Diplomacy can triumph in Zimbabwe and the future belongs to us not Mugabe – Rashweat Mukundu
On 28 January South Africa’s e-TV showed pictures of emaciated Zimbabwean prisoners and rural families, many sick and dying from lack of food and medication. The pictures and accompanying news story were a stark reminder of the dire situation in Zimbabwe at the time that Southern Africa leaders had completed a meeting on finding a lasting solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe.
The e-TV story is particularly interesting as it shows in clearer terms the issue(s) in Zimbabwe, that the crisis is about livelihoods and people. While a lot has been written about how the crisis is man made, and Mugabe’s intransigence and his total disregard of any civilised political processes, the issue in my view remains that the people of Zimbabwe have reached the end of the tether and cannot hang on any longer. While the SADC summit was concluded in South Africa, reports were already emerging on how the MDC has not consented to the communiqué and how the breakthrough, is after all a false one. This message of doom was conveyed mostly by the foreign media with newspapers as the Telegraph in the UK carrying opinions supporting the MDC not to join Mugabe in a unity government. This kind of news has a chilling effect on the majority of Zimbabweans local or in the diaspora, for its says only one message, that is more suffering and an increasingly uncertain and dark and darker future. This brings back the question of what these talks are really about. Despite my misgivings about the leadership of South Africa in this process, I agree with Kgalema Motlanthe that we cannot afford to go on talking and talking and that these talks should focus on simply saving the lives of the people of Zimbabwe first and everything else later. No one is fooled that the MDC received a raw deal from Mugabe and SADC. The questions that remains to be answered is what options the MDC has, what can the MDC do to overcome the support that SADC openly shows for Mugabe. My view is that the MDC right now has no choice but to join the unity government with its headlights on beam. The MDC now needs to go above ZANU PF both morally and in political strategy and define itself as a party of the future. I argue that the MDC now need to join the goverament and simply help lives and restore some sort of dignity and normalcy to the lives of Zimbabweans.
The MDC at the moment needs to go into the unity governments to salvage the little of what is left of Zimbabwe, as well as work on a new constitution that reverses the damage of the past eight years as well set a future course guaranteeing our rights as well independent institutions for elections and other pressing issues. This agenda does not need the MDC to have Ambassadorial post among other issues. The MDC need to look at its role in the unity government as transitional and not permanent. There is no way this process, flawed as it is, can be seen as the ultimate solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe but a process towards a final resolution addressing issues of free and fair elections at some point. The transition in Zimbabwe, the MDC should note, will be slow and painful but the journey has to be taken nevertheless. For Christians the death of Christ on the cross was a painful journey that had to be taken, but was certainly not the end of the process but simply part of it and the final victory is coming. The MDC need to make full and effective utilisation of the social service and economic ministries it holds to stabilise Zimbabwe, gain experience in running a government and prepare for the future. Joining the unity government, however painful, gives the opposition a chance to carry out its political programmes in peace. One thing is clear about ZANU PF and Robert Mugabe. Not only is he 84 years old and therefore half way into being an ancestor and spirit medium for his family and party, but Mugabe is and should not be seen as part of the future of Zimbabwe. He unfortunately bestrides the door of transition and a way has to be found to sidestep him and move forward. The success of the MDC in the unity government is depended on what the party will do with that little power and an acknowledgment that the unity governments is part of and not the transition. The MDC still need a robust political programme that guarantees its continued linkages with its grassroots support both urban and rural.
A key stumbling block that the MDC needs to overcome is the pessimism that come from western capitals. This pessimism is rooted in the understandable loathing of Robert Mugabe. The MDC is however better counselled by history, that sometimes what maters in the life of any given state are its interests. Mugabe did not mutate into a dictator overnight. He was one in 1980 and did commit heinous acts against the Ndebele community in the 1980s. Then there was no talk of Mugabe quitting. The likes of Tiny Rowland even threatened to fire editors of their newspapers in London who reported the atrocities in Matabeleland. Any given state is better protected by its people, healthy and without disease and hunger. Mugabe has weakened Zimbabwe and our abilities to move forward as a people, the MDC cannot afford to maintain this path by going for broke. The call by some media organisations that the MDC should not join the unity government negates the suffering that the people of Zimbabwe are going through. Another aspect that the MDC needs to remove from its psyche is that the unity agreement as process will not succeed without monetary support from the west. That in my view is neither true nor a sustainable proposition noting how the west is now burdened with its own economic challenges. The future of Zimbabwe lies not in generous aid but normalising the economy, resuscitating agriculture, education health, and more importantly taming corruption. History and present international crises must counsel the MDC that the world is far less concerned about Zimbabwe in comparison, say to Gaza. The geo-political significance of Zimbabwe is such that we can all die and the world moves on as if nothing happened. One million people died in Rwanda and the world moved on. Less that two thousand died in Gaza and the world almost came to standstill from the UN, Washington, London, Johannesburg, Lusaka to Paris. African governments, all quite on Zimbabwe, had something to say about the deaths of the Palestinians. Over 3000 have died in Zimbabwe and not many, except Raila Odinga and Botswana, said anything. That is the painful reality of our own world. It is good to then evaluate how far we can rely on outside to help to get us out of the malaise that ZANU PF has thrown us in. Diplomacy then is best placed to serve us and move us forward. The future belongs to us not Mugabe. //End//
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Candid Comment: Judiciary not Beyond Criticism
Candid Comment: Judiciary not Beyond Criticism -
Friday, 16 January 2009 10:21 - Zimbabwe Independent
THIS week High Court Judge-President Rita Makarau lambasted some legal practitioners who she says criticised the judiciary in foreign media.
No particular story or legal practitioner was mentioned but those who have been following the human rights abuse cases in Zimbabwe, and lawyers who have braved state intimidation to stand with the victimised, can easily put some faces to the legal practitioners concerned.
Zimbabwe is not living in normal times and the Judge-President and others in the judiciary cannot pretend otherwise.
Zimbabweans from all walks of life have been victims of state thuggery and the judiciary has been complicit in this by failing to invoke legal protection when asked to do so.
Many in civic society, the opposition and indeed many voices critical of the government of President Mugabe cannot say they have received justice in Zimbabwe. Any criticism of the judiciary is thus on the basis of its failure to dispense justice.
The judiciary has been willing tools in the circus of phantom treason charges and dozens of conspiracy theories of Zanu PF in which individuals — who are invariably found innocent at the end of the day — have been subjected to the most inhuman treatment.
If not willingly consenting to the enforcement of the repressive measures of Zanu PF, one can conjecture that the judiciary is itself a victim of Zanu PF — fearful of what might happen to them.
One cannot but relate the composition and character of the current judiciary to the events leading to the resignation of Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay, followed by many other senior judges.
Earlier there was the desecration of the High Court by war veterans who danced on top of court desks and chairs during the inquiry into the looting of the war veterans fund.
When senior Zanu PF and government figures say they will defy the courts should they not like their rulings, the judiciary has remained silent.
The judiciary in Zimbabwe has undergone major changes in which one finds it difficult to say the citizens are being served. In fact the ruling elite has created its own judiciary to serve its interests.
It is therefore proper, Madam Judge-President, for those disaffected to highlight their concerns. For laypersons like me, there is no way we can know what is happening unless those who interact with the courts speak out against the serious regression in the protection of citizens.
In this regard the judiciary is not being undermined when people criticise it but is in fact being called upon to respect and adhere to its constitutional duty, which is the upholding of the law, and more importantly the protection of citizens from arbitrary arrest and detention.
That is all that the judiciary is being asked to do. Citizens of Zimbabwe now realise that once Zanu PF decides you are going to suffer there is nothing you can do, and more frighteningly there is little the judiciary is prepared to do.
Many cases abound where the judiciary has failed in this regard. In looking at the current crisis in Zimbabwe we also need to mention that the judiciary is inherently compromised by its almost parasitic reliance on the executive for handouts and survival.
How many judges double as farmers and other dealmakers? Who buys cars for judges and under what legal provisions?
All these issues are not lost on citizens. The same questions I am sure were asked by citizens who lived under the Smith regime and indeed in apartheid South Africa, as to whether they received justice and under what laws?
Criticism of the judiciary in Zimbabwe is therefore not something that the judiciary can wish away. It is real and if the stories in the media are inconveniencing judges it is well and good.
The lawyers referred to by the Judge-President are perhaps talking to the foreign media because of laws such as Aippa that have decimated the Zimbabwe media. The judiciary upholds the same laws as just and constitutional despite the suffering they cause to the citizens of Zimbabwe.
All this is being played out right in front of our eyes. The call is therefore for the judiciary to stand up and protect the rights of citizens, or be judged harshly by posterity.
BY RASHWEAT MUKUNDU
Friday, 16 January 2009 10:21 - Zimbabwe Independent
THIS week High Court Judge-President Rita Makarau lambasted some legal practitioners who she says criticised the judiciary in foreign media.
No particular story or legal practitioner was mentioned but those who have been following the human rights abuse cases in Zimbabwe, and lawyers who have braved state intimidation to stand with the victimised, can easily put some faces to the legal practitioners concerned.
Zimbabwe is not living in normal times and the Judge-President and others in the judiciary cannot pretend otherwise.
Zimbabweans from all walks of life have been victims of state thuggery and the judiciary has been complicit in this by failing to invoke legal protection when asked to do so.
Many in civic society, the opposition and indeed many voices critical of the government of President Mugabe cannot say they have received justice in Zimbabwe. Any criticism of the judiciary is thus on the basis of its failure to dispense justice.
The judiciary has been willing tools in the circus of phantom treason charges and dozens of conspiracy theories of Zanu PF in which individuals — who are invariably found innocent at the end of the day — have been subjected to the most inhuman treatment.
If not willingly consenting to the enforcement of the repressive measures of Zanu PF, one can conjecture that the judiciary is itself a victim of Zanu PF — fearful of what might happen to them.
One cannot but relate the composition and character of the current judiciary to the events leading to the resignation of Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay, followed by many other senior judges.
Earlier there was the desecration of the High Court by war veterans who danced on top of court desks and chairs during the inquiry into the looting of the war veterans fund.
When senior Zanu PF and government figures say they will defy the courts should they not like their rulings, the judiciary has remained silent.
The judiciary in Zimbabwe has undergone major changes in which one finds it difficult to say the citizens are being served. In fact the ruling elite has created its own judiciary to serve its interests.
It is therefore proper, Madam Judge-President, for those disaffected to highlight their concerns. For laypersons like me, there is no way we can know what is happening unless those who interact with the courts speak out against the serious regression in the protection of citizens.
In this regard the judiciary is not being undermined when people criticise it but is in fact being called upon to respect and adhere to its constitutional duty, which is the upholding of the law, and more importantly the protection of citizens from arbitrary arrest and detention.
That is all that the judiciary is being asked to do. Citizens of Zimbabwe now realise that once Zanu PF decides you are going to suffer there is nothing you can do, and more frighteningly there is little the judiciary is prepared to do.
Many cases abound where the judiciary has failed in this regard. In looking at the current crisis in Zimbabwe we also need to mention that the judiciary is inherently compromised by its almost parasitic reliance on the executive for handouts and survival.
How many judges double as farmers and other dealmakers? Who buys cars for judges and under what legal provisions?
All these issues are not lost on citizens. The same questions I am sure were asked by citizens who lived under the Smith regime and indeed in apartheid South Africa, as to whether they received justice and under what laws?
Criticism of the judiciary in Zimbabwe is therefore not something that the judiciary can wish away. It is real and if the stories in the media are inconveniencing judges it is well and good.
The lawyers referred to by the Judge-President are perhaps talking to the foreign media because of laws such as Aippa that have decimated the Zimbabwe media. The judiciary upholds the same laws as just and constitutional despite the suffering they cause to the citizens of Zimbabwe.
All this is being played out right in front of our eyes. The call is therefore for the judiciary to stand up and protect the rights of citizens, or be judged harshly by posterity.
BY RASHWEAT MUKUNDU
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
Who is playing god George?
In last week’s Nathaniel Manheru column in The Herald and in ZBC news bulletins, President Mugabe’s Spokesperson George Charamba lamented what he called the misrepresentation of President Mugabe’s, “Cholera has been arrested” speech while burying Manyika at the heroes acre. One can understand George’s frustrations of defending and spinning Mugabe’s words, at a time when it is increasingly difficult to do so. And it is clear George has run out of spin. The ZBC then went on to play and replay Mugabe’s heroes acre speech, which all confirmed what he had said that cholera had been dealt with. One feels pity for ZBC more so for Charamba for having to defend the undefendable, and if journalists went on to quote the President; it is because that is what he said, with his own mouth in front of thousands and in front of cameras. Charamba lamented that all he wishes for is objective reporting from the western media, not manipulation of facts or events. Well said. It is interesting noting that this is the same person who controls the state media, and who has, at no point asked the same media to be objective in their reporting or coverage of the so called enemies of the government. Charamba wants to be treated differently from the same standard of measurement that he applies on all others he perceives as his enemies. He has the guts after this, to threaten Zimbabwe journalists, playing god saying he is going to withdraw their accreditation, in other words he is going to cut their means of livelihood and they will suffer, because god Charamba did not like what they wrote. Contrary to what Manheru said, it is you then George who is playing god, it is you who has brought chaos in the Zimbabwe media by playing god and distorting the journalism field with your stubbornly one sided approach to work. The journalists that you now threaten have done nothing unexpected of them, they reported what the President said, you on the other hand, have interpreted what the President said, embellished it with your words seeking to change the meaning of what he said. You rightfully, as your job entails sought to defend your employer, that is all fine George but please stop playing god, stop pretending that all journalists in Zimbabwe belong to you and that there are puppets in your hands, who you manipulate to suit your desires. We hope after this and in your briefings with President Mugabe, you advise him honestly and openly about the situation in Zimbabwe. One can only conjecture that he is not aware since he lives in Zimbabwe but not with us and has never been aware of anything taking place in Zimbabwe, he does not suffer water, electricity shortages, he does not suffer from lack of medical attention, he does not buy with forex in our shops, he does not use commuter omnibuses, he relies on you George to know what Zimbabwe looks like. He only knows what court jesters tell him. And they tell what only amuses him about the greatness of his kingdom and how everyone is happy and love the king. I hope you advise him that cholera is still very much on the lose and taking hundreds of lives, while our hospitals are shut. It is you George who is playing god, not only with the lives of media workers, both private and state journalists who you threaten weekly, but dangerously playing god with our lives which are endangered everyday and many paying the price of your promotion of self serving interest. We only hope one day you will realise that you are, after all, only human like us.
In last week’s Nathaniel Manheru column in The Herald and in ZBC news bulletins, President Mugabe’s Spokesperson George Charamba lamented what he called the misrepresentation of President Mugabe’s, “Cholera has been arrested” speech while burying Manyika at the heroes acre. One can understand George’s frustrations of defending and spinning Mugabe’s words, at a time when it is increasingly difficult to do so. And it is clear George has run out of spin. The ZBC then went on to play and replay Mugabe’s heroes acre speech, which all confirmed what he had said that cholera had been dealt with. One feels pity for ZBC more so for Charamba for having to defend the undefendable, and if journalists went on to quote the President; it is because that is what he said, with his own mouth in front of thousands and in front of cameras. Charamba lamented that all he wishes for is objective reporting from the western media, not manipulation of facts or events. Well said. It is interesting noting that this is the same person who controls the state media, and who has, at no point asked the same media to be objective in their reporting or coverage of the so called enemies of the government. Charamba wants to be treated differently from the same standard of measurement that he applies on all others he perceives as his enemies. He has the guts after this, to threaten Zimbabwe journalists, playing god saying he is going to withdraw their accreditation, in other words he is going to cut their means of livelihood and they will suffer, because god Charamba did not like what they wrote. Contrary to what Manheru said, it is you then George who is playing god, it is you who has brought chaos in the Zimbabwe media by playing god and distorting the journalism field with your stubbornly one sided approach to work. The journalists that you now threaten have done nothing unexpected of them, they reported what the President said, you on the other hand, have interpreted what the President said, embellished it with your words seeking to change the meaning of what he said. You rightfully, as your job entails sought to defend your employer, that is all fine George but please stop playing god, stop pretending that all journalists in Zimbabwe belong to you and that there are puppets in your hands, who you manipulate to suit your desires. We hope after this and in your briefings with President Mugabe, you advise him honestly and openly about the situation in Zimbabwe. One can only conjecture that he is not aware since he lives in Zimbabwe but not with us and has never been aware of anything taking place in Zimbabwe, he does not suffer water, electricity shortages, he does not suffer from lack of medical attention, he does not buy with forex in our shops, he does not use commuter omnibuses, he relies on you George to know what Zimbabwe looks like. He only knows what court jesters tell him. And they tell what only amuses him about the greatness of his kingdom and how everyone is happy and love the king. I hope you advise him that cholera is still very much on the lose and taking hundreds of lives, while our hospitals are shut. It is you George who is playing god, not only with the lives of media workers, both private and state journalists who you threaten weekly, but dangerously playing god with our lives which are endangered everyday and many paying the price of your promotion of self serving interest. We only hope one day you will realise that you are, after all, only human like us.
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Not yet Uhuru- Elections, Gender and we the people- By Rashweat Mukundu
Not yet Uhuru- Elections, Gender and we the people- By Rashweat Mukundu
In Zimbabwe and Kenya, elections are a matter of life and death. Before one makes that decision to go and join a line to vote for whom so ever, one equally has to be aware of the direction to take on foot, when trouble comes. Elections in these two countries and indeed many other parts of Africa and the world have been a curse. As an inalienable cog of democracy, elections have lost their intended meaning and purpose. While some are used to this chaos, nothing has prepared many, rather me, for the shock of the USA elections to be finalized on 4 November 2008. The USA is, to many a beacon of democracy, and indeed this powerful nation has tried to live to expectations, strutting the globe installing democratic regimes and threatening the hell out of those who belong to the axis of evil, but like Africa, the land of ‘we the people’ still has a long way to go.
Africa and many parts of the word are conditioned to think that the major dichotomy between the west and south is the lack of democracy in the latter. Africa has too many examples of failed states, chaos and abundant hopelessness, that to some extent the world has given-up on us. An enduring contrasting image of Africa and the west is the "shoe shine', as Zimbos say, with which the Republicans and the Democrats campaign, the simplicity and serenity that occupy those events and the chaos that defines our own elections.
No example can be so close as the chaos in Darfur and the East of the Democratic Republic of Congo where women, men, children the elderly and sick are living in hell. In the case of the Congo, one can be forgiven for believing that that this region is cursed, as it has not known peace since King Leopold of Belgium appropriated the Congo to himself, cutting-off hands of the locals for failing to fill enough buckets with rubber. Africa aside. The world is fixed on the USA elections. This to the media is the story, the Congo is and will always be like that hence a permanent scenario of Africa, that we are used to and can be ignored or we can live with that, after all that is what the Congolese are. In Namibia the media recently reported about electoral related violence end of October between the ruling SWAPO and opposition, Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP). The pitched battles in the sprawling, poor and cast out location of Katutura where instigated allegedly by SWAPO supporters who were demanding that the RDP should not hold a rally at a piece of ground, not council or proper stadium, but just a piece of land which the ruling party supporters allegedly cleared for its rallies. The struggle over this piece needed police intervention, and tear gas to calm. Some fire arms were confiscated by the police and sure they were going to be used. At the highest level, SWAPO lamented that the opposition was provocative, couldn’t they take a hoe, spade and wheel barrow and clear their own piece of land gushed the SWAPO spokesperson. Coming from Zimbabwe, I was not shocked; in any case this is Africa. Our eyes should be on the spectacle of the year, the USA elections.
The USA is famous for its ‘we the people’ statement, an affirmation of the centrality of its people to the governance of this country. A closer look at the nation of ‘we the people’ however shows surprising similarities with the politics in Katutura, Harare and Nairobi, of death, stereotyping and exclusion. While not declaring my own favorite between Obama and McCain, I am shocked at the treatment of Sarah Palin by the media and the American society in general. The very instance that the Alaska Governor was chosen as McCain’s running mate, the first group to welcome her were American entrepreneurs. All of a sudden her hair style, glasses, type of dressing and makeup became the hit of town. Gorgeous look-alikes' sprouted everywhere, look alikes' who act foolish, purportedly mimicking the real Palin. As if this was not enough, Palin was under the scrutiny for her $150 000 wardrobe (shocking though, but how much is Obama and McCain’s wardrobes), and many other sorts of things were said about her. I should hasten to say none of the main contestants have been subjected to that kind of sexual scrutiny. Recently a beauty pageant was organized to find out the most beautiful look-alike of Palin. Skimpily dressed and blond contestants (meaning daft) girls are displayed for men to feast their gorging eyes. Worse off, if one pursues Palin’s story on the net, they are reports that pornographic films featuring look-alikes’ are being done to be released before the November 4 vote.
This, ‘we the people’ will argue, is America, anything and everything is possible. ‘We the people’ are a free people. One gets a feeling that the Democrats and Republicans should have taken it upon themselves to, at least defend the rights of Palin, by condemning the sexual bigotry, the labeling and ‘placing her in her right place’ as an object of beauty and sex. That is the entire of what Americans see on her. Where she tried to speak her mind, McCain handlers were quick to call her a rebel. One gets the feeling she was chosen to be an ornament for the campaign and to be displayed as a talking parrot in the march of the great American Hero, John McCain, to the Oval office.
The story does not end here; many born in USA might not be able to vote after all. This is so because thousands received letters that their names were either incorrect, improperly registered or that they are, after all, not citizens etc. It reminds me of my 20 hour wait at a polling station in Harare, Zimbabwe 2002. A wait that was suddenly disrupted by tear gas fired by riot police, to disperse me from a voting line, a voting line of all places. Well in the USA this is done nicely with the all too good legal jargon and niceties. Apart from failing to vote, Democratic Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has received threats for allegedly deciding to go ahead with a voter register that some deem faulty. At least her argument is that those she registered should be allowed to vote, some are fighting that fellow citizens be struck off.
So at the end of the day my fellow people, whether one is chasing you with an axe in Zimbabwe or Kenya because you did not vote right, or you are busy fighting over a piece of ground under a 40 degree Celsius sun in Katutura Namibia, or better still shouting kill him in the USA, or subjecting a fellow woman politician to such humiliation because she is woman, the world has not changed that much. The people of the world are still far from claiming and dictating politics. Elections and politics are still removed from the human values that we are all aspire to carry and cherish. One day I hope we can really and truly say, “WE THE PEOPLE”. //End//
In Zimbabwe and Kenya, elections are a matter of life and death. Before one makes that decision to go and join a line to vote for whom so ever, one equally has to be aware of the direction to take on foot, when trouble comes. Elections in these two countries and indeed many other parts of Africa and the world have been a curse. As an inalienable cog of democracy, elections have lost their intended meaning and purpose. While some are used to this chaos, nothing has prepared many, rather me, for the shock of the USA elections to be finalized on 4 November 2008. The USA is, to many a beacon of democracy, and indeed this powerful nation has tried to live to expectations, strutting the globe installing democratic regimes and threatening the hell out of those who belong to the axis of evil, but like Africa, the land of ‘we the people’ still has a long way to go.
Africa and many parts of the word are conditioned to think that the major dichotomy between the west and south is the lack of democracy in the latter. Africa has too many examples of failed states, chaos and abundant hopelessness, that to some extent the world has given-up on us. An enduring contrasting image of Africa and the west is the "shoe shine', as Zimbos say, with which the Republicans and the Democrats campaign, the simplicity and serenity that occupy those events and the chaos that defines our own elections.
No example can be so close as the chaos in Darfur and the East of the Democratic Republic of Congo where women, men, children the elderly and sick are living in hell. In the case of the Congo, one can be forgiven for believing that that this region is cursed, as it has not known peace since King Leopold of Belgium appropriated the Congo to himself, cutting-off hands of the locals for failing to fill enough buckets with rubber. Africa aside. The world is fixed on the USA elections. This to the media is the story, the Congo is and will always be like that hence a permanent scenario of Africa, that we are used to and can be ignored or we can live with that, after all that is what the Congolese are. In Namibia the media recently reported about electoral related violence end of October between the ruling SWAPO and opposition, Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP). The pitched battles in the sprawling, poor and cast out location of Katutura where instigated allegedly by SWAPO supporters who were demanding that the RDP should not hold a rally at a piece of ground, not council or proper stadium, but just a piece of land which the ruling party supporters allegedly cleared for its rallies. The struggle over this piece needed police intervention, and tear gas to calm. Some fire arms were confiscated by the police and sure they were going to be used. At the highest level, SWAPO lamented that the opposition was provocative, couldn’t they take a hoe, spade and wheel barrow and clear their own piece of land gushed the SWAPO spokesperson. Coming from Zimbabwe, I was not shocked; in any case this is Africa. Our eyes should be on the spectacle of the year, the USA elections.
The USA is famous for its ‘we the people’ statement, an affirmation of the centrality of its people to the governance of this country. A closer look at the nation of ‘we the people’ however shows surprising similarities with the politics in Katutura, Harare and Nairobi, of death, stereotyping and exclusion. While not declaring my own favorite between Obama and McCain, I am shocked at the treatment of Sarah Palin by the media and the American society in general. The very instance that the Alaska Governor was chosen as McCain’s running mate, the first group to welcome her were American entrepreneurs. All of a sudden her hair style, glasses, type of dressing and makeup became the hit of town. Gorgeous look-alikes' sprouted everywhere, look alikes' who act foolish, purportedly mimicking the real Palin. As if this was not enough, Palin was under the scrutiny for her $150 000 wardrobe (shocking though, but how much is Obama and McCain’s wardrobes), and many other sorts of things were said about her. I should hasten to say none of the main contestants have been subjected to that kind of sexual scrutiny. Recently a beauty pageant was organized to find out the most beautiful look-alike of Palin. Skimpily dressed and blond contestants (meaning daft) girls are displayed for men to feast their gorging eyes. Worse off, if one pursues Palin’s story on the net, they are reports that pornographic films featuring look-alikes’ are being done to be released before the November 4 vote.
This, ‘we the people’ will argue, is America, anything and everything is possible. ‘We the people’ are a free people. One gets a feeling that the Democrats and Republicans should have taken it upon themselves to, at least defend the rights of Palin, by condemning the sexual bigotry, the labeling and ‘placing her in her right place’ as an object of beauty and sex. That is the entire of what Americans see on her. Where she tried to speak her mind, McCain handlers were quick to call her a rebel. One gets the feeling she was chosen to be an ornament for the campaign and to be displayed as a talking parrot in the march of the great American Hero, John McCain, to the Oval office.
The story does not end here; many born in USA might not be able to vote after all. This is so because thousands received letters that their names were either incorrect, improperly registered or that they are, after all, not citizens etc. It reminds me of my 20 hour wait at a polling station in Harare, Zimbabwe 2002. A wait that was suddenly disrupted by tear gas fired by riot police, to disperse me from a voting line, a voting line of all places. Well in the USA this is done nicely with the all too good legal jargon and niceties. Apart from failing to vote, Democratic Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has received threats for allegedly deciding to go ahead with a voter register that some deem faulty. At least her argument is that those she registered should be allowed to vote, some are fighting that fellow citizens be struck off.
So at the end of the day my fellow people, whether one is chasing you with an axe in Zimbabwe or Kenya because you did not vote right, or you are busy fighting over a piece of ground under a 40 degree Celsius sun in Katutura Namibia, or better still shouting kill him in the USA, or subjecting a fellow woman politician to such humiliation because she is woman, the world has not changed that much. The people of the world are still far from claiming and dictating politics. Elections and politics are still removed from the human values that we are all aspire to carry and cherish. One day I hope we can really and truly say, “WE THE PEOPLE”. //End//
Wednesday, 15 October 2008
Cautious Hope: State of media in Southern Africa
Cautious hope: The state of media and freedom of Expression in Southern Africa- Rashweat Mukundu
Media development and respect for freedom of expression rights are increasingly coming to the centre of public debate in Southern Africa. While the region carries the infamous distinction of being home to Zimbabwe, one of the word’s worst violators of media and freedom of expression rights, Southern Africa is also home to South Africa the continent’s leading economy and media giant. While the region is a mixed bag of success and failures, one gets the feeling that despite all what has gone wrong in the region, especially in Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Swaziland and Lesotho, media development and freedom of expression rights issues can no longer be ignored by governments.
The democratisation of Southern Africa, a project of the early 1990’s saw many changes in the region. Critically the independence of Namibia and South Africa and consolidation of political multi-partiysm in Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Botswana, Madagascar and Mozambique. At the same time the region had to deal with the situations in Lesotho, Zimbabwe and DRC. At the centre of these challenges is the place of media and freedom of expression rights in national discourse, especially political transformation, reporting human rights violations and corruption. It difficult if not impossible to give a uniform score mark to Southern African countries but rather to distinguish amongst the broad categories that each given state finds itself in.
South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Madagascar, Mauritius, Zambia, Malawi, Namibia, and Mozambique are probably in their own category in which media plurality and diversity can be said to exist, not without challenges. The media in these countries has fairly diversified especially in the 1990s going into this century. This category boost of numerous newspapers printed by private players as well as government owned media in the form of broadcasting stations and newspapers. While most state owned media has played the role of supporting government projects in what this sector calls development journalism, the private or independent media has endeavoured to report critically around issues of bad governance and corruption. This has resulted in the private media being painted with the same brush as the opposition parties. And being seen as part of the opposition comes with its own challenges in the region. In Namibia as an example the government still maintains a ban on advertising in The Namibian newspaper, which it accuses of writing negatively about the SWAPO led government. In South Africa, the government made a threat to stop advertising in the Sunday Times after critical reporting on an arms purchase scandal that has engulfed the political leadership in that country. The ruling Africa National Congress (ANC) in South Africa has also proposed legislation that would restrict media freedom. The same has happened in Botswana. Apart from the threats of economic sanctions, all countries in this grouping have proposed laws to curb media and journalistic freedom under the guise of protecting national interests. At the time of writing this piece, the Zambia government was at the throat of The Post newspaper, threatening to deal with the newspaper should its Presidential candidate and Current Acting President Rupiah Banda win the Presidential by-election in that country. In Malawi the state has threatened to shut down private radio stations accused of supporting the opposition. Botswana once seen as the beacon of hope in the continent is discussing a Media Practitioners Bill, which critics have likened to the infamous Zimbabwean Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) under which journalists and newspapers have been harassed. Under the proposed law, the government would register journalists and subject them to a disciplinary code developed by a government appointed commission. Those critical of the Botswana government especially its handling of the minority San communities have been bundled out of the country. In Southern Africa generally all media has a fixation with politics while critical areas of concern to the common citizen have been neglected. These include wider coverage of the HIV-AIDS issues, gender sensitive reporting among others. Where corruption is reported it is mostly related to politics.
The second or ‘bad guys’ grouping of the media in Southern Africa includes Zimbabwe, the DRC, Lesotho and Swaziland. In these countries the media operates under tight control and threats are put into action. Zimbabwe has in the past few years banned four newspapers, and exiled tens of journalists. The private media operates in a legal minefield in which literally anything critical of the ruling elite can result in arrest. If one escapes arrest, extra judicial means have been used including the murder of one independent camera person and beating of journalists. Swaziland is increasingly tightening its control of the media and freedom of expression rights are impugned upon with impunity and increasingly so. The growing demand for political plurality is drawing the worst out of the world’s last absolute Monarch as marches, processions and demonstrations are banned. The private media is increasingly being called upon to tow the line. The same happens in Lesotho, where Harvest FM, a private radio station was handed a 12 month ban and private journalists threatened with legal suits and arrests. In the DRC independent journalism is rarely tolerated and being a critic has dire consequences.
It is important to state that while media and freedom of expressing rights are still very much in peril, investment in the media is growing in the region, except in few countries as Zimbabwe. And even in Zimbabwe hope has been rekindled that a political settlement between the main political rivals might result in the relaxation of media and freedom of expression laws. Of importance in Southern Africa is the growing use of new technologies in information generation and sharing. If is for this reason that while the Zimbabwe government could afford to ban all foreign media, the story of Zimbabwe remained in the public domain regionally and internationally due to online publishing. Mobile telephony has given the common person new power to communicate and share information without much restrictions. A lot however still needs to be done with regard to repealing undemocratic media laws, and encouraging the development of media and telecommunications. Nonetheless Southern Africa is changing, albeit slowly. //End//_____________________________________________
Media development and respect for freedom of expression rights are increasingly coming to the centre of public debate in Southern Africa. While the region carries the infamous distinction of being home to Zimbabwe, one of the word’s worst violators of media and freedom of expression rights, Southern Africa is also home to South Africa the continent’s leading economy and media giant. While the region is a mixed bag of success and failures, one gets the feeling that despite all what has gone wrong in the region, especially in Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Swaziland and Lesotho, media development and freedom of expression rights issues can no longer be ignored by governments.
The democratisation of Southern Africa, a project of the early 1990’s saw many changes in the region. Critically the independence of Namibia and South Africa and consolidation of political multi-partiysm in Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Botswana, Madagascar and Mozambique. At the same time the region had to deal with the situations in Lesotho, Zimbabwe and DRC. At the centre of these challenges is the place of media and freedom of expression rights in national discourse, especially political transformation, reporting human rights violations and corruption. It difficult if not impossible to give a uniform score mark to Southern African countries but rather to distinguish amongst the broad categories that each given state finds itself in.
South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Madagascar, Mauritius, Zambia, Malawi, Namibia, and Mozambique are probably in their own category in which media plurality and diversity can be said to exist, not without challenges. The media in these countries has fairly diversified especially in the 1990s going into this century. This category boost of numerous newspapers printed by private players as well as government owned media in the form of broadcasting stations and newspapers. While most state owned media has played the role of supporting government projects in what this sector calls development journalism, the private or independent media has endeavoured to report critically around issues of bad governance and corruption. This has resulted in the private media being painted with the same brush as the opposition parties. And being seen as part of the opposition comes with its own challenges in the region. In Namibia as an example the government still maintains a ban on advertising in The Namibian newspaper, which it accuses of writing negatively about the SWAPO led government. In South Africa, the government made a threat to stop advertising in the Sunday Times after critical reporting on an arms purchase scandal that has engulfed the political leadership in that country. The ruling Africa National Congress (ANC) in South Africa has also proposed legislation that would restrict media freedom. The same has happened in Botswana. Apart from the threats of economic sanctions, all countries in this grouping have proposed laws to curb media and journalistic freedom under the guise of protecting national interests. At the time of writing this piece, the Zambia government was at the throat of The Post newspaper, threatening to deal with the newspaper should its Presidential candidate and Current Acting President Rupiah Banda win the Presidential by-election in that country. In Malawi the state has threatened to shut down private radio stations accused of supporting the opposition. Botswana once seen as the beacon of hope in the continent is discussing a Media Practitioners Bill, which critics have likened to the infamous Zimbabwean Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) under which journalists and newspapers have been harassed. Under the proposed law, the government would register journalists and subject them to a disciplinary code developed by a government appointed commission. Those critical of the Botswana government especially its handling of the minority San communities have been bundled out of the country. In Southern Africa generally all media has a fixation with politics while critical areas of concern to the common citizen have been neglected. These include wider coverage of the HIV-AIDS issues, gender sensitive reporting among others. Where corruption is reported it is mostly related to politics.
The second or ‘bad guys’ grouping of the media in Southern Africa includes Zimbabwe, the DRC, Lesotho and Swaziland. In these countries the media operates under tight control and threats are put into action. Zimbabwe has in the past few years banned four newspapers, and exiled tens of journalists. The private media operates in a legal minefield in which literally anything critical of the ruling elite can result in arrest. If one escapes arrest, extra judicial means have been used including the murder of one independent camera person and beating of journalists. Swaziland is increasingly tightening its control of the media and freedom of expression rights are impugned upon with impunity and increasingly so. The growing demand for political plurality is drawing the worst out of the world’s last absolute Monarch as marches, processions and demonstrations are banned. The private media is increasingly being called upon to tow the line. The same happens in Lesotho, where Harvest FM, a private radio station was handed a 12 month ban and private journalists threatened with legal suits and arrests. In the DRC independent journalism is rarely tolerated and being a critic has dire consequences.
It is important to state that while media and freedom of expressing rights are still very much in peril, investment in the media is growing in the region, except in few countries as Zimbabwe. And even in Zimbabwe hope has been rekindled that a political settlement between the main political rivals might result in the relaxation of media and freedom of expression laws. Of importance in Southern Africa is the growing use of new technologies in information generation and sharing. If is for this reason that while the Zimbabwe government could afford to ban all foreign media, the story of Zimbabwe remained in the public domain regionally and internationally due to online publishing. Mobile telephony has given the common person new power to communicate and share information without much restrictions. A lot however still needs to be done with regard to repealing undemocratic media laws, and encouraging the development of media and telecommunications. Nonetheless Southern Africa is changing, albeit slowly. //End//_____________________________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
