Back to Index

Report on meeting to discuss The Forced Evictions and "Operation Murambatsvina"
Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR)
June 03, 2005

Noting with grave concern the ongoing forced evictions, widespread destruction of houses, flea markets and residential properties in certain parts of the country, and the unfolding humanitarian disaster, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) convened an emergency membership meeting to discuss legal strategies to challenge the actions taken by the various city councils, their respective Municipal Police, the Ministry of Local Government and Urban Development, the Ministry of Home Affairs through the Police Commissioner and related law enforcement agencies. Debate centered around the action to be taken in light of the unfortunate and worrying judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe in the matter involving Dare Remusha Cooperative vs. The Minister of Local Government and Urban Development, the Chairperson of the Harare Commission, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Commissioner of Police and the Harare City Council, wherein it was ruled that the evictions were lawful.

The application had been filed on an urgent basis praying for a spoliation order and or an interdict. The provisional relief sought that:

a) 'Operation Murambatsvina/Restore Order' be declared unlawful and ordered to cease with immediate effect;

b) Anyone acting through or under the instruction of the Ministry of Local Government and Urban Development, the Harare City Council or the Ministry of Home Affairs be interdicted from furthering the objectives of 'Operation Murambatsvina/ Restore Order without due process of the law;

c) The residents of Hatcliffe Extension as represented by Dare Remusha Cooperative be granted peaceful occupation and possession of their stands;

d) The Ministry of Local Government and Urban Development and various other state and non state entities acting through or under them be interdicted from evicting, threatening or continuing to evict the Applicants from their homes in Hatcliffe or destroying the same.

The Court ruled that the residents of Hatcliffe Extension had breached their lease agreements and had failed to construct structures with City Council approval, and the evictions were therefore justified. Regrettably the Court did not address the fulfillment of the requirements of a spoliation order or interdict which do not require scrutiny of the merits or issues of legal ownership or tenancy as happened in this case.

ZLHR members resolved to:

1. File an appeal in the Supreme Court against the decision of the High Court which looks patently wrong at law and is seen as yet another incident where the judiciary has failed to be the guarantor and protector of human rights and fundamental freedoms, (the grounds of appeal are available on request);

2. That further applications for relief for the victims of Operation Murambatsvina and Operation Restore Order (according to societal sector and geographic region) be filed through various courts

(Magistrates' Court, High Court and Administrative Court) countrywide. The challenges would include applications challenging the legality of the action taken, applications for interdicts and peace orders, and compensation claims, amongst others;

3. That a constitutional challenge be filed with the Supreme Court raising among other issues the violation of rights as protected in the Declaration of Rights in the Constitution of Zimbabwe; in particular, Sections 12, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22 and 23 thereof, and relying upon relevant case law from the region and further afield in the area of forced evictions;

4. That the constitutional application take cognizance of the provisions of various international and regional human rights declarations and instruments which the Government of Zimbabwe has ratified or assented to, such as but not limited to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women;

5. That potential communications and complaints be prepared with regards to the various human rights systems and mechanisms which have the mandate to consider complaints on human rights violations in Zimbabwe;

6. That urgent appeals be sent to the Special Rapporteur(s) on adequate housing (under the United Nations system) and the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women in Africa, and the Special Rapporteur on Refugees, Asylum-seekers and Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (under the African system);

7. That an urgent appeal also be sent to the office of the Secretariat of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights to the attention of the Commissioner in Charge of Zimbabwe requesting an urgent intervention in the matter;

8. That press statements continue to be issued and circulated within and without Zimbabwe to highlight the plight of the evictees, and their families;

9. That humanitarian support from ZLHR members and greater networking with other NGOs be coordinated to address the required basic needs of affected persons, such as tents, water, food and blankets,

ZLHR members agreed that the actions of by the government of Zimbabwe will have to be challenged utilising a multi-sectoral approach.

In conclusion ZLHR members found themselves in agreement with the views of the esteemed Justice Albie Sachs in the Constitutional Court of South Africa, in the strikingly similar case of Port Elizabeth vs. Various Occupiers wherein he stated that:

"It is not only the dignity of the poor that is assailed when homeless people are driven from pillar to post in a desperate quest for a place where they and their families can rest their heads. Our society as a whole is demeaned when state action intensifies rather than mitigates their marginalisation. The integrity of the rights based vision of the Constitution is punctured when governmental action augments rather than reduces denial of the claims of the desperately poor to the basic elements of a decent existence. Hence the need for special judicial control of a process that is both socially stressful and potentially conflictual." .

Visit the ZLHR fact sheet

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