|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Inclusive government - Index of articles
Truth, justice, reconciliation and national healing - Index of articles
Hot
seat interview with George Bizos, Sekai Holland, Glen Mpani and
Mary Ndlovu: Reconciliation, justice and national healing
Violet
Gonda, SW Radio Africa
April
10, 2009
http://www.swradioafrica.com/pages/hotseat160409.htm
Violet
Gonda: My guests on the Hot Seat programme are distinguished
South African human rights advocate George Bizos, Amai Sekai Holland
who's the Minister of State responsible for National Healing
and Reconciliation, Glen Mpani the regional co-ordinator for the
Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, and Mary Ndlovu
a social justice activist working with WOZA
- the Women of Zimbabwe Arise.
Now Zimbabwe, since 1960
has experienced high levels of human rights abuses dating from the
Smith regime to the Matabeleland period to the current phase where
individuals have disappeared, while some have been tortured and
murdered.
However the
country has not addressed the challenge of addressing past wounds
and holding individuals responsible to account. In this programme
we discuss the commitment by the inclusive government in Zimbabwe
to institute a process of national healing and reconciliation, and
I'll start with Amai Sekai Holland, who is the Minister of
State responsible for National Healing and Reconciliation. Amai
Holland, what are your terms of reference first of all?
Sekai
Holland: Can I just correct you - there are three
Ministers of State, there is myself from MDC T, there is Minister
John Nkomo from Zanu-PF and Minister Gibson Sibanda from MDC Mutambara.
The three of us are in the process of setting up an organ for national
healing, reconciliation and integration of Zimbabwean society. It's
going to be an independent body; it's not going to be a ministry.
We are at the moment really intensely engaged in, not just talking
among ourselves the three of us; we are meeting a lot of organisations
and individuals. Our terms of reference are to establish an organ
of national healing, reconciliation and integration of Zimbabwean
society.
Gonda:
When is this organ going to be established?
Holland:
We are at the moment at the point where we are going to have a launch
just as we had of the STERP, the Short
Term Economic Recovery Plan. We are going to have a launch;
after the launch we hope that we are then able to set up our secretariat
and that a whole lot of activities will start. The establishment
is not going to be done at the top level; our role will be to work
within the Global
Political Agreement which tells us exactly what to do and our
role will really be what every body like ours will be doing - which
is to co-ordinate, which is really to just see what progress is
being made and it is to guide, it is not to do. So when you say
when is it going to be established, it is in the process of being
established but it is going to be launched. And then people in Zimbabwe
and Zimbabweans outside Zimbabwe who have an interest in participating
will be able to actually come in with much of the programming.
Gonda:
Right, let me go to Mary Ndlovu. The appointment of Ministers of
National Healing as we've just heard from Amai Holland, what
does it signify first of all and secondly what benefit will emerge
from this in your view?
Mary
Ndlovu: Well I would first want to ask some questions
of Amai Holland. One is, is this simply for reconciliation or is
it to institute a complete transitional justice process? And the
second question; is what mechanisms will be set up to consult with
ordinary people on the ground as to what kind of process they would
like to have?
Gonda: OK, Amai Holland,
are you able to answer that right away?
Holland: I'll
answer number two first. Our vision is to actually take an all-inclusive
approach that is grassrootsbased, that will be guided by Zimbabweans.
That's the approach we are taking. On what mechanism will
be set up, the people will decide.
Gonda: Mary?
Ndlovu: Yes, OK, I was
just wondering what mechanism to consult the people, to find out
what they want?
Holland: At Independence
in 1980, I think you were in Zimbabwe ?
Ndlovu: Yes.
Holland: There was a
lot of consultation done in terms of a whole lot of range of change
of direction from what Smith did to what the new government was
going to do and there was a multiplicity of tools that were used
to really get the legal framework, to get the institutional framework
set. I think that if Zimbabweans would really want to take this
head-on, we are going to have at hand a very wide consultative process.
It depends on whether people are ready to participate or not.
Gonda: We will come to
that to find out what people want and if people are ready for that,
but Mary now could you answer my earlier questions - what
does this signify and what benefit will emerge from this in your
view?
Ndlovu: Well I think
it is a very important process and it's a very necessary process
that we heal before we can move ahead to build or as we move ahead
to build the future, but it's not a simple thing and it's
going to take time. And one issue we're concerned about is
how we work ahead with healing and reconciliation when we've
got some of the perpetrators of abuses still in place, people who
are still arresting members of WOZA for example, the same people
are there. So how are we going to start discussing reconciliation
when we see those same people in their places?
Gonda: From what you
have seen, is there political will now by both political parties
to address the wrongs of the past, not just what has happened now,
but even the wrongs of the past during Gukurahundi, to uncover the
truth and move the country forward?
Ndlovu: From what I have seen, there is no will on the part of Zanu-PF
to undertake that process.
Gonda: Glen, you were
in Zimbabwe recently, do people feel safe to talk about this right
now?
Glen
Mpani: Thank you so much Violet. I think that it's
very difficult for me to make a general perspective on what Zimbabweans
really feel in terms of discussing these issues. But if Amai Sekai
Holland is saying that they are going to be providing space for
Zimbabweans to debate this, the issues that come into my mind is
what sort of framework is going to be put in place, considering
that our media in Zimbabwe is still constricted in such a way that
the people cannot be able to participate broadly. Secondly, the
other issue is have the people of Zimbabwe been put through a process
where they now have a sense of urgency considering that in the last
couple of years it has been very, very difficult to group Zimbabweans
to come together and be able to debate these issues without fear,
considering that some of the individuals, like what Mary is saying,
are still moving around in the communities where they perpetrated
such high levels of violence.
So I think there is a
huge challenge for this mechanism that is going to come in; one
to build confidence that whatever process they are going to go through,
it is a real process which is not going to lead to a further backlash
on them as individuals. So I think it is a matter of time, it's
not one thing that can happen overnight, but I think that process
is going to take a lot of effort and confidence building, not only
from the political leadership who are guiding this process but even
local leadership, grassroots leadership would need to take a very
pivotal role in this process.
Gonda: Yes, but from
just the conversations you have been having with people on the ground,
even if it's just a small group, what are people saying so
far about this?
Mpani: I think there
is a huge gap that is there. I think the leadership at the top have
been able to make some milestones in terms of them coming together
and striking a common agenda in terms of how to work together but
there is a disjuncture with what is happening at the top and what
is on the ground. That is why we are having, now hearing some cases
of, incidents of violence that are taking place in pockets of Zimbabwe
across the country. That is why we are hearing even cases that are
taking place where people don't really feel that there is
a healing process or there is an inclusive government that is in
place. So what is transpiring at the top needs to take place at
the bottom and I think that is a huge challenge.
Gonda: Now let me go
to Advocate Bizos who sat on the South African Truth and Reconciliation
Commission. Now Advocate, who should drive a process of national
healing and reconciliation first of all?
George Bizos: Well I have heard the persons that
have already spoken, they are Zimbabweans, they have to find a way.
I can only speak of the South African experience and it sounded
as difficult for us in the early 90's whilst we were talking
about a new constitution and what was going to happen to perpetrators
of atrocious crimes for political ends, for the achievement of political
objectives. The way we did it was to have a provision in the constitution
that there will be amnesty, not for the asking but there were certain
preconditions; the most important of which was that you had to tell
the truth - the whole truth. And that you had to have committed
the unlawful act for the gain of some political objective on behalf
of a known political body, albeit government or opposition. The
details were left to be worked out in legislation to be passed by
the would-be elected government - which happened.
We were very fortunate
to have had the leadership of Archbishop Tutu and other people of
a high profile who enjoyed the confidence of the majority of the
people in the country, but seven and a half thousand people applied
for amnesty; less than half were granted the amnesty. Those who
asked for amnesty and were not granted were liable to prosecution
for the crimes that they confessed to but there was a provision
that the evidence that they gave could not be used against them.
The issue really is a
difficult one because victims cry out for justice and amnesty is
something short of it, but if a country is to look to the future
of its people, it is an agreement not to do justice in its ordinary
sense, but what we would call transformative justice - in order
to transform the society, in order to have unity and have some progress
in human rights terms, economic advancement and reconciliation.
On balance it worked
out although some of the victims are dissatisfied because it wasn't
the complete process and they are complaining about the absence
of some sort of compensation for their loss. So but on balance,
we were not likely to have had a settlement between the apartheid
regime and the liberation movement if we did not agree to this amnesty
procedure.
Gonda: I was going to
ask about that; could a blanket amnesty have healed the nation?
Bizos: The representatives
of the apartheid regime wanted blanket amnesty but the liberation
movement, particularly the African National Congress insisted that
it should not be so, but also had to agree that what was to happen
to the apartheid regime offenders was to happen to the liberation
movement members. Something that was a little hard to swallow by
the liberation movement because it was claimed that the apartheid
regime was an illegitimate regime whereas the liberation movement
was fighting a just war so to speak.
Gonda: Amai Holland,
of late we have heard or seen the president, we've seen the
prime minister imploring Zimbabweans to forgive and forget and yet
over the last few weeks we have also seen an escalation of incidents
of violence as MDC supporters revenge, as they seek to regain property
that they lost during the last elections. What do you make of those
developments?
Holland: Actually Violet,
I think I should really go back to saying to you that I don't
want us to take this interview in a void. We have got a Global Political
Agreement which stands on four legs. We have the democratisation
process, we've got the leg where we would like to actually
deal comprehensively with the humanitarian crisis, we've got
the process where we've got the economic stabilisation process
- which we now have STERP to do that in - and the fourth one is
the national healing. The Global Political Agreement is a comprehensive
document and you need to put national healing in that framework.
You can't talk about national healing outside the framework
of the GPA.
Article Seven of the
GPA begins a discussion on a process of national healing. Article
Seven notes that the new government shall give consideration to
the setting up of a mechanism to properly advice on what measures
might be necessary and practicable to achieve national healing,
cohesion and unity in respect of victims of pre and post independence
political conflict. That's the first point I want to make.
The second point I want
to make is this, that if you take the debate at the level you are
trying to take it now, where we discuss what is happening now outside
the Global Political Agreement, we are actually going to miss the
boat, the way we did in 1980 - when a policy on reconciliation was
declared, admired by everybody but nobody in the NGO community,
in the Churches, anywhere tried to understand what that basically
could translate into nation building. What we are doing right now
with the opportunity we have is to work within the political framework
that we have been given to ensure an all-inclusive process, where
we are working with the other ministries that are involved in also
fulfilling the GPA.
It is not easy in Zimbabwe
as we stand right now. When Tsvangirai came back and started to
discuss with us the issue on whether we would go into the agreement
as these things stood or not. We had very serious debates and discussions
on our own personal views to how we would move forward. When we
agreed to get involved in the GPA and sign, although there had been
big differences before in discussing what we would do, we eventually
at the national executive level reached a consensus. There was a
consensus in the national council. There were ten provinces for
and two against. Now, once we agreed to go in, we made the decision
that we would actually fight to open democratic space inside. We
are inside now.
We are actually facing
the most daunting situations but we are fighting to open this democratic
space. And we are fighting to ensure that what brought us to where
we are is understood. With MDC , in March 2006, we had a congress;
we agreed that we would force a situation in the country where we
would use non-violent methods to bring Mugabe to the negotiating
table. We finally did. The negotiations were a result of the March
11 2007 beatings of us.
The SADC countries decided
to force a situation where Zimbabweans would talk about talks and
have them. The result we have is not very good but we are inside
now and in the short time we have been inside, those that actually
see the sense of fighting from inside are organising themselves
inside Zimbabwe to ensure that the GPA works.
My appeal to everybody
Violet, would be people talking with people inside, who are involved
in doing things inside, how to get this to work. I thought that
maybe I would share some things with you of how we are achieving
some of the things that may be showing results.
In our own unit we have
achieved three things already. The first one is that we have got
a date when we are going to launch. The second one is that we have
got an idea of how we can actually get an inclusive process -
the problem in Zimbabwe is that individuals, organisations and groups
believe in their own individual state that they actually have the
answer for everybody. What we need to understand as Zimbabweans
is that each one of us has a piece of the answer and that we need
to start working together. The situation is very difficult in terms
of security; we now have Giles Mutsekwa in Home Affairs, he is fighting
there to get certain changes made where we will actually be able
to make some progress in the way that we do get our consultations
going.
I don't mind people
being sceptical and really saying what can we do and trying things
out for us but the most destructive thing that we Zimbabweans tend
to do is to pour water on potential things that could work and ensure
that things simply don't work. I'm asking for people
to look at the GPA, talk about national healing as a part of totality,
that's how this was designed and to see that it has been a
very broad achievement by the GPA to include the whole issue which
was left out in 1980 of national healing, of reconciliation and
integration of Zimbabwean society. If people have an understanding
as to how this can be improved, when the launch is done, the opportunities
for people to come and do the work in the best way they can, we
will be open. And the launch we are hoping will be in the next two
weeks.
Gonda: But Amai Holland,
this is what the politicians, you as politicians are organising
right now, but on the ground the situation is still different, so
I go back to my earlier question - how are you dealing with
all the other problems that are continuing, you know, on the ground?
Holland: OK, in Buhera
we were there today, there were 12 to 15 people who are MDC who
were arrested after the police had told the people who took things
from MDC people - they were told to return them, the things were
returned. However we are told that a couple of days ago, people
from the army went to the MDC people who had received their things
back, took those things back to the Zanu-PF people and arrested
the 12 people. This issue has now been put, both to Home Affairs
and to National Healing. So tomorrow morning, because we received
this today, tomorrow morning, the three Ministers are meeting, we
will also meet with Home Affairs, this is the first concrete thing
we have received.
Remember JOMIC is also
receiving very concrete issues from the grassroots and they are
dealing with those. How are we going to deal with that? Today when
the report was given to me in writing, the two chiefs from the area
- Makumbe and Gweru - were present and they are also, as traditional
leaders, involved in this because what they want to do is to ensure
that the traditional manner of resolving conflict does actually
start to work now. Because they are saying that it was politicised
under Smith, it has been politicised under Mugabe and they would
like to really like to understand how traditional chiefs in this
new dispensation can ensure that the 12 to 15 people are released
and they get their property back. These are the concrete cases that
are taking place on the ground.
Gonda: What role briefly
are you playing on the issue of the violence on the farms?
Holland: We actually
for the first time got the details of that from Minister Chinamasa
in Victoria Falls and again tomorrow we are going to see how this
can be met by us in the way in which we are organising so that these
are also dealt with very, very urgently because at the moment JOMIC
is dealing with that. Our role is not to arrest people or to go
and talk to them, that's the work of the Home Affairs. Our
work is really to create a set of tools and Zimbabweans have an
abundance of cultural assets that they use in conflict resolution
which we would like to actually harness and get people to understand
that they empower themselves in starting to use these at the family
level, at the individual level because they are there.
I think that we are too
fixed on looking at how we can resolve situations, you are saying
you are looking at the grassroots level but I don't think
people are because, even as we speak there are lots and lots of
very positive things that have started happening at the grassroots
level because when we say we have cultural assets, I am sure I'm
losing a lot of people but I think people should start to understand
what was the process that took place kuti vanhu vazo svutisana fodya
or ukukhumisa umlotha.
There were six stages
and if you look at those stages they were justice incorporated.
And I think that because we talk about very vague things and very
vague ideas, especially when we are outside the country, people
are not seeing what is happening on the ground where the whole issue
of national healing has to start with our understanding of what
it is that we want to heal.
Gonda: Mary, can you
comment?
Ndlovu: Yes I'm
very happy to hear Amai Holland saying that because some of what
she's been describing is a kind of trouble-shooting of urgent
issues that are cropping up but beyond that we will be looking forward
to seeing how a national programme can be tied up with a grassroots
programme and I agree with her in some places there is positive
development in communities where they are starting to look for a
way of healing themselves but I think what needs to be done is to
link up the whole thing so that the communities can develop their
own ideas of what they want. But that can only be plugged into a
national programme and we'll be looking forward very much
to see how that can happen, but at the same time, looking for some
kind of security sector reform that will go on to make the space
open enough to make the people feel free to discuss and move forward.
Gonda: And . . . (interrupted)
Holland: Violet, MDC
has fought to open a democratic space and we have opened it and
if people are not willing to actually jump in and also be involved
in opening democratic space, this thing will fail! If the grassroots
are left to do this fighting on their own in opening democratic
space, again it will fail, so I am appealing to the middle class
and I am appealing to people in the Diaspora to actually start to
talk to the people that they know in Zimbabwe who are affected by
this very negative situation that we are coming out of and we are
coming out of it.
Gonda: Let me ask Glen
Mpani what he thinks about this. Obviously as Amai Holland has told
us, the situation has been very difficult and . . . (interrupted)
Holland: It is very
difficult now!
Gonda: So let us just
hear from Glen, Amai Holland. Glen, how can the National Healing
process be informed by victims and citizens and move away from what
many have described as political rhetoric?
Mpani: I think one of
the very, very important factors that has been alluded to by Amai
Holland about they are envisioning structuring the processes in
Zimbabwe is using the grassroots but I think there are a number
of issues that I wanted to highlight which should be taken into
consideration and I hope that Amai Sekai Holland, through the process
that they are going to be going through, they also take cognisance
of that.
The first thing is that
consulting grassroots, I think there are a number of layers of problems
that are likely to take place. One, we should know that there are
cases of violence that took place across the political divide so
there are victims of violence - of individuals who belong to Zanu-PF,
there are victims of violence of individuals who belong to MDC and
individuals who don't even belong to any political structure
who were victims of violence from many, many years ago who would
want a process of national healing and reconciliation based on their
understanding.
The second issue that
comes into place is that we cannot have one definition of defining
healing and reconciling. People have got different understanding
in Zimbabwe of those problems of national healing and reconciliation
and Amai Sekai Holland she could even confirm that even among the
political parties there are people who view this issue differently.
So you can hold a process
of consulting individuals on the ground but through that process
you can further divide a nation, so there is need for such a process
to be guided by caution to ensure that whatever is going to emerge
out of this process is going to achieve the intended benefits. There's
no-one right now, even among ourselves who can tell whether this
process is going to get its intended benefits. It's something
that we are going through with commitment that this is going to
work.
The other level of problem
that I have is that if you look at the debates that are taking place
even within the civil society themselves in Zimbabwe - who are some
of the major players in issues, there are some who are already proposing
that we need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Zimbabwe .
You ask them to say why do you assume that for Zimbabwe, this is
important, they will give you the example of South Africa, they
will give you the example of Sierra Leone but looking at those comparative
examples of those Truth and Reconciliation Commissions one needs
to ask themselves whether they were a success, did they achieve
the process of national healing and reconciliation?
So I think what we need
to be very careful of is where we do a cut and paste process of
borrowing processes and introducing them in Zimbabwe . I was so
happy that Amai Holland is talking about the traditional process,
it is important but we should be cautious that it has been politicised
and we should look at the Rwandan example, where they have used
a cultural process, what has been the weakness of that process?
So I think, taking all
these issues into consideration, we will be able to allow us to
craft a process that is Zimbabwean-oriented and that can allow our
people to deal with what happened in the past, but we have to balance
the process of getting justice and peace, we can't forget,
forgo either of those processes, we need to balance that and sequence
it properly.
Gonda: Now let me go
to Mr Bizos. Advocate Bizos, are you still there?
Bizos: Yes I have been
listening to this discussion with interest . . . (interrupted)
Holland: Excuse me Violet . . .
Violet
Gonda: Amai Holland can
you hold on. I want to . . . (interrupted)
Holland: I think there
has been a misunderstanding of what I said because I think that
I'm being understood to say we are going to use one method.
I said to you we are using an all-inclusive approach and of course
the NGOs in Zimbabwe are part of that, the Churches are part, everybody's
a part of that. We are looking at South Africa , we are looking
at all of them. I was in Rwanda when Kagame launched Gachacha.We
are looking at how we it has developed up totoday. So I am saying
to you, we are using an all-inclusive process where everybody will
sit as an equal partner to tell us which way to go as Zimbabweans.
We are using our cultural assets because we want our own thing but
it cannot overlook what has happened in other countries, in Africa
, in Asia , in Europe , we are going to be looking at that. We are
already looking at that in the internet.
Gonda: Ok so let's
hear from Advocate Bizos to find out the lessons learnt from the
South African experience. Now Advocate, on the issue of the Truth
and Reconciliation Commission, is there merit for that in Zimbabwe
in your view?
Bizos: I think that each
country where there has been this trauma over a number of years
and where there has been conflict, they are the best people to decide
how they want to do it, but what should be taken into consideration
is this - that to say let us forgive and forget is easy to say.
Yes, it may be easier to forgive but very difficult to forget. One
of the results of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission
is that there were denials. The regime said that there were no hit
squads. The people said yes there must have been hit squads because
the leaders of the liberation movement were killed within the country
and in the neighbouring countries and in the rest of Africa where
they had taken refuge.
The attitude of the regime
was 'let us start with a clean slate'. The contrary
view was well let's write on the slate what happened and once
we have written it then we can try and deal with it but we can't
really reconcile unless there are admissions and an acceptance of
the wrongs that have been done. Now I don't know whether the
Zimbabwean people will try and reconcile among themselves without
a historical record coming into being as a result of a body appointed
by their parliament. And you know the judicial process can't
solve these problems but there is an element which helps reconciliation
if the victim and the perpetrator face one another before an amnesty
committee where they say what they have done and why they did it.
The victims very often find it easier to forgive under those circumstances,
particularly if regret is expressed and some sort of restitution
extended. This has been our experience.
I hope that the people
of Zimbabwe who deserve to become reconciled and united and bring
about prosperity in their country will find the best possible way
that they can in order to achieve that result. Amnesties differ
from countries in the South American states, in the Asian states,
in the African states but they do have a common factor and that
is that people realise that what wrong has been done to them should
not be perpetuated and that civil war or something similar should
continue. Having a proper structure and I hear about the historical
agreement that has been spoken of and I hope that it works. People
have got to work hard at it; they don't have to necessarily
follow the South African example.
Gonda: If I may stay
with you Advocate, as we've been talking about in this discussion
and also many people have been asking the question that we've
asked earlier on - asking who should drive a process of national
healing and reconciliation and should it be the politicians, who
are in this case compromised and likely to craft a process that
best serves their political ends and pushes for impunity. Now from
your . . .
Holland: (laughing in
the background) Violet haaiti . . .
Gonda: Hello?
Bizos: Yes I can hear
you.
Gonda: Now from your
experience with the TRC , what would you do differently if you were
given a second chance and perhaps this would also help the people
in Zimbabwe ?
Bizos: A political settlement
is absolutely necessary and a settlement in good faith among politicians
who as a result of a common patriotism want to get things right
in their country. That's a prerequisite. The structures that
we have established in amnesty committees, presided over by judges
or people of some legal training, in order to hear the admissions
and give an opportunity of the victims to face the perpetrators,
we consider to be a necessity.
There are complaints
and they are justifiable complaints that it not go far enough. We
have examples of a police officer that was responsible for the deaths
of about 15 or 16 people in a community - coming in to ask for amnesty
and actually going to do work within that community in order to
appease them and in order to do justice to them.
It depends on the sort
of structure that is established and I think some sort of structure
has to be established. I have heard that the communities will start
talking to one another. Yes people within a divided community must
start talking but they require, I think, some sort of structure
in order to control the dialogue between them and offer some sort
of apology, some sort of a solution, some sort of compensation for
loss in order for the process to work.
Gonda: Right. Let me
go to Mary Ndlovu. From your work with victims on the ground, do
Zimbabweans feel that the inclusive government is serious in dealing
with human rights violations committed in the past?
Ndlovu: Well unfortunately
we haven't seen the inclusive government showing very much
unity yet. We hope that might come. Certainly there's a suggestion
on the MDC side that they're serious about dealing with the
violations. It is unfortunate that the GPA only talks about political
violence because a lot of the violence against Zimbabwean people
has actually been economic violence - causing their poverty, their
lives to deteriorate to a level of misery almost. So we'd
also like to see that dealt with and we hope that will be able to
be dealt with somehow.
But we are prepared to
work hard. As WOZA Women we have already started working on discussion
and trying to inform ourselves as to what can be done and we'll
be certainly looking forward to a programme coming from government
that we can link into and feed our concerns into them and hope that
they also provide these structures that Advocate Bizos is talking
about. But the structures, I think the important thing is that the
structures themselves also be informed by what comes from the ground
and that there be a process of dialogue there before anything is
actually settled on.
Gonda: Still on you Mary,
in the current context in Zimbabwe , do you think it is possible
to balance peace and justice?
Ndlovu: Well that's
always a conundrum - which comes first? I think the justice
we'll probably have to wait for quite a while. Probably the
peace has to come first and the whole process will be very gradual
because in terms of peace, we really have to deal with the security
sector somehow so that the abuses stop. How can we really get justice
if the abuses are still continuing? It's going to be very
difficult. So it's not something that's going to happen
tomorrow or next week, it's something that's going to
happen over a period of months and probably even years. But we're
hopeful that something will come out of it.
Gonda: Glen - there
are some who have said that in 1980 Ian Smith and others should
have been put on trial to send a message to future leaders that
if this happened again, this would not be allowed. What are your
thoughts on this?
Mpani: I think there is merit in looking at it from that perspective
but if you look at it in the context to say they should have been
put on trial, I think that in 1980 there were also political concerns
that they were dealing with in relation to the Lancaster House Agreement.
And they were forced to take a decision within that context to say;
because we want the country to move on we are going to take these
hard choices. And I think over and above from that period I think
a culture of impunity has been created into the Zimbabwean political
space.
And I think what we now
need to look at is to say, based on all those developments coming
to, to this period that we are in right now, are we going to be
taking such a choice to say that in the event that there's
a political crisis - are we going to be taking a choice where we
just give amnesty willy-nilly? Or we are going to look at options
that Advocate Bizos has been talking about to say there can be conditional
amnesty where we need to know what really happened.
Because the real story
of what happened since 1960, the Matabeleland massacre, we don't
know some of these issues and I think it is important, not only
for the healing process but for posterity so that we understand
what went on and what has been happening in the country. And worse
enough coming to 2000 to 2008 with the closure of the media, I think
we need to know what was happening in the different parts of the
country. We've got places where things happened that we've
not been able to know and I think it's important just to get
to know all these issues and put them in the public domain.
Gonda: Mai Holland, at
what point in the process does the issue of amnesty come in to play?
Holland: Actually the way the discussion is taking place seems to
ignore the fact that most of the MDC leadership has suffered from
some of the worst violence, physically, mentally and in every way
and it seems that now, when we have got where we think we can all
go in and fight to open the democratic space and bring the changes
that could get us to where we want, we are now again being seen
as having done something wrong.
Nobody at all has discussed
amnesty! I have said and I would like to repeat we are going to
actually ensure that what Zimbabweans set up and what Zimbabweans
get to work on together come up with what we then see as something
we agree upon. We can't, as the three Ministers start off
by saying there's going to be amnesty, there's not going
to be amnesty. I think what I also need to say very quickly which
we seem to be misunderstanding is that the Global Political Agreement
came about because MDC made a decision that getting inside at this
stage was the only non-violent, the only viable, non-violent route
that was in our face, that's why we took that. We would like
to really make people understand that for us in MDC , saying that
we are not going to use violence means just that and that we are
buying peace by demonstrating at every stage that we are going to
use peaceful methods to stop violence.
Gonda: I don't
think anyone has said you have done anything wrong as the MDC and
correct me if I'm wrong but . . .
Holland: You are saying
we are compromised politicians, all those things which really does
not understand that the MDC in going in this Agreement, it was for
us a big sacrifice of ourselves because in the situation we were
in, everything was as it was and we knew we could be killed the
next day - and the fact that each day we go and fight and we get
a bit more inch of space, more democratic space, surely is enough
to inspire Zimbabweans to understand what it is we are trying to
say and get involved because the involvement of everybody is what
will give us what we want.
Mpani: Can I just say
something Violet? Amai Holland, I get what you are saying, but as
you get into a very sensitive matter like this one of national healing
and reconciliation which is equally important to even providing
food on the table in the Zimbabwean context, there's going
to be both criticism and support in this process. And I think it
is important - you have been mentioning in a number of instances
to say the Diaspora should support you, it is very commendable what
Amai Holland and her colleagues are trying to do in terms of the
process of national healing and reconciliation - but I think it's
going to be a highly contentious process, where there is going to
be a lot of criticism and that criticism should be taken in the
context that each and everyone would want the best process to emerge
out of this process.
And I think that some
of the things I am getting from Amai Holland are more or less like
they have tried so much - we know they have been in the terrain
for a long time, they have endured so much from what Zanu-PF has
been doing on them. But I think it also important to look at this
criticism not necessarily as retrogressive or as criticism that
is trying to destroy this process because the moment we do that
we are going to shut out a certain level, a certain class of individuals
who might want to contribute to the process but simply because they
feel that their views are taken to trying to derail the process,
this in itself might actually be one of the hindrances of the process.
So this is all I want
to say to Amai Holland that it's important that they take
every idea on board - and the people in the Diaspora, in all intents
and purposes, they don't mean badly. I would not want to give
myself the responsibility to speak on their behalf but some of the
criticism that they give in terms of these processes, is simply
because they want to go home, they are not seeing the indications
that there is sincerity on the part of the political players in
Zimbabwe . So it's very difficult to convince them from the
basis to simply say there is change that is going to be taking place
and then in a couple of days hear cases of violence taking place
all over the country. It's very difficult to be talking about
national healing and reconciliation in such a context. So their
words should match with what is happening on the ground.
Gonda: Mary, do you have
anything to add on this issue and on what Amai Holland has said
that there's this unfair criticism on the MDC and that the
MDC has really tried very hard to actually change the situation
in the country. What can you say about that?
Ndlovu: Well, I think
it's fair enough; a lot of people have been very sceptical
and with reason but I think what we feel is that somebody had to
try to do something, we couldn't go on the way we were, and
we had to make some kind of effort to solve the problems as Zimbabweans.
It's certainly, as Amai Holland says, it's not easy
and it's not going to be easy. But when it comes to looking
to the future, my only concern, or one of the concerns I find is
that people are worried that there might be too much emphasis on
reconciliation, this forgive and forget idea and not enough on the
fact that we must end this impunity. Crimes have been committed,
very serious crimes over a long period of time and somebody must
be held to account. Those people who have committed them must face
the people, their victims and account to them and in some way somebody
has to be punished and the victims have to be compensated so we'd
like to see a process where it's multi-faceted, we don't
just concentrate on getting along with each other but we have to
deal with the past in order to go into the future in a positive
way.
Gonda: Your final thoughts
Advocate Bizos?
Bizos: We considered,
and there were many South Africans who believed the criminal trial
was necessary to punish perpetrators. A choice had to be made. If
one side insist that members of the other side have to be brought
to the criminal court and punished you are not likely to persuade
their supporters that, that is a viable solution. Very often the
compromise that is necessary in order to create unity is necessary
and however strong the calls for justice, punishing the guilty,
may be one that we have to understand. In fact the reconciliation
route, unsatisfactory as it may be is the better route to follow.
I don't know if they insisted in 1980 that Ian Smith should
go on trial whether there would have been a settlement. I don't
know whether there is a possibility of the settlement which has
been entered into in Zimbabwe will succeed if one or other side
insists that there should be criminal trials and that people should
be punished, they should be jailed, they should be directed to pay
compensation. It's going to probably spoil the attempts at
reconciliation and peace being brought to the country.
Gonda: And your thoughts,
your final words Amai Holland?
Holland: I want to thank the panellists for their suggestions,
they are excellent, they will be very helpful and I'm comforted
that the criticisms are not ones that are already lumping us as
the enemy. That they're really meant to bring us good ideas
but what I'd like to say to the people even that are listening
is that we've received very few submissions from people. The
ones that we have received are excellent, from NGOs, from individuals,
at home, in the Diaspora and if we had more, the quality of the
work we produce will depend on the quantity and with the participation
of Zimbabweans at home, in the Diaspora and from friends of Zimbabwe
who have been working in this area for a long time. And I just want
to say to everybody listening, if you don't participate, the
quality of the product is not going to be as good as you wish.
Gonda: Can you just help
our listeners and readers with the details as to how they can contact
you, where they can send their submissions?
Holland: I think that we've got offices now. They are on
the 9th floor, Clubs Chambers, Nelson Mandela Avenue in Harare .
Gonda: Is there an email?
Holland:
email - we don't have an email yet but everybody knows
my email: sekaiholland@gmail.com
But we need really for people to write. Unfortunately the criticisms
that are made are verbal; we need people to send written submissions
because every submission really qualitatively improves our product.
Mpani: Glen, final word?
Mpani: My final word to Amai Holland is that I'm going to
take her on her word and will do as much as possible to assist in
any way possible and provide them with comparative examples of any
processthat Zimbabweans would have opted to craft and I hope that
they are going to maintain their stance of listening to the voice
of people on the ground and the victims because ultimately that
is very, very crucial and important in terms of moving forward.
Gonda: Mary Ndlovu?
Ndlovu: I'd like
to assure Amai Holland that WOZA Women will be in the process of
discussing and compiling their views and we will make sure that
she receives it. We welcome the opportunity to make an input.
Gonda: I'd like
to thank distinguished South African human rights advocate George
Bizos, Amai Sekai Holland who is Minister of State responsible for
National Healing and Reconciliation, Glen Mpani the Regional Co-ordinator
for the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation and
Mary Ndlovu a social justice activist. Thank you for participating
on the programme Hot Seat.
Holland,
Mpani, Ndlovu: Thank you.
Bizos: Thank you and
I wish the people of Zimbabwe well.
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
|