• I am a big brother, Mugabe tells MDC
• MDC rejects Mugabe's call for unity
• ZNSPCA update 24/9/03
• ZANU PF in succession quandary
• Land mines blow multi-billion park project
• Zim sitting on ticking time bomb
• A case for full disclosure
• ZANU PF’s broken independence promises
• Financing national budget locally is inflationary: bank
• Paltry $46m paid out to displaced farmers
• Tobacco sales to decline by 30 percent
• Recent attempts at resolving the crisis by stakeholders
• Peace is the absence of fear
• From WOZA
• JAG PR Communique dated 25 September 2003
• Zimbabwe's Christian Churches Demand Repeal Of Media Laws
• Mugabe leaves for UN General Assembly in New York
• Chance to mend fences will be lost if Mugabe clings to old guard
• Speak out on Zimbabwe crisis, Chrétien urged
• JAG Open Letters Forum No. 151
• Journalists harassed as crackdown on Daily News continues
• Gas explosion injures 13 in Harare
• Farmers May Sue Government
• Zimbabwe - lest we forget
• Mbeki Says Diplomacy Needed for Zimbabwe

      By Brian Latham

Harare - Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe wants the opposition Movement
for Democratic Change to treat him like a "big brother".

And the MDC should be talking with his Zanu-PF party - behind closed doors,
he said in a rambling and contradictory speech at the funeral of Vice
President Simon Muzenda on Wednesday.

Muzenda died at the weekend aged 80.

In a surprisingly conciliatory moment, Mugabe embraced the MDC as fellow
Zimbabweans and "sons of the soil" but then went on to rebuke them.

      'But I am a big brother and you will listen to a person who is bigger'
"Sons of the soil should behave like sons of the soil. They should not rise
against each other."

"Of course, there'll be differences. But I am a big brother and you will
listen to a person who is bigger. A person who is bigger is bigger, and
there is nothing you can do."

Mugabe went on to say: "We sort things out in our house, not (British Prime
Minister Tony) Blair's house. Then, when we go out, people won't see we've
been shouting. But when it comes to a fight, we can fight."

And, after saying that Zimbabweans should unite regardless of colour,
religion or tribe, Mugabe took a swipe at the country's few remaining white
farmers, accusing them of being "Rhodesians" bent on undermining Zimbabwe.

"I read that an association of farmers has decided to defy the land
acquisition policy and not work with new farmers."

"Instead they've decided to go to the European Union to ask the EU to
withdraw our beef exports. They like our beef, it is delicious."

"If they were really Zimbabweans, would they really do this?" he asked.

In fact, Zimbabwe's beef export quota of just more than 9 000 tons a year
was withdrawn by the EU two years ago over concerns about foot-and-mouth
disease, largely caused by the rampant cutting of farm fences by Mugabe's
supporters.

Then, in a speech that lasted for about an hour, Mugabe veered off to say:
"We don't recognise these farmers as Zimbabweans. We must show them the
gate." - Independent Foreign Service

President Robert Mugabe called yesterday for unity between all Zimbabweans,
including the opposition Movement for Democratic Change.

But the MDC quickly rejected the rare display of conciliatory rhetoric as
"public posturing".

In a rambling speech at the state funeral of Vice-President Simon Muzenda,
Mr Mugabe called on Zimbabweans to settle their differences internally and
not "in Blair's home", referring to the British Prime Minister.

"We are sons of the soil together, and sons of the soil should behave like
sons of the soil, not rise against each other," he said.

Since the formation of the MDC four years ago hundreds of its supporters
have been killed and thousands beaten or imprisoned by Mr Mugabe's
supporters and state security agents.

Paul Themba Nyathi, an MDC spokesman, said: "Mugabe is leading a country
where 70 per cent are unemployed, 80 per cent live below the poverty line
and more than five million people require food aid. If he was serious about
rectifying the situation he would take practical steps." The funeral, which
began three days of national mourning, was attended by thousands of
Zimbabweans who cheered the call for unity.

But the loudest cheers came when Mr Mugabe castigated white farmers for
failing to take part in the government's land seizure programme and blamed
them for the loss of lucrative beef exports to the European Union.

      9/25/2003 8:22:20 AM (GMT +2)

      Zimbabweans breathed a collective sigh of relief when President Robert
Mugabe announced the setting up of the Presidential Land Review Committee to
audit the emotive land reform process, which has been dogged by controversy.

      This was because there were high hopes that once Charles Utete assumed
the high-pressure responsibility to dig deeper into the stinking land grab
scandal, government would avoid, as had happened before with the results of
investigations into issues of national significance, the temptation to sweep
the findings of this investigation under the carpet in spite of who is
involved.

      And before the ink is even dry on the Utete Committee report, there is
already a whiff of panic within the ranks of corrupt politicians and civil
servants who acquired more than one farm in contravention of government’s
stated policy of one-man one-farm, which in itself could lead to crossed
paths between Utete’s team and the exposed politicians.

      That the President saw it fit to appoint this committee is, in itself,
an acknowledgement by government of the existence of serious irregularities
and down right corruption in the whole land redistribution process marred by
multiple farm ownership which we feel has dealt a bruising blow to the
country’s economic empowerment endeavours.

      There were justifiable reasons for the government to believe that
corrupt politicians and civil servants had pushed the envelope too far.
There reportedly is rampant fronting whereby leading and influential
politicians have acquired several farms and registered them in the names of
their children, mothers, sisters, brothers etc.

      Some of the politicians and civil servants, who should have known
better as they are the architects of the government policy, are claiming
that they have since handed back some of the farms, as if that should reduce
their moral blameworthiness. Why, in the first place, had they accepted
several farms when they were aware of the government stipulation of one-man
one-farm? The mind boggles.

      We are not, and should never be, swayed by arguments that some of
these people had multiple applications for farms in various provinces and
were successful in all cases. Another pertinent question is, would they have
handed back these farms (that is if they did at all) were it not for the
Utete investigations? Obviously not. Handing back the farms was an
after-thought that could have gone unthought of were it not for fear of
being exposed.

      This is why we strongly feel that these people should be exposed for
what they are, remorseless, uncouth and corrupt individuals whose life is
all about self-aggrandisement. Zimbabweans demand full disclosure and they
should get it for the government to be able to restore integrity in the
whole process of equitable land redistribution.

      Government officials continue to propagate a politics that is
ill-suited to accommodate diversity, hence the silly reference to the office
of the head of state as being a ‘straight jacket’. Any notion of individual
rights and liberties is met with incomprehension, mistrust and naked
hostility. As a result, Zimbabwe’s political terrain is replete with
fanatics and xenophobes who reduce identity into regimes of "straight
jackets". This is how party-rapists, murderers and other political criminals
are manufactured. Once again, this is a gross violation of the independence
promise of building a "new politics" based on "new thinking" and "new men".
Everything in Zanu PF’s current politics suggests the resurrection of the
Rhodesian ghost, childishly embracing a haunted past. How then can a
progressive future be imagined?

      State propagandists insist that we assume personal and collective
identities based, in reverse, to those of our enemies (real or imagined).In
the unfolding of Zanu politics over the last two decade we, First, hear of
Zapu dissidents, then witches and wizards in the party, then "stooges of
imperialism" amongst political opponents, followed by people with no totems
and then those ingrates (the born frees).The list is endless.

      Mugabe has over the last decade plied up an impressive list of enemies
and set out to destroy them. But these so-called enemies are Zimbabwe’s
workers, peasants, farmers, industrialists, young professionals, students,
minorities and ordinary citizens. In Mugabe’s political vocabulary, the
non-Zanu majority in the nation are ‘enemies’. This is political
superstition of the highest order.

      This identity of being violent towards "our enemies" is not a given
that we must accept without questioning. Rather it is a problem that must be
defined, interrogated and thrown away. We are – as one famous historian once
suggested- as much children of our time as we are those of our parents. The
time we are living in and the reality that surrounds us defines as much who
we are and what we aspire for, as does the historical struggles of our
parents. We live in a world experiencing greater democratization and
freedoms. Why then should Zimbabweans deserve or settle for less?

      The Myth of a single loyalties?

      In contemporary Zimbabwe race is, in itself, not an absolute
ingredient of what constitutes our respective identities. Indeed the
category ‘black’ has some very serious fractures and contradictions based on
class, gender, ethnicity and age. Should we not question these in the
intense process of negotiating who we really are as individuals and as a
nation?

      As a general fact of life we often feel affiliated to particular
positions (political or otherwise) because of two key factors, namely the
influence of others in our group or that of the opponents (real or imagined)
of our group. If-for instance- our race is under attack we flaunt our colour
as a key component of our identity or if we are too weak we hide it .This is
also true of political affiliation, ideological persuasion and religious
beliefs. Whether we flaunt or conceal components of our identity, our
immediate fears and aspirations still pre-occupy our self-identification. As
a result, asserting our threatened identity becomes an act of
self-liberation .The question remains, is our blackness under threat in
Zimbabwe, and if so, from whom? Is it not true that our class identities are
more under threat from the false consciousness of the recent politics of
"straight jacketed" blackness? The same could be said about gender,
generation, and etcetera. Clearly race agitation is-when standing alone- an
inadequate tool for effecting equitable socio-economic transformation. Its
self-righteous idiom might actually destroy social cohesion, whilst
concealing other regimes of inequity in our society. It is a myth that must
be exploded through a more scientific critique.

      Crime is not revolution

      The dangers of race agitation are seen in Zimbabwe where socialists
have paradoxically engaged in the redundant right wing politics of hate and
plunder. For instance, one excuses killing white farmers because ‘they
deserve it .They deserve it because "we" can recollect all the horrendous
indignities (descriptions, dates and statistics supplied) they made us
suffer- between 1890 and 1980- before our policy of reconciliation?
Curiously the most vocal advocates of race-agitation have been the middle
and upper classes. The same groups that are terrified of class-agitation of
the ZCTU kind. Against this other type of agitation they are quick to raise
arguments of economic interests and the like. But who has been the major
beneficiary of this limited politics, in land redistribution and economic
empowerment projects?

      To define our national identity based on hate, revenge and fear hardly
speaks volumes for our emotional intelligence, let alone political acumen.
Particularly because the emotions of fear and insecurity do not always tend
towards rational human behaviour.Vengence does not necessarily result in
equality or justice, it obscures the distinction between good and evil.
Spreading hate and fear through propaganda gives primacy to these factors as
opposed to the reality of the alleged threat. It is this manufactured fear
and insecurity that has produced sycophants and killers within our political
terrain. Exhausted nationalism has found refuge in this politics of the
right. It has telling implications on the legacy of liberation movements and
their leadership.

      Mugabe employed similar politics with very dire consequences in the
events surrounding the Gukurahundi atrocities in the Midlands and
Matabeleland in the 1980s.Clearly therefore, this politics of grudge and
hate hasn’t just been about black and white? Crime committed against
defenseless citizens in the name of the party or the leader is not
revolution!

      The Gukurahundi affair teaches us that his "straight jacketed" notion
of identity encourages sectarian, intolerant, domineering and violent
conduct. There are those citizens that Zanu PF considers as "ours" and over
whom it is protective. It also denounces them if they are not radical
enough; it intimidates them into parroting party positions and punishes them
as "sell-outs" if they seem to accommodate the other side. This seems to be
the fate that has befallen Edison Zvogbo, lately. In politics of grudge and
hate, the other side does not deserve the dignity we fought for, the rights
we claim to have brought from the bush nor the land that belongs to all
black people? They (the other side) are neither black nor people, simply
because they are opposed to us. The only thing that matters is our
‘militant, demagogic and most fanatical views’.

      History is not like a caterpillar that moves on a linear path, but
rather advances along an infinite number of paths. What we choose to do or
not to do now will determine whether our future is made up of our dreams or
nightmares. We have a unique opportunity to author a new future based on new
politics.

      Taking the Independence promise seriously

      Our forbearers bequeathed to us a wealthy heritage which we must
acknowledge and be proud of. So too have our social institutions and popular
traditions. But who we are is more than what our ancestors and the
liberators taught us. We are also affected by the dictates of our
contemporary reality and experiences. Our current realities and experiences
enhance our ability to compare ourselves to similarly or differently
circumstanced people elsewhere in the world. Through these new lenses we are
able to define ourselves and our world as we see fit. There is no political
pharmacist who can prescribe that future for us, we just have to fashion it
ourselves.

      In this reality that surrounds us ,it is foolish to accept the
monolithic identities prescribed by our political high priests .We are a
generation with an infinite range of choices and identities that defy the
current regime of "straight jackets". Once we accept this particular fact,
we will realize the foolishness of trying to kill off difference and
divergence. In fact, we may even realize the prudence of opening up
political space to permit the wide range of citizen identities to enrich our
national debate and thinking. This is the cure to our madness, realizing
that the ocean of citizen experiences and identities can not be contained in
our obsessions with "straight jackets". This prudence causes a government
with a ‘siege mentality’ to repeal repressive legislation and facilitate
rather than become a victim of political change. It causes the likes of
Mugabe to take the independence promise seriously.

        .. Brian Kagoro is a human rights lawyer and a political
commentator.

      9/25/2003 8:19:27 AM (GMT +2)

      This article chron-icles the various efforts by the stakeholders to
resolve the current crisis since it raised its ugly head in 1997. It is
important to realise that serious efforts have been made to redress the
crisis, but they have all floundered for the same reason: lack of political
will to implement agreed positions.

      When government reached a settlement with disgruntled war veterans in
November 1997, where each of the estimated 50 000 former combatants was
awarded a one-off gratuity payment of Z$50 000 and a monthly pension of Z$2
000 beginning January 1998, it sought to introduce a levy to finance the
deal. The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) organised demonstrations
on the 9th of December 1997 protesting against the proposed levy. At its
annual congress held in Mutare early in December 1997, ZANU (PF) also
rejected the introduction of the proposed levy.

      Government thereafter sought to raise Sales Tax by 2.5 percent to
partly finance the settlement. ZCTU organised a two-day stay-away in March
1998, calling for the removal of the increase in Sales Tax by 2.5 percent to
fund the war veterans’ package and the development levy. A stalemate
developed between labour and government, prompting employers to approach
government in August 1998. As a result, the three social partners, the
Employers Confederation of Zimbabwe (EMCOZ), ZCTU and government met on 2
September 1998 to discuss the way forward. This meeting marked the birth of
the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF).

      On 4 September 1998, the TNF agreed to, among other things, remove the
development levy with effect from 1 January 1999 and scrap off the 2.5
percent increase in Sales Tax with effect from 1 November 1998.

      Towards the end of September 1998, fuel prices were hiked by 67
percent, which fuelled inflation. Irked by the erosion of the packages
agreed in the TNF, ZCTU organised a stay-away in November 1998 and
thereafter threatened weekly stay-aways on Wednesdays. The TNF was quickly
reconvened to discuss the fuel situation among other issues. Government
admitted there was a lot of corruption at the state-owned fuel procurement
organisation, NOCZIM, and promised to clean up the organisation. Realising
that the government was not prepared to deal with the underlying causes of
economic decay, exclusive economic policies, fiscal indiscipline and
deteriorating governance, ZCTU and at least 40 other civic groups organised
a Working People’s Convention on 26-27 February 1999 at which they agreed to
form a "broad based movement for change". This movement, which was later
named the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was officially launched on 11
September 1999. Since the launch of the MDC, the political landscape of the
country has never been the same again. The turning point was the February
2000 referendum, which amply demonstrated that the political pendulum was
swinging in favour of the new opposition.

      Meanwhile, as the economic crisis deepened, the TNF was reconvened in
October 1999 to explore possibilities of developing and signing a binding
Social Contract. On the 19th of January 2000, the three social partners
signed a Declaration of Intent, which outlined the obligations of the
parties. The ZCTU withdrew from the negotiations, citing lack of seriousness
on the part of government as evidenced by the continued violence. Following
the 70 percent increase in fuel prices of June 2001, ZCTU organised a
two-day stay-away in July 2001, which resulted in the reconvening of the
TNF. The parties agreed on national minimum wages for agriculture, and
industry and commerce based on the June 2001 Poverty Datum Levels of Z$4 000
and Z$8 900 respectively. The parties also agreed to negotiate viable prices
with producers. However, as the negotiations were going on, government
slapped price controls on all basic commodities. As with the price controls
introduced in 1998, these failed to control prices and created shortages,
which resulted in a thriving parallel market.

      Realising that the problem was political, the social partners under
the TNF agreed to go on a retreat to discuss what they termed the "political
risk factor". What emerged from this retreat is the Kadoma Declaration,
which highlights the need to restore relations with development partners,
restore the rule of law and good governance.

      In an attempt to go it alone, government launched its Millennium
Economic Recovery Programme (MERP) early in 2000. As was the case with
ZIMPREST, MERP was largely ignored. In his address of Parliament in August
2001, the President announced that government was now implementing a
10-point strategy, which was agriculturally driven. The 10-point plan
remained a mystery, with then Minister of Finance Economic and Development
insisting that MERP was still alive. That, in itself, clearly showed the
extent of policy contradictions within government and the existence of two
diametrically opposed views on how to manage the economy.

      It is important to mention that after the Parliamentary elections of
June 2000, the new Csabinet incorporated technocrats. The idea was to
project a problem-solving approach on the part of government. However, it
became clear that the new technocrats could not change the wheels of
government, resulting in the key technocrats from whom much was expected,
Nkosana Moyo and Simba Makoni resigning in frustration. After the
Presidential elections of March 2002, a new "war-cabinet" was unveiled on 24
August 2002, ostensibly to defend the government’s position.

      In the 2003 national budget statement announced on 14 November 2002,
the Minister of Finance and Economic Development, Herbert Murerwa declared
price controls as ineffective and blamed them for promoting the parallel
market. In a move that contradicted the budget statement, government
published Statutory Instrument (SI) 302 of 2002 on Control of Goods (Price
Freeze) Order on 15 November 2002, a day after the budget statement. The SI
extended the list of items covered by the price freeze for a period of six
months.

      With businesses on the brink, CZI cobbled together a last gasp
economic recovery proposal, which was presented as a matter of urgency to
the acting President, Simon Muzenda at the end of December 2002. The
document is entitled: "Government and Business Partnership on Key Economic
Issues" dated 20 December 2002. In the proposal, business offered to support
government’s Agrarian Reform, in return for an active partnership with
government (including regular meetings with the President). The proposal
insisted on consultations on key issues as part of confidence building.

      To make the deal attractive, business offered to regulate itself on
the basis of a Business Charter, to pursue price management (as opposed to
controls), to raise off-shore lines supported by export earnings, to
minimise foreign exchange leakages, to proportionately reduce prices where
the exchange rate has been reduced and stabilised, and to share notes with
other key stakeholders such as TNF. The main issue in the proposal was the
suggestion on export incentives. To ‘incentivise’ exports, the proposal was
that for exporters, the first 50 percent of earnings be exchanged at the
official rate of Z$55 to the US$, while the second 50% attracts a favourable
rate of Z$800 to the US$. For mining, the suggested rate for the first 50
percent was as above. However, a higher rate of Z$1 350 to the US$ was
proposed for the remaining 50 percent.

      These efforts coincided with the reconvening of the TNF in December
2002. The TNF developed an Incomes and Prices Stabilisation Protocol which
was signed by government, business and labour on 30 January 2003. The
protocol adopted the concept of price management whereby the ‘social
partners’ would negotiate prices of basic commodities. Meanwhile, government
pledged to reduce the deficit to 11 percent of GDP, inflation to 96 percent
by end of 2003.

      Apart from the Incomes and Prices Stabilisation Protocol, the TNF also
agreed to sign and put into effect the Kadoma Declaration. The Kadoma
Declaration deals with the political issues such as restoration of good
governance, restoration of normalcy, and in particular relations with
development partners. The Declaration spells out in detail what has to be
done to deal with the "political risk factor". This includes, among others,
the restoration of the rule of law and good governance, and
de-politicisation of public institutions and restoration of relations with
development partners.

      A tripartite position on immediate measures to stimulate the economy
was adopted. These were based on the proposals from business. Instead of
having multiple exchange rates as suggested by business, the TNF recommended
an inflation consistent exchange rate of Z$800 to the US$. The Minister of
Finance and Economic Development was requested to develop immediate policy
measures based on those adopted by the TNF. It was as a result of this
request that government launched the National Economic Revival Programme
(NERP) in February 2003. Already, it has emerged this programme is not being
implemented.

      Other sub-committees established include one on economic empowerment,
which sought to develop measures to democratise the economy and establish an
Empowerment Charter with sectoral schedules for indigenisation of the
economy. Realising that what it had identified were only immediate measures
to deal with the crisis, the TNF agreed to negotiate an economic policy to
cover the medium to long-term period.

      However, the political will to implement the adopted positions was
conspicuous by its absence. In a move that contradicted the adopted
principle of negotiated prices, government unilaterally increased fuel
prices by almost 100 percent on 25 February 2003, followed by another
unilateral fuel price increase of at least 200% on 15 April 2003. Irked by
the continued unilateral decisions of government, ZCTU demanded the reversal
of the latter fuel price increase and organised a three-day stay away from
23-25 April 2003. At the same time, ZCTU announced that it had withdrawn
from the TNF until the fuel price hike was reversed. The business sector
also raised its disquiet with the violation of the Prices and Incomes
Stabilisation Protocol. In a bid to pacify labour, government and business
met on 24 April 2003 and agreed to introduce new minimum wages. Business
only agreed to the new minimum wages on condition that the price controls
were lifted. However, ZCTU rejected the new minimum wages, arguing that they
were now outdated given that they were based on January 2003 Poverty Datum
Levels.

      Since then, the TNF has not been reconvened. Meanwhile, the crisis is
deepening with the emergence of an acute shortage of cash in banks,
continued shortage of foreign exchange, basic commodities, and fuel among
others.

      The sad reality is that while clear policy recommendations have been
suggested by the TNF and other fora, they have been ignored, with
devastating consequences for the economy. The issue therefore is that the
"problem" is not a technical one, but rather a political one. One may bash
the Reserve Bank, bureaucrats, economists etc. but that will not change the
course of the economy. Traveller’s cheques have been tried and failed; now
the Reserve Bank is introducing bearer cheques in a bid to stem the cash
crisis. All this will fail, unless the root cause of the crisis is
addressed: lack of political will to implement inclusive, transparent and
accountable policies.

      Our friend, Libya has done the sensible thing, restored its
relationship with the international community. The sooner we realise that
while the rest of the world may not need Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe needs the rest
of the world, the better it is for our economy and future.

If we could do that in our homes, we would never be short of cash.
Government does have the right to print money but they should follow strict
rules. When government needs money to run the country, it is supposed to
collect that money in taxes. If the government spends more than what it
receives as tax, it can borrow the difference as an extra tax. This money
collected would be used to pay back the borrowed money. Our HIV/AIDS levies
do not count as an extra tax. Those that are sick should directly benefit
from this money.

QUESTION: WHEN SHOULD GOVERNMENT PRINT MORE MONEY?
ANSWER: ONLY WHEN THE ECONOMY IS GROWING.
If the economy is growing, the amount of money printed should be equal to
that growth. For our household, we say that we are achieving good financial
housekeeping if money coming in is exceeding money going out. For the
country we might call it good governance. The important issue here is the
fact that our government has borrowed money and spent it. If the borrowed
money had been invested carefully, the investment would have generated the
money needed to repay the lenders. Borrowing is not bad or dangerous if the
borrowed money is invested rather than being used to build expensive houses
and luxury items.

However, for individuals as well as governments, it is very dangerous to
borrow money and simply spend it like a small child buying sweets to ease
hunger. When the time comes to pay it back, another bigger amount has to be
borrowed because the lender will have to be repaid the capital and paid an
additional amount in interest. As the amounts get bigger, the borrower gets
deeper into debt, like the child who remains hungry and malnourished even
after eating the sweets. In Zimbabwe, government has been spending borrowed
money for many years, and has had to borrow to repay the loans and borrow
yet more to pay the interest. If Zimbabwe had to pay this debt tomorrow,
every man, woman and child in the country would need to contribute at least
$ 50 000.

QUESTION: WHO ARE THE LENDERS AND ARE THEY RESPECTED?
ANSWER: YOU AND ME - WE, THE PEOPLE ARE THE DISRESPECTED LENDERS.
It is the ordinary Zimbabweans that PAY for the government and its people to
work. We pay their water and electricity and we even pay their staff
salaries. We have heard that we contributed through our taxes to build a
house worth over FIFTY billion Zimbabwe dollars. How much did we contribute
to this expense instead of paying to build our own houses? Government use
our money through the POSB, pension funds such as NSSA. NSSA is the
government's compulsory pension scheme for the whole nation. Building
Societies such as CABS and Beverly have grown because we ask them to keep
our money. It is an outrage that we struggle to get our money back when we
now need it so badly. We have heard that Banks are making billions of
dollars of profit during these hard times but we, the owners of the money,
can only draw $5000 of our own money after queuing for hours - day and
night.

We did not give permission to lend our money to government; they just passed
a law telling the banks and savings institutions to lend our money to the
state. When the debt was growing very rapidly several years ago, government
decided to cut the interest rates to reduce the amount it would have to pay
to the lenders - that's us. This seemed a good idea for government, but it
was a bad move for us. The interest we earned from our savings and pension
funds went down very steeply and we are suffering. Inflation was rising
strongly at the time, but the money that we received in interest was too
little to make up for inflation, so when the loans were repaid with
interest, our savings institutions received very much less in buying power.
In effect, government has used our savings without our permission, to pay
off the national debt. This process has left thousands of people in poverty
and made the savings held by the rest of us very nearly worthless. That is
how our savings have now become a debt that averages $50 000 for every one
of us.

But now government is finding that the idea was not as clever as they first
thought. They have to keep borrowing to pretend to pay us back and so they
will just print more money instead of earning it. They will print the money,
and keep on printing it until enough has been printed to meet the payments
and maybe there will be enough for us.

They were told this would cause inflation. Their answer? "So what? That is a
problem for the future." A fast track short term 'solution' to disaster! A
hungry child buying sweets instead of eating food.

So government has been trying to print the extra money it needs. But this is
also proving difficult to do because it is a cockeyed solution. Foreign
exchange has to be spent on the very special paper and printing inks and on
the printing plates and machinery. Unfortunately, Zimbabwe is very short of
foreign currency because export industries have had to struggle to survive
and many have had to shrink or close. We are even more short of foreign
exchange because we now have to import food that we used to grow for
ourselves.

Our own shrinking economy has caused the Zimbabwe dollar to lose most of its
value, so we now need many more of them to buy a United States dollar or any
other currency. This has increased the costs of importing everything and has
caused more inflation. The government has been able to print quite a lot of
money, but this has increased inflation even faster. It is like running in a
circle. You get nowhere! The higher the inflation, the more money is needed
to pay the prices and the more that has to be printed, and this then causes
even more inflation. Our inflation rate is now the highest in the world. It
is so high that we are finding it impossible to produce enough money to keep
up with the rate at which prices and wages are rising.

WHAT CAN WE AFFORD TO BUY AS PRICES GO UP AND UP AND NOTES BECOME HARD TO
FIND?
Look at how the prices for basic commodities have gone up since 1981 and at
the same time less and less of us are working. There are 70% of ordinary
Zimbabweans unemployed. How do they afford to feed their families?

Zimbabwe Grocery Prices 1981, 1999, 2003
Item Quantity 1981 Jan-99 Aug-03
Bread Loaf 0.25 8.80 950.00
Mealie Meal 5kg 0.51 29.35 4,180.00
Rice 500g 0.41 47.50 1,415.00
Milk 600ml 0.16 5.30 430.00
Tea 500g 0.24 21.09 1,462.77

When prices double, the amount of money needed to pay those prices also has
to double. Wages have to go up so that workers can afford to pay the higher
prices, and that makes the production of the needed extra money even more
important. But we see that government has failed to do what was necessary
and we see that they cannot even do the wrong things the right way.

The Zimbabwe Mint in Bulawayo opened in August 2001 to produce coins. It is
now a 'white elephant'.  We cannot even get the Banks to accept coins from
us, as they seem to be worthless as money.

The rate at which we need to print notes is already more than what
government can print, so we are having to spend even more of our scarce
foreign currency to pay foreign companies to print notes for us. Worse
still, somebody in government believes that bank notes with larger
denominations will become the cause of yet more inflation, the Reserve Bank
has not been allowed to produce notes with values of $5 000 or $10 000 or
$20 000.

This means that we still have to print many more notes than we would need if
bigger notes were permitted - any Grade Four child could tell you that - but
we are not allowed to have them. Forty $500 notes would have the value of
one $20 000 note and printing forty notes costs forty times as much as
printing one note. How long will our authorities fail to solve problems that
any 10-year-old could solve? We think that this is a very poor standard of
governance and that this is what has caused the bank note crisis. It is this
quality of economic management that is giving you a problem in managing your
household budget and so the economy has become cockeyed. (Cockeyed means
crooked, lopsided, drunk or it can be used to describe a foolish scheme.) If
you have other views, please tell us.

QUESTION: HOW AND WHY DID THAT CRISIS DEVELOP?
ANSWER: INFLATION AND NOT ENOUGH CASH FLOWING.
The situation and, on top of it, the use of "silly solutions" means that
inflation is now more than 400% (year-on-year).  We need more than five
times the value of bank notes than needed only a year ago to purchase the
same goods. The cycle is: 1. Shortages 2. Price increases 3.  Rising costs.
The result is black market profiteering and it leads us back to point one.

HOW CAN IT BE SOLVED AND WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?
Take time to read and understand what caused this CASH CRISIS. Spread this
informational sheet to friends and discuss it with them. Decide to take
action! Complete and cut out the Protest Note and deliver it to your bank or
building society. If Government mismanagement means that the banks cannot
fulfil their obligations to their customers, they must try harder to
convince government of its failed policies. By delivering this Protest Note
you will be forcing your bank to join you in saying NO to an unfair and
lopsided economy where the money owners have become the victims.

We request the following of our Bankers:
1. The Reserve Bank must consult us the people before
introducing unusual solutions such as Travellers and Bearers Cheques. We do
not want them - we want bank notes!
2. The Reserve Bank must prepare for the printing of higher
denomination notes such as $10 000 and $50 000. The release of the $1 000
note will not solve our queuing blues or meet the mass demand because of
inflation.
3. As our Bankers, it is their duty to protect their clients
from state intimidation regarding our cash needs. Intimidation on this issue
will further reduce our confidence in the banks and force us to close our
accounts.
Banks must put pressure on Government to cut spending and stop their
meddling in the financial sector.  We can tell them on behalf of my
suffering family members that we want cockeyed systems OUT - Zvinhu zviri
kokayi hatidi - Izinto eziKokayi azifuneki!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
PROTEST NOTE
SERVICE, RESPECT & CASH - NOT COCKEYE SYSTEMS!
I am a client of your Bank/ Building Society and have spent many hours
queuing to withdraw my money held in trust by your bank in my account. Some
people even spend the night on the pavements, hoping to receive cash. Even
on those occasions when we do manage to withdraw some cash, the amounts we
get do not even cover our families' needs. This situation is now serious and
we are suffering because of it. We will not continue to suffer in silence as
the State continues to destroy the economy. We feed our families on a poor
diet of over-priced black market goods. Our children are getting thinner
whilst black marketers get fatter.

1. We do not want Traveller or Bearer Cheques; we want bank
notes in good supply and in higher denominations $10000 and $50 000.

2. We remind you, that banks have an obligation to their
clients. We need efficient service and to be protected from intimidation.
We, the powerful citizens have been made unwilling victims burning on the
altar of corruption and stupidity.

3. We request that Banks and the Reserve Bank pressurize
Government to cut spending and stop meddling in the financial sector.

4. On behalf of my suffering family members, I say cockeyed
systems OUT - Zvinhu zviri kokayi hatidi -  Izinto eziKokayi azifuneki!

Name
.........................................................................
Date ............................

      Zimbabwe's Christian Churches Demand Repeal Of Media Laws

      HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP)--Christian churches in Zimbabwe demanded
Thursday the repeal of oppressive media and security laws, as nine reporters
for the country's only independent daily were charged with violating the
laws.

      The reporters from The Daily News, which the government banned last
Saturday, were charged with working for the paper without official
accreditation from the state-appointed media commission, the Associated
Newspapers group said.

      Police said 45 of the paper's 60 journalists were sought for
questioning on the same grounds and were also likely to be charged under the
sweeping security and media laws, said Gugulethu Moyo, the group's corporate
and legal adviser. The laws were passed last year to stifle criticism of
President Robert Mugabe's increasingly authoritarian government.

      The churches, in a statement, likened Mugabe's government to "the
beast in Revelation 13 which usurps power and terrorizes God's defenseless
people thus fermenting anarchy and lawlessness in the land."

      Clergy and pastors of the nation's 59 Christian denominations,
representing about half the population who are Christians, said the
government abandoned fundamental principles of protecting the common good of
the people, upholding justice and the rule of law and of being "custodians
of social and moral values."

      "Any government that negates these principles forfeits its God-given
mandate to rule. It therefore cannot demand submission and obedience of its
citizens," the statement said.

      The deepening economic and political crisis in Zimbabwe was marked by
political violence, suppression of any form of opposition, rampant official
corruption and economic mismanagement that impoverished the majority "while
the rich get richer," the statement said.

      It said the churches committed themselves to campaign for democratic
and social reform that included the repeal of security and media laws.

      The state media commission banned The Daily News on Saturday by
denying it registration to publish under the strict media laws. Since its
launch in 1999, the paper has given a voice to critics of Mugabe's 23-year
rule.

      The paper, with 300 employees and a daily readership of more than
940,000, has said it will challenge the ban in court.

      On Monday, four Associated Newspapers directors were charged on
allegations of violating the media laws before the official ban on Saturday.
The offense carries a penalty of a maximum fine of 300,000 Zimbabwe dollars
($364 at the official exchange rate of 824-1) or two years in jail.

      A coalition of pro-democracy and reform groups described the banning
of The Daily News as the ruling party's "most serious attack yet on freedom
of expression."

      A crackdown on independent civic organizations and church and
independent human rights groups was likely to intensify without an
independent daily newspaper to report on it, said Brian Raftopoulos, a
spokesman for the Crisis Coalition.

      The Daily News has reported on government action to prohibit
opposition political activities and clamp down on rights groups, labor
groups, independent- minded judges and journalists during the country's
worst economic and political crisis since independence from Britain in 1980.

      In January 2001, The Daily News' presses were destroyed in a bomb
attack hours after Information Minister Jonathan Moyo described the paper as
"a threat to national security which had to be silenced."

      Since 2000, more than 200 people have died and tens of thousands have
been assaulted, tortured and hounded from their homes in political violence
blamed mostly on ruling party militants, police, state security agents and
troops.

  Dow Jones Newswires
  09-25-031455ET

Chance to mend fences will be lost if Mugabe clings to old guard

By Basildon Peta

Has the death of Vice-President Simon Muzenda created an opportunity for
President Robert Mugabe to unite his divided country by appointing the
leader of the Movement for Democratic Change as a replacement? After all,
some of Mugabe's staunch allies, like President Thabo Mbeki and Nigeria's
President Olusegun Obasanjo, have fought hard to encourage a united
government in Zimbabwe as the only realistic way of rescuing the country
from its seemingly bottomless economic and political quagmire. MDC leader
Morgan Tsvangirai and the top brass of his party, including
secretary-general Welshman Ncube and national chairman Isaac Matongo,
demonstrated unprecedented magnanimity by visiting Muzenda's home in Harare
to convey their condolences. As the country mourns the death at the weekend
of Muzenda, who was 80, speculation has been mounting about how Mugabe will
use the sudden vacancy to settle the succession question. Analysts say that
in a functional democracy it would not be unreasonable to expect Mugabe to
use his deputy's death as an opportunity to offer an olive branch to the
opposition.

"But in the mad circus that Zimbabwe has become, it is more than foolish to
expect this to happen," said University of Zimbabwe analyst Lovemore
Madhuku. The reason is not the opposition's dislike for an unity arrangement
with the Mugabe regime, but mainly Mugabe's demonstrated belief that
Zimbabwe and his government would be far better off without an opposition.
Although the MDC would probably refuse to be part of Mugabe's government, if
Mugabe extended an olive branch this would portray him as a magnanimous
statesman eager to take steps to resolve the crisis in his country. Although
this would play to his advantage, Mugabe would most likely rather miss the
opportunity. As it is, Mugabe used a memorial service for Muzenda as an
opportunity to demonise the MDC as "British puppets" who would never rule
Zimbabwe "as long as I live".

If the prospects of Mugabe's appointing Tsvangirai are zero, what about a
young candidate from within Zanu PF who has the credentials - such as former
finance minister Simba Makoni - to improve the party's credibility and
standing? "There is no chance of this happening, either," said University of
Zimbabwe political scientist Elphas Mukonoweshuro. "Mugabe will stick to the
old guard and Muzenda's successor is going to come from the old school." Any
young Zanu PF politicians who have shown a serious inclination to work with
the opposition and engage the international donor community have been
branded "traitors". None of the many analysts interviewed thought Emmerson
Mnangagwa would not be Mugabe's choice. Mugabe has done everything to ensure
that Mnangagwa, the Speaker of parliament and Zanu PF head of administration
implicated by a United Nations report in looting the Democratic Republic of
Congo - will succeed him. "If Mugabe delays announcing Mnangagwa's
appointment, it will be because he wants to give him more time to
consolidate his power in the party before elevating him," said Madhuku.

There are many reasons for Mugabe's sticking to Mnangagwa, but the most
compelling is that the speaker is Mugabe's best insurance policy against
future prosecution. In the early 1980s, as minister of state security in
charge of Zimbabwe's dreaded spy agency, the Central Intelligence
Organisation, Mnangagwa oversaw the systematic elimination of an estimated
25 000 Mugabe opponents in Matabeleland. The findings of a 1984 inquiry
commissioned by Mugabe to investigate the Matabeleland massacres after an
international outcry have not been made public, despite pressure by civic
groups. Any moderate candidate who may, after taking office, bow to public
pressure and release the findings is therefore automatically disqualified
from the succession race. If, through some stroke of fate, Mnangagwa fails
to be appointed, Mugabe's next choice, analysts agree, would be Defence
Minister Sydney Sekeramayi, another hardcore Mugabe fanatic also implicated
in the DRC looting. John Nkomo, the charismatic Zanu-PF national chairman
considered by many as one of the few Zanu PF men who could make a difference
by breaking with Mugabe's past, is out of the equation because of his
moderate tendencies. Like many other opportunities that have arisen to
resolve Zimbabwe crises, that of settling the succession question and
brightening the country's prospects by appointing a credible candidate has
come - but is certain to go begging since it is likely that Mnangagwa - a
prominent member of Mugabe's old guard - will be appointed.

GRAHAM FRASER
NATIONAL AFFAIRS WRITER

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Jean Chrétien should speak out clearly on the crisis
in Zimbabwe, and insist that African leaders agree to criticize their
colleagues, a Zimbabwe opposition MP said yesterday.

"I am not finding the Canadian voice coming out clearly with a specific
position on Zimbabwe," Priscilla Misihairambwi-Mushongasaid yesterday. "You
are too nice, too diplomatic, too quiet. The Prime Minister of Canada should
be very clear, very specific. We need these voices."

She said that African leaders have been reluctant to criticize leaders like
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, who do not hold free and fair elections,
and who abuse human rights.

"I am not asking the Northern governments to do something about this, but I
am asking the Northern governments to ask the African governments to begin
to take a position on their own brothers," she said.

At last year's Commonwealth conference, Chrétien was instrumental in a
compromise that delayed any condemnation of Mugabe until after the March,
2002, election. Only after clear indications of electoral fraud, violence
and intimidation did Canada withdraw funding from the Zimbabwe government —
while the observer mission of the Organization of African Unity called the
election "transparent, credible, free and fair."

Misihairambwi-Mushonga, an opposition MP, said Canada should be very clear
about what it means by free and fair elections and respect for human rights.

She is part of a delegation of African legislators active in fighting
corruption who are visiting Ottawa to discuss ways of strengthening
parliamentary institutions on their continent.

Chrétien will be travelling to the Commonwealth conference in Nigeria later
this fall, and several African delegates said they hoped Canada would
reinforce the role it is playing in Africa.

Canada has committed itself to spending $500 million through the Canada Fund
for Africa, and is focusing on strengthening parliamentary institutions and
helping stop corruption, fighting AIDS and polio, and reducing poverty.

Nigerian MP Gabriel Suswah said corruption is a two-way street. A serious
problem is that Western banks have agreed to take massive deposits of stolen
funds from African dictators, including an estimated $40 billion from
Nigeria, he said.

"If Canada would bring pressure to bear on these countries, it would help a
lot," he said. "If we could get things right in Nigeria, there would be a
change of attitude in other countries."

Ugandan MP Augustine Ruzindana said he would like to see Canada more engaged
in Africa.

"You definitely can do a lot more than you're doing now," he said.

Business Day (Johannesburg)

September 25, 2003
Posted to the web September 25, 2003

Jonathan Katzenellenbogen
Johannesburg

FRUSTRATED by a lack of assistance from government, a group of South African
farmers whose land has been seized in Zimbabwe has formed an organisation to
lobby on its behalf.

The group, Concerned Investors in Zimbabwe, says it may ultimately consider
legal action against government if members feel it is not supporting their
cause through diplomatic means. They charge that government has not been
taking steps to protect their interests, in contrast to the efforts taken by
European Union (EU) member states.

Crawford von Abo, a founder member of the group, says that of the few farms
that have not been seized, most belong to citizens of EU countries. Farms
belonging to Austrian, Danish, French and German citizens have been
untouched, he says.

In the absence of diplomatic pressure from Pretoria, the group says it is
difficult for its members to recover their properties.

Von Abo was arrested for being on his farm last year although, he says, the
notice that his land was to be seized had been withdrawn.

Another founder member is John Mackenzie, whose family has had its two farms
in Zimbabwe seized.

About 10 other South Africans who farmed in Zimbabwe have expressed interest
in joining the group, says Von Abo. He estimated that there were about 60
South African citizens farming in Zimbabwe before the controversial land
redistribution programme.

Among the South African landowners in Zimbabwe is the Oppenheimer family,
who gave away part of its landholdings to the Zimbabwe government.

Von Abo, who farmed in Zimbabwe for 50 years, lost 14 farms in the country.
He says he wrote to President Thabo Mbeki about the matter last year. The
letter was passed onto the foreign affairs department, which Von Abo says
replied only six months later.

In February, Von Abo says, he received a letter from Deputy Foreign Minister
Aziz Pahad, who said the Zimbaweans had agreed to return his farms. But he
says his farms have not been returned to him. "I don't want to fight my own
government but I would like it to get the Zimbabweans to uphold their
agreement to delist my farms."

The group also plans to raise public awareness and be a contact point for
those who have lost their investments in Zimbabwe.

In a statement released by the group, it alleges that the seized properties
are not used for genuine resettlement but allocated to faithful Zanu (PF)
supporters.

      These are dark days indeed for our namesake in Zimbabwe - the Daily
News. Not only have the newspaper's owners been interrogated and charged
with publishing without a licence, but its 45 journalists now face a bleak
future. They don't have a newspaper to work for, and have now been told they
will be charged for working without proper accreditation.

      For the Daily News, however, licences and accreditation are just a
smokescreen. It is clearly the newspaper's highly principled and courageous
stand against excesses by the Zimbabwean government that has incurred the
wrath of that government, prompting draconian measures that have seriously
threatened the independence of privately-owned newspapers.

      It is no secret that the Daily News has been a thorn in the side of
the Zimbabwean authorities. Its journalists refuse to be lackeys of Robert
Mugabe's government, which displays scant respect for the rule of law and
human rights.

      The intimidation and harassment they are being subjected to today is
no different to what many journalists in South Africa endured only a decade
or so ago under apartheid. Lest we forget, it is critical for us to recall
the many instances of imprisonment, arbitrary detention without trial,
torture and withdrawal of basic rights and liberties our journalists had to
endure.

      If we are indeed proud of the role we played here as journalists in
challenging injustice, it is imperative for us to make our voices heard when
the government of a neighbouring state is guilty of similar excesses.

      The people of Zimbabwe gave us succour and support in our dark days.
It is time we as South Africans - and that includes our government -
reciprocated. Save the Daily News and press freedom in Zimbabwe.