|
Back to Index
African
Commission adopts key resolution on the human rights situation in
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR)
Janaury 04, 2006
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights ("the Commission"),
meeting at its 38th Ordinary Session in Banjul, The Gambia,
from 21 November to 5 December 2005 adopted a critical resolution
on the human rights situation in Zimbabwe as well as taking decisions
on the admissibility of several communications submitted to the
Commission by Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR). The Resolution
on the Human Rights Situation in Zimbabwe was passed at a time when
the international community, through various entities, and in particular
the United Nations, had made adverse findings on the actions of
the government of Zimbabwe relating to the forced evictions and
had commented on the deplorable human rights record of Zimbabwe.
The resolution
of the Commission highlighted several key issues which require the
urgent attention of the government of Zimbabwe. Of note is the fact
that the Commission is concerned over the continued decline in the
rule of law characterised by defiance and disobedience of court
orders, ousting of the jurisdiction of the courts through Constitutional
amendments (in particular Amendment No 17), the violation of collective
and individual rights through forced evictions, and the suppression
of fundamental rights and liberties through laws such as Public
Order and Security Act, Broadcasting Services Act and Access to
Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The Commission further
called upon the government to implement the recommendations of the
Commission’s Fact Finding Mission of June 2002, as well as the recommendations
contained in the report by the United Nations Special Envoy on Human
Settlement Issues of July 2005, and to repeal or amend Constitutional
Amendment No.17 and provide an environment conducive to constitutional
reform on the basis of fundamental human rights.
Regrettably
the government has failed to take heed of the resolution adopted
by independent African human rights experts, rather choosing to
continue with threats, harassment, and arrests of individuals asserting
their right to freedom of expression, and stepping up its persecution
against critical local non governmental organisations and law based
organisations as more fully appeared in the statements covered in
the front page of the Sunday Mirror of the 1st
of January 2006.
This is a further
indication of the contempt with which the government of Zimbabwe
continues to treat independent experts concerned about the continuing
deterioration of the human rights situation in the country, and
those who attempt to offer suggestions for reform and amelioration
of the suffering of the people of Zimbabwe, who continue to bear
the brunt of the ongoing human rights violations.
ZLHR therefore
calls upon the government of Zimbabwe to take the various recommendations
by the African Union through the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights seriously and make significant changes and reforms
as highlighted in their Resolution to allow for the return to the
rule of law and the enjoyment and protection of fundamental rights
and freedoms in Zimbabwe.
The Commission,
during its private session, also considered several cases involving
the Republic of Zimbabwe on the aspects of admissibility.
The Commission
declared admissible the cases of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights
on Behalf of the Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe/Government of
Zimbabwe Communication 284/2003 (challenging the Supreme Court’s
application of the dirty hands doctrine in constitutional and human
rights related matters and its impact of the right to protection
of the law under the African Charter), Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human
Rights, Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa - Electoral
Petitions/Government of Zimbabwe Communication 293/2004 (highlighting
the inordinate delays in resolving electoral related disputes from
the 2000 parliamentary elections and its implication on the independence
of the judiciary and protection of the law), Zimbabwe Lawyers for
Human Rights, Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa
- Free Practice of Journalism/Government of Zimbabwe Communication
294/2005, (on the deportation of independent journalists in defiance
of courts orders as inimical to the free practice of the profession
of journalism as well as denial of protection of the law), and the
Independent Journalists Association of Zimbabwe, the Zimbabwe Lawyers
for Human Rights, Media Institute of Southern Africa/The Government
of Zimbabwe Communication 297/2005 (in respect of free practice
of journalism and compulsory registration of media houses by the
government).
International
Litigation, generally including the communications procedure in
the African Commission, provides for three stages namely seizure,
admissibility and merits. Of these three ZLHR notes that the admissibility
stage is crucial in establishing whether or not the government of
Zimbabwe is observing the rule of law and separation of powers.
It is also at the admissibility stage that the adequacy and effectiveness
of domestic remedies is tested in respect of alleged violations
of the African Charter, and whether the Judiciary is able to offer
substantive protection and redress to individuals and groups against
whom the state is alleged to have perpetrated human rights abuses.
Indeed it can be argued that the admissibility test is a practical
test by an independent group of experts sitting as the African Commission
selected by the African Union Assembly of Heads of States and Governments
as to whether there is effective separation of powers in Zimbabwe
or not.
The African
Commission ruled on four separate occasions that communications
submitted by ZLHR were admissible implying that in those four cases
there were no effective domestic remedies for the rights violations
alleged. Such decisions are an indictment of the judiciary as well
as an unequivocal and significant indicator that the judiciary and
the justice delivery system in Zimbabwe no longer guarantee enjoyment
of universally recognised human rights and fundamental freedoms.
This also further denotes the absence of the protection of the law
for victims of human rights violations and gives credence to the
allegations that there exists a practice of state sponsored impunity
in Zimbabwe. With these findings by the African Commission, ZLHR
argues that it has now established empirically through a very critical
African organ that the judiciary in Zimbabwe is seriously compromised
and is no longer the guarantor and protector of fundamental human
rights and freedoms.
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
|
