Sikhala criticized ZANU PF repression and not Zimbabwe!

Source: Sikhala criticized ZANU PF repression and not Zimbabwe!

I do not know whether the ruling ZANU PF pretends to be dimwits or they are genuinely foolish.

Tendai Ruben Mbofana

 

Honestly, it is very hard to understand why they can not make the distinction between Zimbabwe (the country) and the ZANU PF government

How do they, in their minds, interpret the two as one and the same thing – such that any criticism of the government or ruling party is regarded as an attack on the country?

Even a primary school pupil knows the difference.

As a matter of fact, I would have expected ZANU PF to be the first to grasp this simple concept.

Are they not the same people who traversed the globe in the 1960s and 70s criticizing the government of the day?

Did they not call out the regime’s racist segregatory policies – which led to the marginalization and oppression of the majority, who were denied their inalienable rights?

Are we then to say that ZANU PF went around the world criticizing the country and tarnishing its image?

Actually, was ZANU PF itself not at the forefront of calling for economic sanctions against the country?

Were party leaders as chairman Herbert Wiltshire Chitepo, Eddison Jonasi Zvobgo, amongst others, not regular features in various international capitals, mostly in the West, where they marketed this narrative?

As a result, for those of us who still remember, we endured several shortages in the 1970s of such imported products as fuel.

I still clearly recall the long queues at service stations whereby my parents had to procure coupons in advance for the purchase of petrol.

In fact, ZANU PF did not stop there since they proceeded to unleash a military conflict against the regime of the day.

Are we to accuse the party of having waged a war against their own country – which actually led to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, mostly in the rural areas?

If we are to make such conclusions, then that would indicate an absence of basic political understanding.

So, why is ZANU PF suddenly displaying this lack of understanding today?

Or, as suggested earlier, is the party pretending to be foolish?

Our younger generation would characterize this as ‘kunyepera kuzungaira’ – pretending to be confused and clueless.

Why?

Simply because they have morphed into the new oppressors, who are perpetrating some of the most egregious injustices against the people of Zimbabwe.

In so doing, they do not want the world to know what they are doing.

They do not want the world to know that the same people who were coming to them masquerading as freedom fighters (seeking assistance) had become just as heinous and brutal as the oppressors they subsequently removed from power.

What is different today when the new generation of opposition leaders and human rights defenders take the suffering of the people of Zimbabwe onto the world stage?

Is it now wrong for suffering Zimbabweans to cry out against the relentless oppression they are enduring at the hands of their government?

What crime did opposition leader Job Sikhala commit when he eloquently chronicled the unending onslaught by the ZANU PF regime not only on himself but the people of Zimbabwe as a whole?

So why is ZANU PF so infuriated with his statement at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva (Switzerland) last week?

On what basis can Sikhala be described as having criticized his own country or tarnished its image?

How is it criticizing Zimbabwe when exposing gross human rights abuses, persecution through ‘lawfare’ of perceived opponents, electoral fraud, state-authored impoverishment of millions, and the unfettered high-level looting of national resources?

Are these not the same truths, even social justice advocates as myself, write about nearly on a daily basis; and my articles are read throughout the world?

Why was it not a problem when ZANU PF was doing the same in the 1960s and 70s?

If anything, Sikhala did not beg for any further action against those perpetrating these woeful injustices against the poor people of Zimbabwe.

He simply told the world his story and left!

We can not say the same with ZANU PF in the 1960s and 70s – who not only actively requested economic sanctions but proceeded to wage a war against the oppressive regime.

Sikhala has never done anything of the sort, nor does he intend to do so.

As a matter of fact, I have never come across a more gentle, humble, and patriotic individual as Sikhala.

I had the honour of meeting and having lunch with him when he invited me to his home soon after his release from nearly 600s days of unjustified pre-conviction incarcerated (after being repeatedly denied his constitutional right to bail).

The man’s selfless passion for Zimbabwe and its citizens is unquestionable.

It then becomes laughable when I hear ZANU PF officials and sycophantic supporters accusing him of unpatriotism.

In fact, do the disturbingly increased threats not only on Sikhala’s life but of his arrest upon his return to Zimbabwe not serve to buttress what he said about the regime in Geneva?

It only proves that he was telling the truth.

Why all this anger against a man who was merely articulating what ordinary Zimbabweans are already saying about the ruling establishment?

If there was anything wrong with his presentation at the UN Human Rights Council, why then is ZANU PF not addressing those issues – instead of all the hate and anger?

Let us remember that the UN was established as a global community of all nations – of which Zimbabwe is a full member – where they are held to account.

Was that not one of the main reasons the organization was formed in the first place?

That is why, on 10 December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

As such, there can not be a more appropriate platform for oppressed citizens from across the globe to air their grievances against their governments than the UN and its various organs.

That is also the reason American Philonise Floyd addressed the same UN Human Rights Council on 17 June 2020 after the death of this brother George at the hands of US police officer Derek Chauvin.

He was never accused by the American government of criticizing his own country and tarnishing its image or threatened with arrest.

The Logan Act was never placed over his head since – contrary to the ZANU PF regime’s shamefaced lies – it is not the same as Zimbabwe’s so-called ‘Patriotic Act’.

No US official ever uttered death slogans against him.

He was actually heralded as a hero for justice and the fight against racism.

If Philonise Floyd could travel all the way to Geneva to tell the world over the killing of only one man, what more can we expect from Zimbabweans?

So why are we not celebrating Sikhala instead of attacking him?

A true patriotic is an individual who selflessly fights for the upliftment of every Zimbabwean – as opposed to the ruling elite who have authored the citizenry’s suffering.

Zimbabwe is now in desperate need of more genuine patriots!

COMMENTS

WORDPRESS: 1
  • comment-avatar
    Nyoni 4 weeks ago

    Tendai i rest my case.Speaking out against this useless regime is of no use. They simply will dig their heels in . Just like a donkey . Get my drift.