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


Mugabe walks with new spring in step
Sun 30 May, 2004 16:11

By Cris Chinaka

HARARE (Reuters) - Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe is walking with a new
spring in his step.

Despite years of bruising political battle, the 80-year-old leader could
face elections next year with renewed vigour, armed with diplomatic support
from regional neighbours, apparent opposition weakness and -- crucially --
signs of economic recovery.

"He is looking solid and confident as his opponents are looking weaker,"
said Professor Heneri Dzinotyiwei, a political analyst from the University
of Zimbabwe.

After 24 years in power Mugabe's current presidential term ends in 2008.

But he says parliamentary elections, the next major political contest, will
be held on schedule next March five years after his ZANU-PF party scraped to
victory in a contest marred by violence and charges of widespread

Those elections were the first big setpiece of a struggle with the
opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in which government
policies, particularly over land reform, have left the economy in tatters
and the country isolated, according to critics.

In an interview with Britain's Sky TV last week, the veteran Zimbabwean
leader said his government was turning around an economy he maintains has
been sabotaged by Western and domestic opponents seeking his downfall.

There has been some improvement in fuel, foreign currency and electricity
supplies this year after Mugabe appointed a new central bank governor who
has cracked down on black market activity, yielding millions of dollars for
the government.

Inflation has fallen from over 600 percent in December to 500 percent in
April, according to official figures and independent economists say it could
fall to 200 percent this year.

Analysts say Mugabe is also reaping a benefit as South Africa and other
neighbouring states offer political support in the face of Western pressure
over his policies, including his seizure of white-owned farms for black


By contrast the MDC appears in disarray, hit by factionalism and demoralised
by a string of defeats in elections it says have been rigged and put on the
defensive by relentless street pressure from pro-government youths.

A treason trial in which MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai is accused of plotting
to kill Mugabe has also sapped the party's energy, analysts say.

Lovemore Madhuku, a government critic and chairman of political pressure
group National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), said Mugabe was likely to
deploy "his usual weapons" in the coming campaign, including violence.

"For Mugabe, it's carrots and sticks, shock troops and song. He is a
thorough man who normally leaves nothing to chance and I think he is going
to deploy all his usual weapons," he said.

ZANU-PF denies it uses violence against its opponents and accuses the MDC of
using such charges to win Western support.

More than 30 opposition supporters were killed in 2000 poll violence in
which ZANU-PF won 62 seats against the MDC's 57.

"Our fears are that there are ZANU-PF supporters who think that their
violent tactics worked last time, and that violence delivers the right
result," said Reginald Matchaba-Hove, chairman of the civic election
monitoring group Zimbabwe Election Support Network.

Back to the Top
Back to Index


        Mugabe: Out of touch, but in control

            May 30 2004 at 01:10PM

      By Patrick Laurence

      Scrutiny of the full text of this week's Sky News interview with
Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe compels the reader to the conclusion that
the veteran politician is describing a society that exists in his mind, not
the actual polity over which he has presided for nearly half a century.

      The question arises whether the 80-year-old Mugabe:

      a.. Refuses to publicly acknowledge the almost ubiquitous signs of
oppression and distress in Zimbabwe as a political stratagem calculated to
mislead television viewers and disrupt the interviewer; or

      a.. Really believes that what he says accurately portrays the state of
the postcolonial nation, of which he emerged in 1980 as the founding father
after a long struggle against the white settler government.

      The contrasting interpretations of Mugabe as a deliberate propagandist
and as an ageing politician who has taken refugee in denial are not
necessarily exclusive, however.

      The best propagandists are those who believe their own denials.

      Mugabe's opening statement is illuminating. It addresses the question
of whether the time has arrived for substantive negotiations between the
ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF) and the
opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

      "Well, if there is business to negotiate about we will welcome
negotiations," he replies blandly. "But if there is no business, I don't see
why we should talk about negotiations."

      These two sentences set the scene for his depiction of Zimbabwe as an
established democracy, in which Zanu-PF fulfils its function of governing
the country while the MDC discharges its opposition role by monitoring and
criticising government policy "in the normal way".

      Mugabe offers no comment - until prodded by further questioning - on
the fierce contestation over his re-election in the presidential poll of
March 2002, despite grave doubts in many world capitals about whether the
election was free and fair.

      Mugabe utters not a word on the indictment of MDC leader Morgan
Tsvangirai on charges of treason; nor, significantly, on the dismissal of
charges for lack of evidence against two of Tsvangirai's co-accused, MDC
general secretary Welshman Ncube and MDC parliamentarian Renson Gasela, in
August last year.

      It should be noted in parenthesis that the rejection of the case
against Ncube and Gasela gives credence to the MDC belief that the
arraignment of Tsvangirai is a political manoeuvre to discredit him and
promote Mugabe as a potential victim of assassins, and thereby neutralise
his image in some international quarters as a sponsor of state violence.

      The fiercely contested election result - which was condemned by at
least two African observer missions, those of Ghana and the Southern African
Development Community parliamentary forum - sustains neither Mugabe's
depiction of democratic normalcy in Zimbabwe nor his description of the
dissenting voices on the 2002 election as "the voice of Europe", of British
Prime Minister Tony Blair and United States President George Bush.

      The treason trial of Tsvangirai and the MDC's court application for
the 2002 presidential election to be declared null and void juxtapose
uncomfortably with Mugabe's image of Zimbabwe as a "normal" democracy.

      "We are very faithful to our democratic system," Mugabe insists in the
Sky News interview. His explanation for the early closing of the polls in
Harare - an MDC stronghold - on the third day of voting in the 2002 election
is unconvincing.

      He presents it as a measure to thwart MDC voters "trying to vote again
in large numbers". It fails to explain how the supposed aspirant fraudulent
voters planned to circumvent the preventive measures against double voting
and why several observer missions reported that the polling booths were
closed while many people were waiting to cast their votes for the first

      The recurring reports of violent attacks on MDC members by Zanu-PF
zealots, including the "war veterans" and the youth militia, is raised in
the interview, only to be denied by Mugabe, euphemised as minor scuffles and
justified as retaliation against MDC assailants.

      In an apparent attempt to deflect blame on to the MDC, Mugabe charges
that MDC loyalists went to a recent by-election in Lupane armed with axes
and spears, even though police armed with firearms protected the polling

      In the next breath, presumably to give substance to his presentation
of the MDC as the aggressor, Mugabe cites the recent episode in Zimbabwe's
parliament when white MDC stalwart Roy Bennett knocked Zanu-PF's Patrick
Chinamasa to the ground, as if pushing and shoving and even punching can be
compared to murderous attacks by Zanu-PF documented in the 2004 Amnesty
International report.

      Mugabe indulges in a similar exercise when, again in response to a
question about attacks by Zanu-PF militants on political opponents, he
refers to the punching of a protester by British Deputy Prime Minister John
Prescott during Britain's 2001 general election campaign.

      "The deputy prime minister beats a person, boxes a person and that
person falls down," Mugabe exclaims, raising his clinched fist in the air as
he demands to know whether "that is more acceptable than the violence of a
small group
      [of Zanu-PF activists] that must just be mistaken in its own belief
that violence will work".

      Mugabe's bid to shift the blame for violence in Zimbabwe on to the MDC
and to trivialise it when Zanu-PF is at fault should be set against a few
extracts from the latest Amnesty International report.

      "There was an escalation in state-sponsored attacks on critics of the
government, particularly supporters of the opposition Movement for
Democratic Change," the report states.

      "The perpetrators of human rights violations continued to enjoy
impunity and allegations against state agents remained without
investigation. The majority of the abuses were committed by ruling party
supporters and police, security and army officers against opposition

      On the question of freedom of association and assembly, the report
adds: "Police arrested hundreds of activists, including trade union leaders
and civil society leaders, following a number of peaceful protests."

      The interview includes an exchange on an issue of crucial importance
to Zimbabwe: the government's insistence that the country is poised to
harvest a record 2,3 million tons of maize and its concomitant rejection of
food aid from the United Nations-linked World Food Programme (WFP).

      In direct contradiction of the government's optimism, the WFP notes
that Zimbabwe's poor harvests in 2002 and 2003 left "millions of people in
need of food assistance".

      "While the number of people in need of assistance has dropped from a
peak of over 7 million in the early months of 2003, hundreds of thousands of
the most vulnerable Zimbabweans still require food assistance in May and
June of 2004."

      Mugabe, however, dismisses the WFP's sombre appraisal. He insists that
Zimbabwe will harvest more than enough to feed all its citizens.

      His declaration sets to naught concerns over the disruption to
agricultural production caused by the seizure of white-owned farms and the
occupation of these farms by an assortment of peasants, war veterans and
Zanu-PF notables with little or no experience of large-scale commercial

      "We are not hungry," Mugabe exclaims. "It [the WFP] should go to
hungrier people, hungrier countries than ourselves.

      They need food. We urge [the WFP] to go and do good work there."

      There are growing suspicions that the predicted bumper harvest is a
product of the Zanu-PF propaganda machine, the more so as it has suddenly
become headline news.

      A supplementary suspicion is that it is part of a stratagem to ensure
that Zanu-PF has complete control of maize supplies to increase its
patronage and thereby its leverage over the electorate for the forthcoming
parliamentary elections.

      One of the problems for Zanu-PF of accepting UN food aid is the
condition that it should be distributed by non-governmental organisations
appointed by the UN.

      As Africa Confidential (May 14) explains: "The government's order to a
UN crop assessment team to leave the country last weekend is part of its
strategy to maintain tight control over food supply and score a resounding
win in the coming parliamentary elections.

      "The order effectively blocks UN and European preparations to provide
food aid to more than 5 million people this year."

      From another perspective, it can be concluded that the Zanu-PF
government has put its political survival ahead of the welfare of the
people, even if it means hunger, if not starvation, for citizens suspected
of supporting the MDC.

      Zanu-PF baron Abednigo Ncube foreshadowed the strategy in an earlier
statement to villagers in Matabeleland: "You have to vote for Zanu-PF
candidates before the government starts rethinking your entitlement to food

      There is an element of irascible malice in Mugabe's comments on
emeritus Anglican archbishop of Cape Town Desmond Tutu ("an angry, evil and
embittered little bishop") and the Catholic archbishop of Bulawayo Pius
Ncube ("He thinks he is holy but he tells lies all day, every day").

      But it would be a mistake to dismiss Mugabe as an embittered old man
in denial about his culpability for the parlous state of Zimbabwe.

      He is too calculating to be typified as a politician reduced to mere
petty vindictiveness in his dotage.

      .. Patrick Laurence is the editor of Focus, the journal of the Helen
Suzman Foundation

        .. This article was originally published on page 9 of The Sunday
Independent on May 30, 2004

Back to the Top
Back to Index



Subject: Zimbabwe's Last Hope

The International Crisis Group is calling upon Zimbabweans and the
international community, especially SADC, to agree bench-marks and a
timeframe to ensure that the electoral process in the run-up to Zimbabwe's
forthcoming parliamentary elections meets the SADC Norms and Standards for
Free and Fair Elections (a protocol to which Zimbabwe is a signatory). [For
the full text of the ICG report, please go to their website and download Zimbabwe: In Search of
a New Strategy.]

Please find attached a synopsis of the ICG's recommendations and a call for
the formation of a democratic alliance in Zimbabwe for free and fair

This is a plea for your support for the ICG initiative: even if it only
means passing this message onto someone you believe can help bring
democracy back to Zimbabwe.

The Formation of a Democratic Alliance to ensure Free and Fair Elections in


In April 2004, the International Crisis Group (ICG) prepared a report
entitled Zimbabwe: in Search of a New Strategy. As the hope of a negotiated
solution between ZANU(PF) and MDC fades, it recommended that international
and local efforts should centre on ensuring Zimbabwe's compliance with the
SADC Norms and Standards for Free and Fair Elections. In particular, it
should focus on crafting specific benchmarks and timelines for a free and
fair electoral process; and, equally important, build an international
consensus on the consequences if these benchmarks are systematically
violated. If these pre-conditions are not met early on, the international
community would reject the electoral process even before polling day.

The ICG recommended that the U.S. and multilateral international
organisations should consult key stakeholders in SADC and Zimbabwe to craft
these benchmarks and accompanying timelines. This paper summarises the ICG
report and calls for the formation of a democratic alliance between the MDC
and civic society to coordinate responses to the international community's
initiative. The alliance should also make a strong regional diplomatic
offensive and formulate smart strategies for non-violent protests that will
bring pressure to bear on ZANU(PF) to ensure conditions for free and fair
elections in 2005. ZANU(PF)'s Strategy

ZANU(PF) intends to win the March 2005 elections at any cost. It has
already closed the Daily News, banned civic meetings under POSA, retired
impartial judges, militarised civilian political structures, and
systematically arrested and beaten activists. ZANU(PF) not only wants to
win, but it wants a two-thirds majority to make constitutional amendments
that entrench its rule under Mugabe. It has no intention of conducting free
and fair elections, but will endeavour to garner as much legitimacy as
possible in the process, especially in the eyes of its SADC allies.
ZANU(PF) therefore needs a compliant MDC that participates at all levels in
order to maintain a pretence of multi-party democracy.

ZANU-PF's election campaign has kicked off by targeting symptoms of
economic mismanagement, especially corruption and inflation. In the rural
areas it launched Operation Nyararai ("Shut Up") in January 2004, to seal
off the countryside. Residents of every village are required to register
with the headman, to whom visitors, including children visiting parents,
must justify themselves. This will effectively close off rural Zimbabwe to
opposition campaigners. ZANU-PF also controls the process for delimiting
constituencies and registering voters. By gerrymandering to reduce urban
constituencies it could increase its share of parliament relatively easily.
Merely by focusing on reclaiming a few MDC seats in "swing" areas such as
the Midlands, Masvingo and Manicaland, it could probably be certain of a
two-thirds majority. Such a relatively modest objective might consolidate
its power but without forcing the kind of sweeping victory that would cause
domestic and international observers alike to cry foul. ZANU(PF) might even
open space for campaigning close to the elections so that international
observers would be tempted to certify that voting was free and fair.

All recent Zimbabwean elections have been typified by high levels of
violence and intimidation during the run-up period, but relatively peaceful
conditions when observers were present and ballots actually cast.
Similarly, ZANU(PF) might increase civic freedoms such as access to the
media and the right to assemble shortly before election day, by which time,
however, the damage would already have been done. If it can control the
framework for elections as in the past, and observers come only at the end
of the electoral process, it would be almost certain to win the seats it
wants. To boycott or not?

The MDC has participated in by-elections and has begun preparing for the
March 2005 parliamentary elections. It has, however, threatened to boycott
the elections if certain conditions are not met. But if some conditions are
not met, and the electoral process is compromised, the MDC will face a
fundamental strategic dilemma.

If it contests the elections it will legitimise a patently flawed electoral
process, managed and controlled entirely by the ruling party. When it loses
the election, as it clearly must, its plaintive cry that the election was
neither free nor fair will be ignored by invited observers. If, on the
other hand, it boycotts the election, it would lose all its seats without a
fight, and leave every government institution in the hands of the ruling

It should also be remember that if, against all odds, the MDC won the
election, the President and his executive would still hold the reins of
power. This power could be exercised to severely curtail the effectiveness
of an MDC dominated legislature. International Diplomacy

To avoid this dilemma, it is imperative that an international consensus is
found on the dividing line between a relatively free and fair election
process and one that is so flawed that it should be declared null and void.
There must be, in other words, an agreed procedure for determining quickly
whether the process - not the voting day itself - is conducted properly,
and to the greatest extent possible agreement on the specific consequences
that would flow from significant violations.

The ICG sees the EU and U.S. initiating the urgent task of building
consensus around this plan of action by appointing envoys to consult
throughout the region. They would begin by coming to agreement with the
bulk of SADC countries, including South Africa, followed closely by Nigeria
and other key AU member states. The assumption of power through elections
by former opposition movements in Kenya, Nigeria, and Ghana, combined with
the presence of stable democracies such as Botswana and Mauritius, could
tip the scales in favour of a democratic solution in Zimbabwe.

So, too, could the NEPAD initiative, which sets credible elections as a
priority - and because Western responsiveness to NEPAD is influenced by how
African countries handle Zimbabwe. A special effort should be made to draw
in those African leaders who are strong NEPAD supporters, including
Presidents Obasanjo of Nigeria, Wade of Senegal and Bouteflika of Algeria.
To provide added impetus to the entire diplomatic exercise, donors should
stress that significant progress can be expected on the NEPAD initiative if
African countries can deliver a free and free electoral process that
legitimises the government in Zimbabwe in the eyes of the international
community. At the same time the international community should, with local
stakeholders, draft a recovery assistance plan that outlines the
significant assistance for debt relief, economic development and land
reform that would be made available to Zimbabwe if it passes the electoral
test. Regional Diplomacy

Like South Africa, many governments in the region share a history of
solidarity with ZANU(PF). Each is reluctant to become a lone voice speaking
against Mugabe and be denounced as a "colonial puppet".

Bishops, the MDC and Zimbabwean civil society have sent representatives to
Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Mauritius, Seychelles and Botswana, where
they have stressed the need for a return to democracy. Engendering this
collective interest in deepening engagement could be critical to
calculations in both Pretoria and Harare.

There has been a slow but steady change: largely the result of concerted
lobbying by the Zimbabwean opposition and civil society, and because of the
sheer magnitude of Zimbabwe's economic collapse. In the last half of 2003,
MDC delegations were well received, particularly in Kenya, Ghana, Senegal,
Mozambique, Mauritius, Tanzania and Malawi. Civil society organisations in
the Crisis Coalition also lobbied the region. ZCTU's work with COSATU and
others in the Southern Africa Trade Union Coordinating Council (SATUCC) has
led to several specific achievements. President Olusegun Obasanjo, has been
active in pressing Zimbabwe for dialogue. Until more African states take
such a stand, however, South Africa's contrary voice will continue to speak

There needs to be an even more concerted diplomatic effort to persuade SADC
states, especially South Africa, that the interests of Zimbabwe, SADC and
African as a whole, will be best served by a democratically elected
government under the SADC electoral protocol Strategic Action

Carefully targeted and well-organised non-violent mass action and civil
disobedience can be important catalysts for policy change and sometimes
even promote transition. But, because efforts by the opposition and civil
society have been disorganised, the Mugabe regime has not been under
sufficiently strong pressure to accept negotiations. While recognising the
singular acts of bravery, sporadic and ineffectual demonstrations not only
lack strategic impetus, they sap the morale of the people.

To address this weakness, the MDC called for a broad alliance to apply
pressure on the government at its annual conference in December 2003. In
January 2004, it opened consultations with civil society representatives to
launch a variety of rolling mass actions. However, personal rivalries have
undermined the pledge of MDC, union and other civic leaders to cooperate
and coordinate better.  This has to change, and change as soon as possible.

Zimbabwean are looking to their pro-democracy political and civic leaders
to demonstrate the statesmanshlp that looks beyond personal rivaliries: to
speak with one voice, to build strength through unity, to coordinate for
effective action. With the threat of the elections being brought forward,
there is an added urgency to form a broad pro-democracy alliance that is
united by clear strategic objectives and action plans, and that can respond
strategically, coherently and effectively to the international diplomatic
initiative that focuses on the SADC norms and standards for free and fair
elections. Every effort must be made to reach agreement on what steps would
be taken if the electoral process does not meet the benchmarks.

The alliance has to spell out precisely what they want from their
government; what specific conditions must be met, and the action it will
take if the conditions are not met. One of the most effective levers of
influence at the disposal of Zimbabweans could be to escalate non-violent
mass action in protest if ZANU-PF fails to meet the benchmarks for free and
fair elections in 2005. To have any relevant, however, leaders must be
willing to participate in the front lines.


JAG Hotlines:
(011) 612 595 If you are in trouble or need advice,
(011) 205 374
(011) 863 354 please don't hesitate to contact us -
(011) 431 068
                                we're here to help!
263 4 799 410 Office Lines
Back to the Top
Back to Index

The Monitor, Uganda

Zimbabwe deports former LRA spokesman
By Frank Nyakairu
May 31, 2004

      HAMBURG - The former spokesman of the rebel LRA, David Nyekorach
Matsanga, was on Friday barred from entering Zimbabwe at the Harare
International Airport and deported.

      The chief immigration officer, Mr Elasto Mugwadi, on Friday confirmed
in the government paper, The Herald, that officials from his department had
ordered Matsanga back last Wednesday.

      Matsanga, who sources say was getting close to Zimbabwean president
Robert Mugabe, is linked to a British Television crew, the Sky News.

      "I cannot disclose as of now the reasons why he was not permitted to
visit this country," Mugwadi told The Herald. Matsanga was coming from the
United Kingdom via Kenya.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Hussain lets rip at ICC over 'diabolical' handling of Zimbabwe

Former England captain asks how any side can go there

Mike Selvey
Monday May 31, 2004
The Guardian

The chances of the England and Wales Cricket Board persuading England's top
players to tour Zimbabwe next October appeared to have receded further
yesterday after Nasser Hussain delivered a scathing criticism of the cricket
establishment's handling of matters during the last World Cup.
In particular the former England captain described as "diabolical" the
International Cricket Council's handling of events that culminated in
England cancelling their group match in Harare and probably sacrificing a
place in the second round of the competition.

Reluctant to fulfil the fixture, England were bailed out at the 11th hour by
a threatening letter from a group calling itself the Sons and Daughters of
Zimbabwe, sufficient for the England administrators to claim that it was
unsafe to tour, the only reason acceptable to the ICC.

It was, Hussain claimed yesterday, "a low point for world cricket, the ICC
and the ECB". Hussain speaks now as a Sky TV pundit and newspaper columnist,
unrestrained by his ECB contract or by the ICC's code of conduct and, only a
few days after the emotional press conference at Lord's in which he
announced his retirement from all cricket, he has lost no time in
off-loading some of what clearly has been welling inside him over the past

His outburst has left his former employers in no doubt that, had he still
been a player, he would have opted out of any plans to tour and, had the
captaincy been in his hands, he would have steered his players in that

Should the tour not already be on the scrapheap, the new chief executive of
the ECB, who will take over when Tim Lamb leaves the post at the end of
September, will have his work cut out from the word go to maintain the
credibility of the England side on the world stage.

It was the ICC, and implicitly its chief executive Mal Speed, who came in
for the strongest criticism from Hussain. During the negotiations in Cape
Town Hussain had an angry confrontation with Speed. He was frustrated by the
inertia at dealing with the matter and specifically the intransigence of the
ICC in not recognising a special case, the effect the delay was having on
his team's World Cup preparations and the inability of either the ICC or ECB
to take on board that the majority of his players felt it morally
inappropriate to play in Zimbabwe.

In the end Hussain, in a phrase used at the time, felt he had been "hung out
to dry" by the cricket establishments and the British government which
offered little support other than watered down sentiments.

"The whole Zimbabwe fiasco wasn't of my making," he said, "so I don't think
it was a low for me in particular. I just view it as a low point for world
cricket, the ICC and the ECB. All that happened during that World Cup on the
Zimbabwe issue was a complete shemozzle. I think the way the ICC handled
that situation was diabolical.

"For people to come into our room and say 'whatever happens you're going to
Zimbabwe, it doesn't matter what's happening or what you think, we're taking
you there' and the way they went about it and their attitude since about the
whole thing has been very poor. I think if you go round asking people in
general about what they think about it they would agree."

The general perception at the time of the World Cup was that only a very few
of England's 14-man squad were happy at the prospect of playing in Zimbabwe
and, although a year on there have been changes of personnel, the situation
in that country has deteriorated dramatically in that time.

"I can't see how any side, Test or one-day, could possibly go to Zimbabwe
and play cricket now," Hussain said. "There are a multitude of reasons from
the moral down to the fact that you're not playing against their best side.
And that's just about select- ion of their team, let alone everything else
that's going on behind the scenes in the country."

If the time comes to select a side, players on central contracts will be
given the chance to opt out without penalty. Others will be told that
failure to tour will not count against them. England are duty bound to
select their best available side but the availability factor could go so far
down the line that any representative team would be a shadow of what would
normally be acceptable by England standards.

By that time the Professional Cricketers Association and the Federation of
International Cricketers Associations, the global body to which it is
affiliated, might themselves have offered guidelines to be observed by its
membership. All will be hoping that the matter is resolved over the next
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Business Report

      Business wants African peer review system to develop teeth
      May 31, 2004

      By Quentin Wray

      Johannesburg - Business would like the African peer review mechanism
to be strengthened so that countries that set up good governance systems got
rewarded with increased investment, Eskom chairman Reuel Khoza has said.

      Khoza chairs the 350-strong group of firms that has formed the New
Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) Business Initiative.

      The peer review is one of Nepad's key projects through which African
countries submit themselves to voluntary peer evaluation.

      Rich nations, which are expected to fund Nepad's infrastructure
projects, see the mechanism as critical but as having no real teeth.

      Speaking ahead of the 14th Africa summit of the World Economic Forum,
which starts in Maputo on Wednesday, Khoza said business "experienced a
sense of frustration" that the process was progressing so slowly and that he
would be happy if the "mechanism was much more robust".

      Khoza would like to see sanctions imposed on countries that fell short
of the mark.

      He said the business initiative would like the peer review to perform
a function "akin to what the ratings agencies do" and countries that
performed well should become more attractive to investors.

      Nepad and the peer review mechanism will be among the subjects covered
at the summit, to be attended by at least 600 participants from 46

      Zimbabwe, Africa's problem child, would be discussed in a session
entitled Zimbabwe: Meltdown or Revival, although the delegation from that
country would be smaller than usual, the organisers said.

      Delegates will focus on mining and minerals, engineering and
construction, financial services and banking, agribusiness and health.

      The initiative will outline its progress in making Africa more
conducive for foreign direct investment, fighting corruption, corporate
social investment and proper accounting and auditing standards.
Back to the Top
Back to Index