Back to Index

Passports crackdown betrays govt insecurity
Njabulo Ncube and Nelson Banya, The Financial Gazette (Zimbabwe)
December 15, 2005

http://www.fingaz.co.zw/story.aspx?stid=388

"HUMAN rights and fundamental freedoms allow us fully to develop and use our human qualities, intelligence, talents and conscience to satisfy our spiritual and other needs.

It follows, therefore, that the denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms is not only an individual and personal tragedy but also creates conditions of social and political unrest, sowing seeds of violence and conflict within and between societies and nations," said President Robert
Mugabe on April 20 1989. He was addressing the second judicial colloquium on the domestic application of international human rights norms, held in Harare.

Ironically, President Mugabe’s government, which has presided over the decline of Zimbabwe’s political and economic environment, seems to have resolved to clamp down on individual liberties as a means of heading off potential social and political unrest, typically precipitated by deteriorating economic circumstances.

Recent developments, which saw the government confiscating travel documents belonging to independent newspaper publisher Trevor Ncube and opposition politician Paul Themba Nyathi, indicate how personal liberties have come under siege from the authorities, who have virtually put the country under a state of emergency.

The state has put together a list of tens of Zimbabweans whose movement it seeks to proscribe "in the national interest" giving further confirmation that personal liberties have come under siege in Zimbabwe.

Leading government critics, including Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) president Morgan Tsvangirai, lawyer Beatrice Mutetwa and journalist Basildon Peta, are believed to be on the government’s list of persons whose passports, according to a leaked government document, are targeted for "invalidation."

ZANU PF used its technical two-thirds majority in parliament to push through controversial amendments to the constitution, making it possible for the government to restrict the movement of persons in "the national interest or in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, public health and public interests and the economic interests of the state."

Previously, Section 22 of the Constitution could be derogated in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health. The inclusion of national interest and the economic interest of the state has drawn widespread criticism, not least because of ZANU PF’s parochial view of these tenets, says prominent lawyer and opposition MDC legislator Tendai Biti.

"The new concepts of national interest and economic interests of the state have found recent currency from the ruling party as it seeks new pillars of legitimisation. They are subjective nebulous political terms as opposed to legal concepts that will very much be used to justify all kinds of encroachments on the right to freedom of movement," Biti said.

Biti argues that the 17th amendment, like all before it, does not conform to the basic tenet of constitutionalism — loyalty to the concept of limited governance and individual rights.

"The constitution must exist as a document that curbs arbitrariness and at the same time guarantees the enjoyment of individual liberty.

"The constitutional amendment is not loyal to these two principles and, like previous constitutional amendments, it abandons these basic liberal conceptions. In so doing it does not mean that it embraces any objective nationalist cause. On the contrary, its ethos and celebration is crude power and autocracy," Biti added.

Independent analysts are agreed that the latest crackdown on government critics shows President Mugabe remains insecure despite a tamed opposition which is at war with itself.

President Mugabe’s ruling ZANU PF controls both houses of parliament following two electoral victories this year, but the renewed crackdown on journalists and government critics betrays the unease within government.

Although the Zimbabwe government finally managed to lift the state of emergency, which had been in place since 1965 when Ian Smith’s Rhodesian Front government infamously made a unilateral declaration of independence, subsequent amendments to the constitution and allied pieces of legislation retained certain aspects meant to quell dissent and close down democratic space.

The state of emergency gave government authorities widespread powers under the Law and Order Maintenance Act (LOMA), including the right to detain persons without charge.

The past five years have seen the promulgation of laws that have progressively whittled down citizens’ rights in the country. The Public Order and Security Act (POSA) of 2002, which replaced an equally sinister LOMA and the deceptively titled Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, under which no less than four newspaper titles have been banned and several journalists arrested, are the clearest evidence of this.

Last year also saw the passing of a controversial law which allows the government to take over "insolvent" firms indebted to the state. This law, commonly known as the Mawere regulations, was used to pave the way for the state to effectively take over assets belonging to businessman Mutumwa Mawere, who has fallen out with the ruling elite in Harare. The Criminal Procedures Law was also amended to allow the police to detain suspects in cases involving economic crimes for up to 21 days without presenting them in court.

In May, the government instituted countrywide slum clearances, which were condemned by the United Nations envoy on human settlement issues, Anna Tibaijuka.
In her report, Tibaijuka stated that Zimbabwe was in a "virtual state of emergency" following the demolitions, which left about 700 000 people homeless and indirectly affected 2.4 million others.

The journalistic fraternity was particularly unnerved by the authorities’ decision to target Ncube — a former editor of The Financial Gazette and the Zimbabwe Independent, who now publishes the latter title as well as the Standard and South Africa’s Mail & Guardian.

Ann Cooper, the executive director of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), said her organisation strongly condemned the government’s latest strong-arm tactics to muzzle the Press and civic society organisations.

"The existence of this list is an affront to basic rights, including freedom of expression and freedom of movement. This is nothing short of a witch-hunt against those courageous few who still dare publicly criticise President Robert Mugabe’s regime and its repression," said Cooper.

Rashweat Mukundu, the director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa, said his organisation deplored the continuing closure of the little democratic space left for civic society and the media.

"It is an intensification of repression by the ZANU PF government," said Mukundu, reacting to the first seizure of travel documents. "What we see is an abuse of state resources and power through the 17th Constitutional Amendment. When you take passports from a publisher, independent journalists and opposition politicians, the message is clear that you must not say anything the ruling party sees as undesirable. It’s clear ZANU PF does not cherish democracy and is not prepared to entertain people with divergent views," said Mukundu.

The European Union said Harare’s move to seize passports violated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which grants everyone "the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Any withdrawal of a passport prevents freedom of movement and is in breach of the Declaration. We have repeatedly expressed concerns about human rights in Zimbabwe and called on the government to respect individual rights, which include free expression and free movement."

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP