Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Index of articles surrounding the debate of the Domestic Violence Bill
Women's
struggle for equity goes on
Dr Fareda Banda
May 03, 2007
http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=306519&area=/supzim0407_home/supzim0407_content/
It seems a lifetime ago
that Zimbabwe's government showed its support and respect for women
when it refused to accede to a request by a visiting Iranian delegation
that women should not be seated at the top tables at a state dinner.
The government noted
that women had fought alongside men in the liberation struggle and
therefore could not be ignored or treated as second-class citizens.
This was not a one-off.
The early years saw the creation of a Ministry of Women's Affairs
headed by the current vice-president and the passing of the controversial
Legal Age of Majority Act, which transformed the legal landscape
for women. The Act proclaimed that like men, women who reached the
age of 18 could enter into contracts and make decisions that affected
them by themselves.
Prior to this, African
women were considered minors throughout their lives, passing from
the guardianship of fathers to husbands.
The case of Katekwe v
Muchabaiwa, which allowed a woman who had achieved majority status
to marry without parental consent and without the payment of lobola
if she wished, together with the Chihowa v Mangwende case, permitting
daughters to inherit family property, sparked disapproval. There
were demands for the repeal or amendment of the statute.
But the government held
its nerve and refused to take back rights already won by women.
More recently,
in February this year, the government enacted the Domestic
Violence Act, which seeks to provide both criminal sanctions
and civil remedies to those experiencing violence in the home or
the community. In addition to battery, it covers practices as diverse
as forced marriage to a brother of the deceased husband and compulsory
sex with a father-in-law.
But women are
failed by the Constitution.
A 1996 amendment to the Constitution barred discrimination on the
grounds of gender. This would seem to cover women. Unfortunately,
the Constitution goes on to note that there are certain instances
where the non-discrimination provision does not apply. These include
family-law issues governed by customary law.
Customary family law
is the area most likely to affect the vast majority of women. While
there are many customs, and some families are generous in their
interpretation of women's entitlements, women should not be left
at the mercy of family members for justice.
Rather, the Constitution
should provide that discrimination is not permitted, without any
exceptions or exemptions being made for any legal system. Women's
rights should not be held hostage to custom, culture or religion.
A related issue that
needs consideration is that of legal harmonisation or consistency.
While the new Domestic Violence Act outlaws compulsory "inheritance
marriages", the Customary Marriages Act appears to recognise
them, if they are registered. To deter a practice that has become
even more dangerous in light of the high HIV infection rate, it
may be best if the recognition given to this type of marriage is
removed.
Given the current climate,
which has witnessed widespread violations of human rights, it is
worth highlighting the eagerness of the state to ratify international
human rights instruments, including the International Covenants
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), on Socio-Economic and Cultural
Rights, as well as the Women's Convention.
However, the government
has not taken the important step, required by the Constitution,
of passing a law to enable the human rights norms to be used in
the national courts. It has also not ratified protocols that would
allow citizens who feel that their rights had been violated and
who are not satisfied with the handling of their cases to appeal
to the United Nations committee tasked with receiving complaints
from nationals of states.
Showing remarkable honesty
and self-knowledge, the government has not bothered to ratify the
1994 Convention against Torture (in any event torture is outlawed
in the Constitution). It is now accepted that severe violence against
women can constitute torture.
These omissions, together
with the government's propensity for ignoring court decisions with
which it does not agree, speak volumes about its commitment to human
rights.
In addition, the country
needs to take its reporting obligations to international human rights
bodies more seriously. As it stands, it owes the Human Rights Committee,
which oversees the ICCPR, two reports. The Women's Committee is
owed three reports; and the committees on economic, social and cultural
rights, race and children's rights are all owed two reports each.
More surprising, given
its self-avowed commitment to African institutions, is the failure
of the government to ratify the African Protocol on Women's Rights
adopted by the African Union in Maputo in July 2003. This protocol
contains many rights that could benefit women.
Lawyers like to think
that passing laws can solve most problems. Clearly this is wishful
thinking. Policy and context are equally important. With this in
mind, it will be important for greater attention to be paid to the
effects of certain policies on the lives of women.
*Dr Fareda
Banda is a reader in the laws of Africa at the school of Oriental
and African studies at the University of London. She is the author
of Women, Law and Human Rights: An African Perspective (Hart Publishing)
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
|