acton's
dictum that "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Unlike colonisers elsewhere in Africa, the British left a relatively
generous legacy to Zimbabwe, but the road to independence was complicated by
the renegade rule of Ian Smith, who'd issued a unilateral declaration of
independence in 1965 in a bid to head off black majority rule. The bitter
civil war that came later was waged by guerrilla forces, that, ominously,
were divided on tribal lines. However, when Mugabe came to power after
elections in 1980 in a coalition with fellow guerrilla leader Joshua Nkomo,
the auguries appeared bright. In a spirit of reconciliation, the sizeable
(and substantially native-born) white minority was encouraged to stay on to
continue running farms and businesses. Mugabe, the avowed Marxist
revolutionary who'd declared that the new nation would be non-aligned, was
lionised by fellow African leaders and others engaged in their own
independence struggles both in Africa and elsewhere. Surprisingly this
goodwill has endured, and Mugabe has exploited it ruthlessly .

Despite the optimism, it took little time for tribal rivalries to emerge in
the new Zimbabwe. In 1982, Joshua Nkomo was expelled from the cabinet after
accusations that he was plotting a coup. Handily for Mugabe, the state of
emergency first declared before Smith's UDI had been kept in place, and this
was now exploited to quell dissension among the Ndebele followers of Nkomo.
Mugabe set about amending the constitution, making changes that saw him
become head of state in 1988. Other changes followed, further consolidating
his Shona-dominated Zanu-PF party's grip on power and emasculating its
political opponents.

For 25 years Mugabe has displayed rat cunning in maintaining his ruthless
hold on power - by turns pious, populist, and defiant. He's played the race
card frequently and without hesitation, scapegoated minorities without
compunction, thumbed his nose at international critics and shrugged off
economic sanctions - though at substantial cost to ordinary Zimbabweans. So
successful has he been in quelling internal opposition and side-lining
potential political rivals within his own party that even trips abroad - the
traditional time for overthrowing unpopular African leaders - hold no fears,
as he's demonstrated with his current visit to Beijing.

Earlier this month Zimbabwe police resumed a slum-demolition campaign in the
country's main cities dubbed "Operation Drive Out Trash". Mugabe claims the
program is an urban clean-up campaign. In reality, the demolitions are to
punish those people who voted for the opposition Movement for Democratic
Change at the March elections. A recent report on the slum demolitions by UN
special envoy Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka has been called by Secretary-General
Kofi Annan "profoundly distressing". Characteristically, Mugabe has
denounced the report as hostile and biased.

There's no apparent logic behind the persecution of Zimbabwe's poorest
peasants, especially as the March election delivered Zanu-PF almost total
control of the Parliament and gave it carte blanche to again alter the
constitution. Now aged 81, Mugabe has also hinted that he won't stand at the
next presidential election in 2008. It would seem his main reason for
conducting the campaign is simply that he can.

Mugabe's megalomania would be impossible without his fellow African leaders,
many of whom choose to ignore his egregious rule out of misguided
perceptions of African solidarity. Few could bring any pressure to bear
anyway, regardless of how much they might be embarrassed by Mugabe in
private. The one country that could, South Africa, is actually aiding and
abetting the regime while ostensibly encouraging contact between Zanu-PF and
the MDC. It continues to supply oil and electricity on credit to the
bankrupt nation, and has said it's prepared to pay off part of Zimbabwe's
large IMF debt to save it from expulsion. South African President Thabo
Mbeki's caution reflects not just the bonds between fellow revolutionaries
but also fears that overt interference could cause splits in his own ruling
coalition, and the belief, at best naive, that the kind of conflict
resolution that transformed South Africa can be replicated in Zimbabwe.

Mugabe has another significant benefactor in China, which is pumping
millions into the economy with an eye to securing some of the country's
mineral wealth. Such comfort and aid highlights just how limited are the
options left for the international community to bring Mugabe into line.
Neither censure nor sanctions have worked. George W. Bush's hope that
President Mbeki might be "point man" on Zimbabwe was wishful thinking. To
increase international support for the pro-democracy movement in Zimbabwe is
to risk further victimisation campaigns.

Strategic engagement with multilateral bodies such as the African Union
probably represent the best hope. But given there are no strategic
imperatives for increased Western involvement in Zimbabwe, what would happen
is precisely nothing. Tragically for the Zimbabwean people, the only things
likely to deliver them from Mugabe are a humanitarian disaster too big for
the West to ignore, or the death of the president himself.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

The Herald

Zim, Bangladesh investors set to construct pharmaceutical firm

Business Reporter
Zimbabwe investors are working in partnership with a Bangladeshi firm to
construct a multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical company, which will save the
country millions in foreign currency currently spent on importing drugs.

In the long run, the establishment of the company would also help the
country earn foreign currency from the export of pharmaceutical products to
the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) and other international

Bilateral agreements between Zimbabwe and the Asian country had already been
signed while funding mechanisms were being vigorously pursued.

It is envisaged that the joint venture project would take advantage of the
abundant resources on the continent to produce medicines for Africa as well
as the world at large.

The Ministry of Trade and International Trade and the Bangladesh authorities
are spearheading the project, which is expected to gobble up billions of
dollars in both foreign and local currency in its initial phases.

Technical experts are also expected to be recruited to ensure the project
becomes a reality.

The establishment of the company is line with the Government's import
substitution strategy aimed at conserving scarce foreign currency resources.

The country has been spending large sums of foreign currency to import
medicines despite immense potential to add value to its vast stocks of
medicinal plants.

Meanwhile, the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (Comesa)
Multi-Disciplinary Technical Working Group on the Pharmaceutical Sector has
met to discuss ways of implementing the pharmaceutical harmonisation

The meeting was attended by delegates from National Drug Regulatory
Authorities (NDRAs) and the private sector from Egypt, Kenya, Malawi,
Mauritius, Uganda, Seychelles, Sudan, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe as well
as representatives of the East African Community.

The delegates constituted a technical working group on the pharmaceutical
sector, which will meet at least once a year to oversee the implementation
of the pharmaceutical harmonisation process, including the establishment of
the Mutual Recognition Arrangements for registration of medicines and
inspection of manufacturing facilities in the trading bloc.

It will also oversee the preparation of a business plan for the
establishment of a permanent regional regulatory authority with due
cognisance of the operations of NDRAs.

A steering committee of four member states, namely Kenya, Uganda, Zambia and
Zimbabwe, was appointed to continue the work programme of preparing NDRAs
towards the next steps in the harmonisation process.

It was found that pharmaceuticals worth billions of United States dollars
are imported by Comesa member states every year, despite the existence of a
vibrant pharmaceutical manufacturing sector in the region.

The measures being put in place to facilitate trade in pharmaceutical
products will contribute significantly to growing trade in pharmaceutical
products in the region, within the framework of the Comesa Free Trade Area.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

The Times


            August 01, 2005

            Forced return to Zimbabwe
            From Mr Alistair Burt, MP for Bedfordshire North
East(Conservative) and others

            Sir, On August 4 Mr Justice Collins will resume a judicial
review hearing, in which he is taking evidence on the safety of returning to
Zimbabwe those whose asylum applications have not been successful in this
            We do not believe he should be in this position. We remain
concerned and disappointed that, in the face of all the evidence from
Zimbabwe, the British Government persists in forced removals to that

            As evidence mounts of the risk to those returning who have
sought refuge in this country, with our long tradition of providing a safe
haven for those fleeing from persecution, and as the UNHCR restates its view
that it is not safe for any nation to have such a policy, we call upon the
British Government to spare itself the embarrassment of having the High
Court take a decision which should be its own, and announce an immediate
resumption of a moratorium on enforced removals.

            ALISTAIR BURT
            FRANCES D'SOUZA
            EVAN HARRIS
            (Liberal Democrat MP)
            KATE HOEY
            (Labour MP)
            DAVID STEEL
            Biggleswade, Bedfordshire

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Canberra Times

The bad boys of global politics
Moises Naim.
Monday, 1 August 2005

WILL John Bolton, the next US ambassador to the United Nations, and Robert
Mugabe, the long-standing tyrant of Zimbabwe, do for global governance what
Enron's Ken Lay and WorldCom's Bernie Ebbers did for corporate governance?
It took high-profile scandals at Enron and WorldCom to shock public opinion
and politicians out of their complacency with the abusive practices of
corporate chieftains. New laws and a heightened public awareness have
created a corporate environment where the abuses and the impunity common in
the past are less tolerated.

Lay and Ebbers are now symbols of greed, and their conduct sparked major
reforms in the way private corporations are governed. Will Bolton's and
Mugabe's roles in the United Nations mobilise the needed political energy to
change the way it and other international organisations function?

Bolton once famously noted that, in his opinion, "There is no such thing as
the United Nations," and that "if the UN secretariat building in New York
lost 10 storeys, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

During his Senate confirmation hearings, a former colleague testified to
Bolton's being a "serial abuser" of subordinates who disagreed with him.
They painted an image of an ambassador who was more bully than diplomat. Now
Bolton is being sent to New York to reform the very institution whose
existence and utility he so frequently and stridently questioned.

As observers were digesting the paradox of having Bolton as the US envoy to
the United Nations, the world body announced a more routine but no less
incredible decision: Zimbabwe was re-elected as a full member of the UN
Human Rights Commission. Yes, Zimbabwe, the poor nation ruled by the
dictator Robert Mugabe, one of the world's worst human rights offenders. It
may sound crazy to have a regime that intimidates its political opposition
through violence and starvation sit in judgment of other states' human
rights records. But it is not as crazy as who is responsible for Zimbabwe's
re-election. The answer: No-one.

Sure, there was an official election and a formal session in New York on
April 27 in which countries cast their votes. But, in practice, these
procedures are designed to mask any responsibility for the decisions the
organisation takes.

The governing body of the Human Rights Commission is the UN Economic and
Social Council. EcoSoc, as this group of 54 nations is called, is in turn
divided into regional groups, and each of these blocs is automatically
entitled to a certain number of seats on the Human Rights Commission.

This year, the 14 African members put forward three newcomers, Botswana,
Cameroon, and Morocco, as candidates for membership and proposed that
Zimbabwe be re-elected. Thus, 14 African ambassadors to the United Nations -
or in some cases their EcoSoc representatives - "voted", and the new and
re-elected member nations were selected to serve three-year terms on the
Human Rights Commission.

In the same way, Cuba, another human rights exemplar, was re-elected in 2003
by Latin American and Caribbean countries, and Asian states have re-elected
China every three years since 1982. According to Freedom House, 30 per cent
of the countries now on the Human Rights Commission are themselves serial
human-rights violators.

If such levels of hypocrisy are considered acceptable, indeed normal, in UN
circles today, one is tempted to conclude that Bolton and the United Nations
deserve each other. In despair, one is also tempted to just forget about the
United Nations and the sad and expensive charade played in Geneva each year
by the more than 3000 delegates who attend the sessions of the Human Rights
Commission. But to do so would be wrong.

Wrong because, despite the United Nations' dysfunction, the world's
dependence on such bodies is growing, not shrinking.

We need them despite the fact that they are slow, inefficient, often
ineffective, a bit ridiculous, and sometimes corrupt. No country acting
alone will make a dent in the well-known and rapidly expanding list of
problems - air pollution, human trafficking, nuclear proliferation, to name
a few - whose nature is as global as their solutions should be.

And in a strange alchemy, the foul odours of corruption, waste, and
ineptitude that pervade the United Nations may be transmuting into, if not
strong winds of change, at least a breeze of reform. The debate over the war
in Iraq, the oil-for-food scandal, and the high-profile missteps of several
senior UN officials (including accusations of nepotism, sexual harassment,
and graft) have all created a mood where change may be possible.

Kofi Annan, the embattled UN secretary-general, has proposed reforms that
seek to change many things at the world body, including its shameful Human
Rights Commission.

This spring, UN members will consider his proposed reforms, offering a good
test case of the world's desire for a better United Nations. But optimism
must be tempered with scepticism. World leaders have grown accustomed to
coexisting with a weak and malfunctioning United Nations. Reform of the
organisation will not take place as a result of the efforts of any single
individual - not those of an infuriatingly diplomatic secretary-general nor
those of a vociferous and bullying US ambassador.

Change will come only when governments and their publics - that is, you and
I - realise that their future is, in part, dependent on how well the United
Nations works.

If the reputations of Bolton and Mugabe help raise that awareness, then they
may be the two best things ever to happen to the United Nations.

Reproduced with permission from Foreign Policy 149 (July/August 2005) Copyright 2005, Carnegie Endowment for International

Moises Naim is editor in chief of Foreign Policy.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Busness Report

Zimbabwe bailout will do wonders for SA
July 25, 2005

By Quentin Wray

The South African government looks set to bail Zimbabwe's President Robert
Mugabe out of the fairly deep hole he has dug for himself - and more than 13
million of his fellow citizens.

There will, as in all foreign-funded bailouts, be strings attached. As a
South African taxpayer, I think this is entirely appropriate - if we are to
make the choice to spend money on other countries' problems rather than our
own, then we must ensure that our foreign policy priorities are met.

Despite this reality, the rhetoric coming out of Harare is that despite
Zimbabwe facing its worst crisis in 25 years - with unemployment above 70
percent, inflation in triple digits and acute shortages of foreign currency,
food and fuel - Mugabe will not accept conditions attached to any loan -
even if these conditions are as fundamental to basic human rights as halting
the demolition of shanty towns, restoring the rule of law and resuming
political talks aimed at normalising the situation.

The loan will, if attached to suitable conditions, spell the end of the
failed policy of quiet diplomacy and will do wonders for South Africa's
international reputation and, accordingly, its chances of making one of the
UN security council seats its own.

Closer to home, the machinery of the economy - which has made it possible
for South Africa to give foreign aid - will continue working.

On the economic front, Statistics SA will release consumer inflation data on
Wednesday. If CPIX, which excludes mortgage interest and is the measure used
to determine monetary policy and interest rates, comes in lower than
expected, further rate cuts could be on the cards.

Producer inflation data will be released on Thursday, with private sector
credit growth, money supply and trade data all set to be released on Friday.

On the markets, short-term insurer Mutual & Federal (M&F) and Anglo American
Platinum (Angloplat) will kick off the reporting season.

Resource stocks are going to become the flavour of the month again following
a long time in the doldrums in the wake of the rand's strength.

Earlier this month M&F, which is controlled by insurance giant Old Mutual,
said half-year basic and headline earnings a share would be up by as much as
80 percent from the year before.

Angloplat, which is majority owned by resources behemoth Anglo American, has
said it expects profits to jump by up to 35 percent.

Other companies reporting results this week include diamond producer De
Beers, paper maker Sappi, which puts out third-quarter production data, and
MTN, which releases its latest subscriber numbers.

Analysts say De Beers will probably have grown half-year sales 11 percent to
$3.31 billion (R21.9 billion) on the back of higher prices and ramped-up

De Beers, which controls over half the world's diamond supply, is 45 percent
owned by mining conglomerate Anglo American and 45 percent by the
Oppenheimer family. The government of Botswana owns the balance.

What will be of great interest will be how De Beers sees the impact of
China's revaluation of its currency last week.

This could boost demand in that fast-growing economy as it could,
theoretically at least, make commodity imports cheaper for Chinese buyers.

We will also look for details on the company's long-awaited black economic
empowerment deal.

-With additional reporting by Reuters
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Chimanikire out

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Aug-01

MDC deputy secretary general Gift Chimanikire, arrested last Thursday
following skirmishes in Mbare as Vice- President Joseph Msika officially
opened the Mbare Musika vegetable market, was released on Saturday by the
Harare magistrates' court on $500 000 bail.
Chimanikire, who was arrested together with three other MDC youths, is
facing allegations of contravening the Firearms Act after he was reportedly
found in possession of a shotgun without a licence.
According to his lawyer Alec Muchadehama: "Initially he was facing public
violence charges but in court the State charged him with breaching the
firearms act only."
The MDC youths who were with Chimanikire when the alleged violence occurred,
namely Edmore Manyota, Prosper Dongo and Stephen Mutsipa, were also freed on
$700 000 bail each.
The trio stand accused of contravening provisions of the Public Order and
Security Act (Posa).
The State further claims that the accused proceeded to threaten Zanu PF
youths with pistols, resulting in the chaos after which they allegedly
jumped into Chimanikire's vehicle and fled. "The state is alleging that they
were arrested when they sought refuge at Mbare Police Station where they
were seeking to make a counter report of assault," Muchadehama said.
As part of their bail conditions, the accused were ordered to report to the
Criminal Investigation Department (CID) every Friday and not to interfere
with State witnesses.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Property scam sucks in High Court master

Takunda Maodza
issue date :2005-Aug-01

THE Master of the High Court, Charles Nyatanga, has been sucked in the
controversial sale of two factories belonging to former businessman Bobby
Maparanyanga in a court case (No. HC 3168/054). The incident allegedly
occurred more than a decade ago.

In his founding affidavit, Maparanyanga is bitter over the manner in which
the sheriff of the High Court auctioned the property, saying the proceeds
were meant to clear a debt Maparanyanga had with Zimbank.
 Maparanyanga claims that in October 1993, Zimbank obtained an order against
Handiwork and Associated Industries (Pvt) Ltd - which ruled that he pays the
bank (plaintiff in the matter) $552 028,30 with interest at the rate of 44
percent per annum to settle the debt.
"Using that judgment, Zimbank caused the immovable property Lot 1 of
Willowvale Harare . to be attached in execution by the deputy sheriff and
the legitimate sale in execution of the attached property was to take place
on December 16 1995 at 10 am," Maparanyanga claimed.
He further claimed that on December 15 1994, Zimbank instructed its legal
practitioner (case HC 5904/93) to stop and cancel the sale in execution and
in turn legal practitioners Gill, Godlonton and Gerrans (G G G) instructed
the sheriff to cancel the sale in execution of the said property.
A copy of the letter from G G G Legal Practitioners to the High Court
Sheriff dated December 16 1994 read: "We refer to the Sale in Execution of
the immovable property belonging to the defendant . being Lot 1 of
Willowvale which is due to take place at 10 am. We act on behalf of the
plaintiff (Zimbank) who has advised us that arrangements have been made with
the defendant for payment of the judgment debt.
"They have requested us to instruct you not to proceed with the Sale in
Execution. We apologise for the short notice of cancellation and look
forward to receiving your statement of account."
Maparanyanga argues the Sheriff did not stop the sale in execution, despite
being instructed to cancel it by the creditor.
"Whoever wanted to participate in the proceeds of the sale in execution
could then not do so since the creditor, Zimbank, had cancelled the sale in
execution of the property," he said. For reasons not in line with the
purpose of the sale in execution or for the purpose of it, the sheriff
allegedly ignored Zimbank's instruction and proceeded to sell the property,
Maparanyanga said.  "The sheriff, however, despite being instructed before
the auction to cancel the sale in execution did not cancel the sale in
execution. The illegal thing happened. The sale in execution went ahead,
despite instructions to cancel it by the creditor (Zimbank) who had
initially instructed the sheriff to sell the property in execution,"
lamented Maparanyanga.
Ashtec (Pvt) Ltd was declared the highest bidder, Maparanyanga said.
However, he adds that the deputy sheriff claimed that the  property had
fetched a very low price, which meant that the sheriff could not proceed
with the distribution of the proceeds of the sale in execution but to revert
to the creditor for new instructions.
Alternatives available were either to re-advertise and re-sell in execution
or let the property be sold by private treaty.
Maparanyanga said the public sale in execution of the property fetched $750
000 plus 10 percent deposit ($75 000) making a total of $825 000.
"The sheriff did not obtain a new mandate or new authority or new
instructions from the creditor (Zimbank) .obviously because the sheriff had
already been instructed to cancel the sale in execution of the property,"
Maparanyanga said.
He adds: "The Applicant has since learned from G G G Legal Practitioners
that when they wrote to the sheriff asking why the sheriff had not cancelled
the sale in execution as instructed, the sheriff did not reply."
The legal practitioners are said to have later phoned the sheriff who
advised them that there had been another writ of execution of Stanbic in
respect of a judgment against the applicant in favour of the bank, which
wanted to participate in the proceeds of the sale. "What is most perturbing
and mind boggling is that a fictitious distribution plan was drawn up by the
sheriff," Maparanyanga charged.
Anomalies Maparanyanga noted in the distribution included the fact that it
reflected proceeds of the sale in execution as $900 000 which, he said, was
not true.
Further, Stanbic, which had caused the sheriff to fail to stay the
execution, is not included in the distribution plan while G G G is included.
"The creditor (Zimbank), despite G G G being included in this fictitious
distribution plan, was not paid any money from the so-called proceeds of the
sale of execution," noted Maparanyanga.
He added: "The first respondent (Zimbank) was paid the judgment debtor by
(Mr) Bobby Maparanyanga."
Maparanyanga further argues that though Ashtec was declared the highest
bidder, the property was never transferred into its name.
"The property was transferred into the name of one who never attended the
sale nor bought the property at the public auction sale in execution," he
said, adding "to this day Ashtec (Pvt) Ltd never owned the property it is
said to have bought at the public auction sale aforesaid and declared the
highest bidder."
Maparanyanga claims Ashtec (Pvt) Ltd ended at the distribution plan drawn on
May 02 1995 and has never been heard of again. "For reasons legally
inexplicable and incomprehensible, the property which was sold at a public
auction sale in execution was transferred from Harare Car Breakers Sales and
Repairs in whose name it (the property) was, to one Charles Nyatanga who did
not attend the public auction sale, one who did not buy the property at the
public auction sale or by private treaty, one who was not even declared the
highest bidder, a clear man from the blues who gave himself authority to
transfer the property into his name - one wonders what his interests are and
why it was done that way and with whose authority," Maparanyanga said.
He claimed the property was later transferred from Charles Nyatanga to
Ashman (Pvt) Ltd.
 "But today the property aforesaid in this litigation is registered in
Ashman Pvt Ltd. One wonders why," Maparanyanga asked in his affidavit.
He adds: "The bonds that were registered on the Deed of Transfer and the
Caveats that were placed on the Deed of Transfer were cancelled and uplifted
respectively without the authority of bond holders and those who had placed
the Caveats on the Deed of Transfer.
"The bond holders and those who had placed the Caveats on the Deed of
Transfer were later paid by Bobby Maparanyanga at a very later year and
later date."
In the High Court Maparanyanga is seeking an order that the Deed of Transfer
registered in the name of Ashman (Pvt) Ltd on February 17 1995 be cancelled
and that the Deed of Transfer listed in the name of the second applicant,
Harare Car Breakers Sales and Repairs, reinstated.
Several efforts to get comment from Nyatanga proved fruitless yesterday.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Cape Times

      Where's Zimbabwe?
      August 1, 2005

      Is there another country in the world called Zimbabwe? I only ask
because the Zimbabwe that is described by the ANC seems to be a different
country to that which I thought was located to the north of South Africa and
has a mad dictator in charge, called Robert Mugabe.

      On Friday July 29, President Thabo Mbeki said: "It was wrong to
suggest that Zimbabwe's land reform programme was marred by corruption"
("Harare stalled land reforms 'to help SA freedom talks'.") I'm sorry, Mr
President, but isn't the allocation of farms, in many cases more than one,
personally to Mugabe, his family,

      friends, senior military officers and government ministers a corrupt

      In the same issue, Finance Minister Trevor Manuel states "the worst
thing we can have is a failed state or a rogue state on our borders". You
can see my confusion, because I thought Zimbabwe was a failed state, and a
rogue state, and is on South Africa's border.
      Steve Cattell
      Constantia Hills

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Angola and Zimbabwe – The Frontline States


Rafael Marques


Right after independence, in 1975, a great sense of African solidarity ran across the Angolan society, regardless of the realpolitik of the time. “Our struggle continues in Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa”, highlighted a propaganda slogan.


Nowadays, South Africa and Namibia have built solid grounds for freedom, peace and stability through reconciliation, democracy and political commonsense, in the past 15 years. While Angola is battling its way up, from the shambles of war and misrule, the other Southern Africa country, Zimbabwe, is on its way down. This country had made great human progress, in 20 years of independence.


At some point, I decided to visit Zimbabwe to learn how that once-lighthouse for Africa’s human development and stability had gone so wrong. Civil society player A. Nongongo gave me the most compelling explanation on why such a well-educated people had failed to prevent the country’s derailment. He said Zimbabweans were driven to have the best education possible and to strive as individuals, but were not taught to be citizens. The belief of the people was that the State was to protect and provide them with a sort of paternal guidance. But, in reality, there was a fine line between the role of the State and that of ZANU-PF.


The ill resolved land redistribution and the not much love between black and white communities, had been idling for almost 20 years. At a crucial time, these were fanned to flame. They were politically re-mastered by ZANU-PF leadership to reassert its control of power. It made the landless, the poor, the veterans and the opportunists believe that the day had come for them to share the spoils. But, as in Angola, only a few have benefited from chaos. When it happened, according to A. Nongongo, the critical mass was somewhat at a loss.


The ensuing political battles have been a defeat to Zimbabwe’s people and its achievements. Today, thousands of Zimbabweans are damned to die of starvation. Most of the people have to live in a state of permanent fear.


The twist of democracy


Zimbabwe has become a landmark case on how an electoral process can be used to further plunge the country into darkness and how it is used to twist a democratic system back into a de facto tyranny.


Angola and Zimbabwe, though in different circumstances, share a common trend. At crucial moments, both civil societies put much emphasis on the hope that the international community and elections would or could help resolve the situation, and not on internal pressure.


In Angola it happened, once again, in 2002, after the death of then rebel leader Jonas Savimbi, with the expectation placed on the outcomes of talks between the contenders and the role played by the UN and international observers.


As for Zimbabwe, the faith was placed on the international community’s sanctions after the 2002 presidential elections, widely condemned as rigged. The highly flawed and questionable 2005 parliamentarian elections further strengthened Mugabe’s regime grip on power, as his party ZANU-PF was awarded a two-thirds majority.


Thus, people have lost the belief in their own ability and courage to change the situation of the country to best serve people’s needs.


Like Angola, Zimbabwe’s civil society is overwhelmingly dependent on the goodwill or strategic conveniences of foreign donors. In Angola, such reliance happens in a country with abundant natural resources, which renders its power holders the most effective means in corrupting and squandering of resources.


Meanwhile, Mugabe’s regime has sought legitimacy, through an internally combined use of a resounding black-nationalist rhetoric, violence and unjust laws. This did not cost him, it helped him. He added the diplomatic support from African countries and, more recently, mass demolitions of neighborhoods suspected of being strongholds of opposition supporters.


Had Mugabe plenty of natural resources (oil) to offer, he would have mastered the support or the silence of the West as well as Dos Santos, from Angola, and Nguema from Equatorial Guinea.  


In both circumstances, the international support has not been helpful to changes neither in Angola, where the government uses and abuses it, nor in Zimbabwe where the civil society and the opposition had received it plenty. Or else, one can say what a mixed blessing!


Such a fact is a lesson on how fundamental is internal pressure, regardless of factors of fear or fragmentation, and how fickle international support can be.


The shield of fear


In both countries fear of repression has been highlighted as one of the main hindrances for people to push for changes.


Let us, for the moment, exclude fear from violence as an argument to justify people’s passivity to demand accountability from and the halting of power abuse by government. One has to bear in mind that usually violence is executed by the foot soldiers, the masses themselves.


During the liberation struggle for independence, and until very recently, in countries like DRC and Angola, to name two that I am most familiar with, scores of fighters would run against bullets - chests out - because they believed witchcraft had bullet proofed them. Che-Guevara learnt about the belief in dawa during his expeditionary mission to Congo[1].


This is to explain that the matter of fear has to do more with the challenges of the unknown, rather than with its imposition by or might of the aggressors or rulers. Fear is a perception, after all, which can easily be overrun by a strong and common belief.  


It is up to those claiming to be alternative leaders to transform the fear of the unknown into an attainable will for change and better days ahead. It is initially about courage, mobilization and wisdom against political banditry, disguised in the form of rule.


A successful story


South Africa has been registering a very successful reconciliation and democratic process, because people fought for it and with their lives when it was necessary. The resoluteness of people in the townships like Soweto, in standing up defenseless against an all mighty and ruthless apartheid regime, greatly inspired ordinary people around the world to espouse their cause.


Those who most suffered, like Mandela, were the most engaged in promoting the truth and forgiveness but, above all, the restoration of South African black dignity.


The images of blacks being chased in Soweto have been replaced by those of a fast developing country, of Mandela’s world statesmanship, Charlize Theron’s Oscar and the hosting of 2010 Soccer World Cup. After all, it has become a country with pride for all its citizens.


It makes only sense for us to continue to fight for our freedom and to learn from one another’s experiences, strengths and weaknesses. We have to share regional solidarity, this time not by way of political leaders’ engagements, but united by the common suffering of ordinary people and against misrule. As, from Angola to Zimbabwe, a luta continua[2].  


As John Kerry has remarked, the “future doesn’t belong to fear; it belongs to freedom[3]. 

[1] Anderson, Jon Lee, Che, page 638, Grove Press, 1997.

[2] A liberation struggle slogan in Portuguese, meaning we continue our struggle.

[3] Kerry, John, acceptance speech at Democratic National Convention, Boston, M.A., July 29, 2004.

Back to the Top
Back to Index