Back to Index

Media war intensifies - Farmers under fire
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe
Weekly Media Update No. 2002/28
August 5th - August 11th 2002

Summary
Once again Zimbabwe's persecuted commercial farming community proved it was no match for the government's determination to entrench its hold on power through the prosecution of its fast-track land reform programme.

In a week culminating in the celebration of Heroes' Day, there was no hope that farmers' appeals for a stay of eviction from their homes would be heard. And the promise of legal challenge to the land seizures simply fuelled the rhetoric that allowed government officials to portray white farmers in the historically suitable image of "unrepentant racists" who "were not prepared to share land with blacks," according to Local Government Minister, Ignatius Chombo (The Herald 9/8).

Notably, Britain's diplomatically feeble and inept efforts to have President Mugabe barred from the Langkawi International Dialogue in Malaysia fell into the same trap of providing Mugabe and his government with some evidence that Zimbabwe's sovereignty is indeed still under threat from the country's former imperialist power.

It was inevitable that the iniquities of colonial land distribution and the alleged hegemony of Britain would form the content of government's message to the people at a time when Zimbabwe remembered the heroes of its liberation struggle.

Not surprisingly, the government-controlled media dutifully set about disseminating this message in the week that saw thousands of farmers and their workers officially become homeless. Only Mugabe offered straws of hope that those "genuinely interested in farming" would not go without land (ZBC all stations 12/8). But in a belligerent and emotional Heroes' Day speech (that was combined with the funeral of the former Minister of Finance, Bernard Chidzero), he also warned that there would only be land for "well-meaning white farmers" who are "loyal citizens". For "those who want to own this country for Britain, the game is up and it is time for them to go."

His authoritarian comments reflected the nature of the statements from government officials and the public media, which virtually blotted out the voice of the farmers. Nor was any question raised in the public media about why land reforms had to be conducted so vindictively and at so much cost to the country's economy and social fabric.

Only the private media carried the voice of the farmer and farm worker (exclusively so on SW Radio Africa, 8/8) and explored some of the practical problems facing them, as well as reporting on declining economic activity and growing starvation.

Farm evictions
The expiry of the Section 8 farm eviction notices coincided with the 59th annual congress of the Commercial Farmers' Union (CFU), which the government and its public media exploited to discredit the farmers. The division between those farmers seeking dialogue with government and those who had given up and were seeking redress through the courts invited the opportunity to do so. All the media covered the story, but ZBC and Zimpapers' titles confined themselves to official observation of the rift and used it to further divide the farmers. For example, The Herald's editorial (9/8) tried to do this ethnically by identifying the Afrikaners "who had seen the light" and were seeking dialogue. But the paper believed that the members of the Justice for Agriculture Group (JAG) seeking legal redress, were "hardliners" and "saboteurs.of a British descent who still want to believe they have godfathers in London and Washington."

In its report on the CFU congress, ZBC (ZTV, 7/8, 8pm) stated:
"Serious cracks have emerged within CFU with a splinter group of hardliners calling itself Justice for Agriculture (JAG) calling for a confrontational approach with the government over land reform".

To the extent that JAG represents individuals who believe their property rights have been wronged and appear to be determined to have this corrected, that part of the report was not far from the truth.

But ZTV then attempted to link the group with the colonial past by stating that Ian Smith "who believes in white supremacy and intends to scuttle the agrarian revolution", was one of the leaders of the group. No credible evidence was provided to support this claim other than airing an incomprehensible interview with Smith. None of the state media bothered to inquire why JAG was established, a question answered by a Daily News report (5/8) citing the failure of earlier efforts to negotiate a solution.

The CFU's guest of honour, Vice-President Joseph Msika, simply threatened JAG (ZTV 7/8, 8pm): "..the protagonists of this unfortunate approach should be warned that the laws of this country.will be enforced without any hesitation.This group will only have itself to blame."

Although CFU's David Hasluck was quoted in the same bulletin stating that JAG was comprised of farmers and civic groups seeking to mount a legal challenge to government's land reforms, ZBC continued to label it a racist farmers' organisation. Thus, ZBC's audiences only heard about government's determination to stamp out resistance to its reform plans.

Zimpapers adopted a similar focus. Apart from reporting Msika's speech, The Herald (8/8) also reported Minister of State, Olivia Muchena, responding to criticism from a South African farmers' delegation, Agric SA, which had also sent the CFU a "solidarity message". Muchena was reported warning the visitors that the fate of Zimbabwe's white farmers also awaited racist white farmers in South Africa. But The Herald omitted to explain the content of their message, or the nature of their criticism.

Only The Zimbabwe Independent (9/8) provided the content of the "solidarity message"; a scathing attack by Agric SA's leader criticising government's "gross mismanagement of this country's economy."

Only The Financial Gazette (8/8) reported a highly significant ruling by High Court judge Justice Silas Hungwe, that "a farm that is mortgaged or bonded cannot be acquired for resettlement if the state has not properly informed the financial institution."

ZBC and Zimpapers' titles simply ignored this important news. Instead, ZTV's main evening bulletin (8/8) focussed on the impending eviction deadline and warned "confrontation looms owing to die-hard Rhodesians who have vowed to stay put on farms and fight to the bitter end". It quoted Chombo and resettled farmers calling on government to force the farmers off the land. Even a war veteran was quoted advising the government to send his colleagues in to do the job. But the reporter did not ask him why he thought they should be doing the work of the police.The next day a front page Herald report (9/8) noted that most farmers trooping off their lands "wore sullen faces as it finally dawned on them that the 1890 invasion of what was then Mashonaland has finally been reversed."

The paper underlined this alleged 'defeat' when it observed that the farmers were fleeing despite "a temporary four-month reprieve granted by a High Court judge on a technicality." But it did not explain what this was about.

In fact none of the public media raised any questions about the issues of compensation, the fate of single-farm owners and the fate of the crops still to be harvested, far less the future of many thousands of farm workers who were being rendered homeless and destitute literally overnight.

But the private media did.

SW Radio Africa (8/8) highlighted the farm workers' plight, and The Daily News (9/8) carried the example of a Marondera farmer evicted from her farm despite having "ungraded tobacco, paprika and maize seed in the field, valued at over $100 million". It also reported the CFU claiming that more than 1,000 of its members with single farms had received acquisition notices for their properties despite government's oft-repeated one-farmer, one-farm policy.The Financial Gazette reported that the evicted farmers "currently have 22000 hectares of the winter crop." which, it said, amounted to "60 percent of the projected crop at the beginning of the year ."

ZTV (9/08, 8pm) reported that 400 of the 1600 farmers served with eviction orders had complied "and many more are expected to follow suit." Without giving farmers a platform to air their views ZTV, in the same bulletin, quoted Chombo, who reinforced the brazenly racist perspective government has given to its land reform programme.

"The commercial farmers are an unrepentant lot. The commercial farmers are a racist bunch that want privilege to themselves only." Chombo said, echoing the earlier comments of Agriculture Minister Joseph Made.

SW Radio Africa (7/08) and the privately owned Press however, reported that 2900 farmers have been served with eviction orders leaving audiences and readers confused over exactly how many farmers were facing eviction.

SW Radio Africa also reported (7/08) that the newly formed Agricultural Development for Africa was helping Zimbabwean farmers to relocate Mozambique. Will this be the final solution?

Media falsehoods
The "war" between The Herald and The Daily News intensified during the week with both papers committing ethical offences that attracted criticism.

But while The Daily News' coverage of one of The Herald's alleged falsehoods was rational and factual, this could not be said of The Herald's emotional attack on its rival over its report of an interim relief order granted by the High Court to a farmer challenging the compulsory acquisition of his farm (8/8).

On Monday (5/8) The Herald published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Joseph Musakwa, pointing out that the paper had inaccurately presented the state case in its report on the indictment of three suspects in the murder of ZANU PF activists Cain Nkala and Limukani Luphahla. He was responding to claims in the paper's lead story the previous Friday (2/8) entitled, "Another opposition MP up for murder," that the trio, who included MDC MP for Lobengula-Magwegwe, Fletcher Dulini-Ncube, were accused by the State to "have been hired by MDC to murder senior Zanu-PF officials to avenge the alleged kidnapping and disappearance of Mr Patrick Nabanyama."

The Herald, which also linked the indictment to the death of Rutendo Jongwe added: "After their recruitment, the State alleges Masera, the party's deputy national secretary for security, taught them the skills to kill people using strong strings or fishing twine".

Musakwa pointed out that some of the facts in The Herald's story were not part of the summary of the State case. He noted that the State had "not alleged in the summary that the three accused are some of the suspects hired by MDC to murder senior Zanu-PF officials" nor that "Masera taught his co-accused the skills to kill people using strong strings or fishing twine".

While the paper published Musakwa's letter, it failed to correct this fabrication and to apologise to its readers. Certainly, publication of the letter from the AG's office pointing out the inaccuracies does not constitute an apology or a correction.

Mr Musakwa noted that "Such inaccuracies have a great potential of damaging the State case when an article ascribes to us facts that we cannot prove."

Indeed, such alleged inaccuracies indicate that falsehoods were published and that a prima facie case exists that The Herald's editors and the story's author violated provisions of the notorious Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act which makes the publication of falsehoods a criminal offence.

While MMPZ believes this anti-democratic law should be repealed, it looks forward to some indication that the police have not become agents for the selective application of the law.

In addition, MMPZ deplores the distorted impression carried by the story that there was fresh news of "another" MDC MP facing murder charges when in fact it was reporting on the latest developments in a highly publicised legal-tug-of-war where a High Court judge reversed an earlier ruling by the same court barring the indictment of the three opposition party members, including Dulini-Ncube.

This, together with The Herald's attempt to link the story to Rutendo's death, constituted a determined and unethical effort by the paper to discredit the MDC and compounded the damage caused by the alleged falsehoods contained in the same article.In addition, The Herald story (8/8) entitled "Farmer challenges Land Act, ministers' term of office" was misleading in so far as the paper omitted the fact that the High Court had issued an interim order in July preventing the compulsory acquisition of the farmer's farm, as reported in The Daily News on the same day (and previously on the 6th).

While The Herald only presented the farmer's argument and that of the respondents representing the State, The Daily News (8/8) reported that Justice Benjamin Paradza had, on July 4, granted the farmer, Pretorius Quinnell, interim relief on the grounds that Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa and Minister of Agriculture Joseph Made had ceased to be ministers "with effect from 1st April, 2002". The judge is also quoted as saying that therefore "the Section 8 Acquisition order signed by him (Made) on 29 April, 2002 concerning applicant's farm known as Nyalugwe, is invalid and of no force and effect".

The Daily News made it clear this provisional order granted apparently on the basis of the argument submitted by Quinnell that according to the Constitution, the offices of vice-president, minister and deputy minister fall vacant upon the assumption of office of a new President.

"By implication", the paper stated, this meant that all members of the Executive "ceased to be members of the Cabinet.as they have not been sworn in since Mugabe was re-elected."This logical extrapolation of the order however, gave rise to an inaccurate first sentence stating that "Cabinet is conducting the affairs of state illegally, according to a provisional High Court order." which was compounded by the headline, 'Judge rules that Cabinet is illegal'.

There is no evidence to suggest that the judge actually went this far in his declaration, although the implication clearly exists. As a result, The Daily News is guilty of stretching its interpretation of the order too far and should recognise this inaccuracy, especially in view of the fact that a confirmation hearing is still pending.

It is not the first time such mistakes have been made by the media in their interpretation of legal rulings and should serve as a reminder why it is so necessary for these organisations to adhere strictly to narrow interpretations that leave no room for ambiguity.

But if The Daily News committed the sin of over-zealous analysis, The Herald's attack on the paper's report the next day (9/8) constituted far greater offences.

In its story entitled 'Daily News lies again, reports on non-existent ruling', The Herald denied the existence of the provisional order given by Justice Paradza and used this as the basis to launch an emotional attack on The Daily News and its reporter Lloyd Mudiwa:

"The opposition mouthpiece, Daily News has once again maliciously misled the public in its desperate bid to protect the interests of white commercial farmers," The Herald stated.

It claimed Mudiwa had simply attributed the contents of the farmer's affidavit to Justice Paradza, which, it said, lawyers believed could lead to charges of contempt of court.

The paper also stated that "the application has not yet been heard or determined by the court," clearly suggesting that the initial hearing had not taken place.

If this were true, The Daily News would be guilty of a serious blunder. But in reporting the comments of Justice Minister, Patrick Chinamasa, The Herald refers to the provisional order. Describing The Daily News story as "false, irresponsible and downright mischievous", Chinamasa stated: "Despite providing the correct position.and relevant extract of the provisional order the publication has outdone itself by repeating a falsehood which is contemptuous of the court."

He added that the matters referred to by The Daily News still had to be determined by the court, a fact that the private daily had also made clear in its story. The Herald reported Chinamasa as saying "the terms of the interim relief granted were in respect of the acquisition order issued to commercial farmer Mr Pretorius Quinnell." Curiously though, the paper made no attempt to explain these references to the provisional order, although it further quotes Chinamasa as saying "All the conclusions of law reached by The Daily News are wrong."

The MEDIA UPDATE is produced and circulated by the Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe, 15 Duthie Avenue, Alexandra Park, Harare, Tel/fax: 263 4 703702, E-mail: monitors@mweb.co.zw

Feel free to respond to MMPZ. We may not be able to respond to everything but we will look at each message. Also, please, feel free to circulate this message.

Previous reports can be accessed at http://www.mmpz.org.zw

Visit the MMPZ 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