Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Zimbabwe's Elections 2013 - Index of Articles
Seat: Interview Zanu-PF’s Jonathan Moyo
Gonda, SW Radio Africa
guest is Zanu-PF politburo member Jonathan Moyo, with his party
position on the ongoing elections dispute. Moyo explains why Justice
Minister Patrick Chinamasa filed an application that the MDCs claim
is designed to fail in court; Why does Moyo say President Robert
Mugabe will not send electoral amendments to Parliament
as expected by the MDC formations? Why does Zanu-PF insist there
is enough time to implement
electoral process between now and the July 31st election date?
Gonda: Due to the time critical nature of the Hot Seat
interview, we are broadcasting it on Tuesday, instead of its usual
Thursday slot. On Wednesday the Constitutional Court will hear the
dispute over the election date and my guest is Zanu-PF politburo
member Jonathan Moyo, with his party position on the ongoing elections
dispute. I first asked Professor Moyo for an update.
Moyo: The reports that there’s supposed
to be a consensus application by the three parties mainly Zanu-PF
and the MDC formations in the inclusive
government is the figment of the imagination of someone who
is not creative at all because there is no such thing. The fact
of the matter is that an application was filed by the Minister of
Justice and Legal Affairs Cde Patrick Chinamasa on last Tuesday
and the next day he followed on that application by lodging an application
for the matter to be heard on an urgent basis. There was a hearing
on the urgency and a determination was made that all the parties
cited in the case including the applicant should file their papers
on Monday and that the case has been set down for a hearing or arguments
Of course during the
hearing on the urgency, the Prime Minister through his lawyers sought
to introduce a letter claiming that the parties in the inclusive
government were still seized with the matter and that the matter
should be stood down or even withdrawn until the parties agree on
a so called consensus application but they have already drafted
an application, the MDC formation, which they hope would replace
Minister Chinamasa’s application and it’s not a consensus
application. It is a draft application by the two MDC formations
and not with the participation of anyone in Zanu-PF and certainly
not with the participation of Minister Chinamasa but they would
like Minister Chinamasa to sign that application.
Professor Moyo, the MDC formations said that the Principals, including
president Mugabe, met last Wednesday and decided that the Justice
Minister Patrick Chinamasa, the Finance Minister Tendai Biti and
the MDC President Welshman Ncube should sit down and work out a
document that Chinamasa will take to the Constitutional Court and
that the one that he sent was not the document that represented
the views of all the political parties and that President Mugabe
actually agreed to this. So are you saying that they lied?
Yes I’m saying that they lied, and they are not lying for
the first time they have lied many times before, the bottom line
is that they are not the presidents’ spokesperson, they do
not speak for the president either in his capacity as the head of
state and government and commander in chief of the Zimbabwe Defence
forces or in his capacity as President and First secretary of Zanu
The fact of the matter
is yes there was a meeting on Wednesday, the MDC formations brought
a lot of people who are not even members of the government, who
are lawyers and just like they did in SADC, they tried to turn that
meeting into a court, making all sorts of arguments, pretending
these were legal arguments and so forth. And in the end Welshman
Ncube came up with a proposal that he wanted to engage Minister
Chinamasa on the narrow issue of the extension of the date and was
joined by Tendai Biti in that regard and indeed they were asked
to discuss so that Minister Chinamasa would get an idea of what
it is that they were proposing.
It was at that meeting
where Minister Chinamasa said to them feel free to make your proposal.
They made the proposal in the form of an application or an alternative
application alone. It was delivered to Minister Chinamasa, they
did not sit with him, they sat heaven knows with who, and presented
him with a draft application which was treating Chinamasa as the
applicant and them as the respondents and therefore create a situation
where they were going to respond to their own application which
is an unacceptable arrangement. And it was not drafted in such a
way as to say everyone was now an applicant and they were going
to apply to the constitutional court for an extension as parties
in the inclusive government. In fact, it was drafted in such a way
as to leave Minister Chinamasa at risk of committing perjury because
the application is based on falsehoods.
it is quite strange and this point needs to be emphasised that the
very same MDC formations made by Tsvangirai and Ncube went to Zuma,
lobbied SADC and went to the summit on the 15th in Maputo
alone with the support of Zanu Ndonga, Dumiso’s Zapu and Simba
Makonis’ MKD not with Zanu-PF, not as the inclusive government
and they attacked Zanu-PF.
But didn’t SADC say to all the political parties in the inclusive
government that they should go back and sit down and…(interrupted)
No, no, no no. Let me first finish this. This is a very important
point, you cannot go to SADC alone and you choose the political
parties and in this case they chose Mavambo, Dumiso’s Zapu
and Zanu Ndonga and they go there and the presentations they made
are then attached to a report to the facilitator. And they attack
Zanu-PF inside the summit, they attack the court judgement and they
come out celebrating claiming that they have humiliated the President
in the summit. Claiming that Chinamasa has given the President the
wrong advice and when we are here they want to go to the Constitutional
Court as the inclusive government and speak with one voice, that
is totally unacceptable.
And you are asking did
SADC not say that the parties should go together? No they said the
government of Zimbabwe, the relevant point in the Communiqué
says the government should do so, and in the deliberation it was
agreed that it’s the Minister of Justice who was going to
approach the court. Tendai Biti boasted on Facebook and other social
media that Minister Chinamasa has been directed to do so, the same
with Welshman Ncube. During the deliberation, it was agreed that
because he is the minister who administers the electoral law, he
should go on behalf of the government to seek an extension and that
is exactly what he has done!
Well the MDC formations say in last week’s cabinet meeting,
it was agreed the parties would speak with one voice and it was
also agreed that the Principals would meet and map out an election
That is what they are saying. You can believe them at your own peril.
The record in terms of the law and the fact is that there is a Constitutional
made on the 31st of May that elections should be held by the 31st
of July and the President has complied with that judgement. These
are facts. They want to turn everything into a political matter.
You cannot have the rule of law if everything is supposed to be
political, if everything is supposed to be negotiated. The reason
the Constitutional Court came up with that judgement is that it
found that elections should have been held in Zimbabwe on the 29th
of June, and that the time for calling for those elections had run
out and that therefore there was no rule of law in Zimbabwe as regards
the electoral process, and that in order to restore the rule of
law in connection with the electoral process, the President had
to issue a proclamation
fixing a date for the election to be held not later than July 31st
and the President has done so. We cannot have a situation where
people now resort to turning government institutions into their
instruments for political parties.
Professor Moyo, how do you respond to accusations by the MDCs’
who say that Zanu-PF is trying to make the Constitutional Court
throw out the application and that Chinamasa has told the court
that; Mugabe is happy with the July 31st court order but that it’s
Tsvangirai and Ncube who want this and it was also a directive by
SADC? Its also said Zanu-PF is turning the Constitutional Court
into their own instrument and it is clear that the court is acting
in concert with Zanu-PF hardliners?
The last point, for them to say the Constitutional Court is acting
in concert with so-called Zanu-PF hardliners is in contempt of court
but to say that the application by Chinamasa is wrong because it
confirms or affirms the fact that the President is happy with the
court judgement and that it is being filed at the instigation of
the MDC formations and that this is the consequence of directions
or instructions from SADC, that is true. Chinamasa is signing an
application, an affidavit under oath. He can’t lie. If he
lies he is committing perjury. It is common cause in the public
domain that the President has said he is happy with the judgement.
Why should we lie about that? In order to assist the MDC formations?
It is also true that he has complied with it. Why would the President
comply with something he is not happy with, something he doesn’t
respect? It is also a fact that the MDC lobbied Zuma and lobbied
SADC and that Welshman Ncube went there and behaved as if the SADC
summit was a court, making legal arguments before people who are
neither judges nor lawyers and thinking that he has dazzled them
with legalities and so forth. All these things are a fact.
No one has indicated
that the affidavit filed by Cde Chinamasa contains falsehoods. They
are unhappy about those truths because they feel exposed that these
truths have now been placed before a competent authority which has
the capacity to tell lies from truth and to do so by applying the
also say in Chinamasas affidavit in court he deliberately does not
point out the constitutional problems with having elections on July
Moyo: Why should he?
This is a ridiculous view. He cannot point to things which he is
not aware of because the President has complied with the court and
his compliance is in accordance with the constitution, in accordance
with the judgement of the court and in accordance with the electoral
law. Now, Violet, if they make all these allegations even the one
you have just referred to right now, they will be managed by the
facts or through the facts that they are the respondents in this
case, they are stating as they are not bystanders who are hopeless
and helpless and yet they are direct participants. They have ample
opportunity to make their own case, it is wrong for them to expect
Chinamasa to make the case for them as if they are not party to
Violet: But can you tell
us the Zanu-PF response to this issue of not having enough time
between now and 31st July to ensure that all the electoral processes
are completed. How are you going to manage that?
Moyo: That is not legally
correct. The only people who have the authority to interpret the
law, whether as regards the time or anything else which is a matter
of law is the court, it is not you or any other journalist, it is
not Welshman, it’s not Chinamasa, it’s not Tsvangirai,
it’s the courts. There is no legal ruling which says there
is no time.
Violet: The MDC formations
are saying that the law says there has to be a 30-day voter registration
and inspection and that you can only have a voters roll once you
have done that. They also say you need 30 days between nomination
court and elections and that it is not possible right now to lawfully
do these things before 31st July.
Moyo: No they are talking
nonsense! I think we have a problem, you are not listening to me
because I’m answering exactly to that. The court judgement,
the ruling of the 31st May by the Constitutional Court took those
things into account. But the more important issue for you please
to consider, the law is not what Coltart says it is or what Welshman
Ncube says it is or what Tendai Biti says it is or Magaisa or Chris
Mhike or the MDC formations. The law cannot be what they claim.
The law is what the court says. Only the court can interpret the
law. There has been no ruling to the effect that there is a problem
with regards to any of the things that you are alleging.
When judgement of the
Constitutional Court came out on the 31st of May, Tsvangirai said
that the court had overstepped itself and had no mandate to do so.
When the President complied with that judgement by issuing a proclamation
fixing the 31st of July as the date for the election, Tsvangirai
again issued a statement challenging that date and putting his own
date and basically saying these are political matters and not to
be decided on legal grounds. He made the same claim before the SADC
summit. This is where the problem is!
are failing to realise and appreciate a simple issue Violet, namely
that at midnight on the 29th of June, which is next week Saturday,
there will be no
one who was elected in 2008 will still have the right to exercise
anything, every term of office elected in 2008 expires at that time.
This is what the court said and the court said elections, taking
into account that time frame which you are saying leads to 44 days
should have been called at least some time in March or April and
because they were not, Zimbabwe does not have the rule of law.
Violet: Why was it not
It was not called then because the new constitution had not been
completed. It was assented to on the 22nd of May and we know why
people were playing games with it because it was a ploy if not a
plot to ensure that we create a jungle situation after the 29th.
And it is very very fortunate that the spirits of Mbuya Nehanda
and Lobengula intervened, thanks to the court application by that
individual citizen Jealous Mawarire that we at least have the restoration
of the rule of law and legality underway.
People are saying you sponsored Jealousy Mawarire to actually take
this matter to the courts.
Moyo: And now they will
say I sponsored you to interview me. I think that this whole idea
that everything is okay when they do it, the very same people you
know who are sponsored by these foreign governments but when Zimbabweans
ask for themselves and challenge these people, it is somebody else
who is sponsoring them. I think for a party which claims to respect
people, which claims to respect the rule of law to make such squalorous
allegations is shameful. It’s as if Jealousy Mawarire did
something illegal by going to the courts. He has an organisation
that is involved in elections and democracy law. I think this is
quite preposterous but it really shows us that we have people who
don’t respect other peoples’ views and who don’t
respect their rights in terms of the law.
Violet: But a lot of
Zimbabweans say that Zanu-PF does not respect other peoples’
views and also…(interrupted)
Moyo: What? Listen you
cannot us that as a blanket argument…
Violet: Professor let
Moyo: No, no, no you
cannot get away with that. You must raise it in relation to what
we are talking about. We are talking about an allegation that a
citizen was sponsored, now you can’t suddenly say those who
are making this allegation don’t respect that citizen, there
are others who say Zanu-PF does not respect, I think this kind of
reasoning is unhelpful… (interrupted)
Violet: So let me say...
Moyo: You are comparing
oranges and apples. You are trying to equalise where equalisation
Violet: Professor Moyo.
Violet: Don’t you
think your partners in the unity government also have that right
to go to the courts and say ‘the time that you have given
Moyo: Who has stopped
them? Instead of going to the courts they are going to Zuma.
Violet: But, you are
not allowing me to finish. We cannot do it like this.
Moyo: I thought you had
Violet: They are saying
they have a right also to go to the courts and say the time that
is left is not enough for all the electoral processes that need
to be done.
Moyo: Zanu-PF has not
said that MDC should not go to court to make their presentations.
Nobody. They have a right to go and make those cases, what we are
saying is, they do not have a right to go to SADC and make ridiculous
arguments pretending to be the best lawyers that God has ever created,
making arguments before a forum which is not a legal forum.
Violet: But professor,
just going back to the practical issues and I just want to get your
views on this as a legislator, is it not correct that in numerous
wards, the voter registration process only begins after the nomination
court on the 28th of June?
Moyo: That is not true,
it is absolutely not true. First of all in Zimbabwe, voter registration
is a continuous exercise, you can always at any time of your choice,
go to any of the offices around the country and register. In terms
of paragraph 6:3 of the sixth schedule of the new constitution,
there was supposed to be a particular programme of voter registration
intensified to last at least 30 days. Constitutionally and legally,
that started on the 23rd of May. In terms of logistics, practically,
politically, it might be another thing but there was registration
Then, we have
a tradition here in Zimbabwe that happens every time we have elections
before the closure of the voters roll for inspection that we have
mobile registration teams around the country in the rural areas
to reach people who may have difficulties going to the offices of
the registrar general and this has been happening. And normally
that happens for no more than between seven to fourteen days. But
in terms of the presidential powers that amended the electoral
act to align it with the new constitution,
section 11 of those amendment regulations allows the registration
exercise to continue beyond the nomination until the 9th of July.
In fact we would have had really the longest intensive exercise
ever done before an election in our country.
Violet: You mentioned
the presidential powers act and I think your colleagues are saying
the presidential powers act is not to be used if the constitution
says what is supposed to be done right now is by an act of parliament
and this is not what happened. They say that what the President
did was actually illegal. What can you say about that?
Moyo: They are saying
that but they are just the same like you and me, they have no particular
authority to interpret the law. If they want that to be the actual
legal position, they must go to court. They have had ample time
to go to court. These regulations were gazetted on the 12th of June
and Tsvangirai issued a statement – when they were gazetted
– to say he had instructed his lawyers to challenge the publication
of the amendment regulations as well as the publication of the proclamation,
and he did this before going to Maputo and when he was in Maputo,
it was brought to the summit that he had signalled that he would
go to the court and then he quickly told the leaders no no no, that
was just an intention. If he knew that it is a valid intention driven
by well-grounded law, why didn’t he go to court? That constitution
gives only the constitutional court as the final authority to do
so. So just because some Tom here, Jerry here, Jane there says this
is the situation about the presidential powers doesn’t make
it the legal position, it’s simply an opinion and like the
Americans say, an opinion is like our behind, everyone has one.
Violet: Is it correct
that the President illegally used the presidential powers act to
fast track the amendment bill?
Moyo: The answer is a
resounding no, absolutely not because no court has found anything
to that effect, nothing of that sort. What is correct is that there
are some people like Tsvangirai, Ncube, Coltart, Magaisa who keep
‘gaisaring’ that point. They keep making that allegation.
The allegation can’t be true simply because they are making
it. If they believed in that allegation, they should have gone to
the court, that is why we have a court, but they have just gone
to newspapers and summits which are run by people who are neither
judges nor lawyers.
Violet: Is that amendment
bill ever going to go through parliament?
Moyo: Why? The President
has the legal authority to do what he did and the current constitution
allows it. The new constitution with the interpretation is open,
we cannot agree with what these colleagues of ours have said. That
section which they have referred to is not yet operational. It will
be operational only on the effective date of the new constitution.
The bulk of the new constitution is not yet operational. It will
be operational when the next President is sworn in. So you get guys
jumping all over the place. They even alleged that the President
should have consulted or sought the approval of the cabinet before
gazetting both the Presidential Powers Temporal Measures amending
the electoral act and the proclamation for the election date when
in fact the constitution 31H, that they have been citing, actually
allows the President to exercise powers directly, and there are
three clauses in that section which unambiguously allow him to do
that. But listen, I’m prepared to say if the President was
wrong in his interpretation and application of the law, the only
forum to prove or establish that is the court of law.
Violet: But what they
also say is Zanu-PF would have tied them up in all these legal cases
when they should be campaigning.
Moyo: These are falsehoods,
and everyone knows them to be such, they are coming from the same
people who have been boasting that they were ready and Zanu-PF is
not ready for elections. The court right now if you look at the
role of the constitutional court in terms of the cases that will
be heard on Wednesday, they are all filed by the MDC not Zanu-PF.
Violet: Well, many believe
what is happening right now is a ploy by Zanu-PF to spread out the
processes until it is too late to even take the amendment bill to
Moyo: The President is
not taking any amendment bill to parliament, he is not. He has already
gazetted it. It’s law. Those regulations are law as we speak
right now, so please understand this, he is not going to parliament.
The MDC formation and the likes of Jameson Timba were boasting in
the media saying that we are going to deal with Zanu-PF in parliament
by holding the passage of the Bill so that we buy time and frustrate
the Presidents’ capacity or ability to comply with the court
order. Now they went public and in typical fashion, they were celebrating.
They like talking too much in bars and then being quoted and reported
in the media and this has been useful there in Maputo where they
celebrated that in their view they had humiliated the President,
they had won, they had performed wonders and so forth, only to realise
that no, you need to go to court and the authority to do that is
Chinamasa but you had already thrown mud all over the place. I just
think that it would be far much better if I could give free advice
to our friends and colleagues in the MDC formations. Stop behaving
like children in the media! Stop using the media as a playground
for childish games!
Violet: I guess a lot
of Zimbabweans are actually feeling that all the political parties
in this inclusive government are using the general public, and it’s
like monkey games that we are seeing, everyday there’s something
weird that is happening making people worry that this is just going
to lead to another GNU.
Moyo: First of all I
don’t agree with you that everybody is doing that when a constitutional
court makes a judgement, that’s not monkey games in the media,
when the head of state complies with that judgement that is not
monkey games. The bottom line is that an election is held not in
terms of political whims of the parties in the government of the
day, an election is of the interest to all Zimbabweans.
I think there
have been some quite awkward developments and moments in the last
four years which have shown us that what you call a GNU for me it
never has been a GNU, this has been an inter-party government or
a GPA government, it’s not good for the country. This has
not been good for the country in terms of the policies. And worse,
because some elements in it have used the GPA
as a statement of some surrender of our sovereignty to either South
Africa or Zuma as the facilitator or SADC. And even in violation
of that very same document because it recognises that Zimbabweans
have the sole prerogative of running their own affairs. So well
to the extent that all political parties somehow have to express
themselves through the media, perhaps you have a point, but the
way the media has been used by the various parties is not the same.
We are not in the same basket.
Violet: Well, the MDC
formations are actually saying media reforms are one of the areas
that need to be sorted out before the elections.
Moyo: Any political party
which tells you that they must be reforms before they go for an
election especially two weeks or so before an election or less now
when the nomination court sits on the 28thof this month which is
exactly a week from today, if someone tells you a week before the
election process is to start in earnest, you must have reforms,
then there’s something fundamentally wrong about that person.
Parties contest elections in order to win and bring reforms. Parties
don’t say let’s have reforms before we contest, that
is ridiculous. I think this is a sickness. You are the one who should
bring reforms, anything that has not been agreed to cannot be a
reform. We agreed to the new constitution, it is the most far reaching
fundamental reform that you can ever get and it catches everything
including the media and anything else in our laws and our practice
which is inconsistent with the provisions of the new constitution
as regards the media is invalid and the courts are there to confirm
the invalidity. So when you hear people who have just adopted a
new constitution which introduces reforms failing to recognise that
fact and still speaking as if that fact has not occurred, then you
know there is something fundamental that they don’t have.
Violet: Well the media
is another issue that needs a whole debate and I’m running
out of time but what happens when you have service chiefs who publicly
show their allegiance to a particular party, do you think that is
Moyo: Well, they don’t
show allegiance to a particular party, that is an unfair allegation.
They have shown allegiance to the liberation struggle and the gains
of that struggle because they participated in it and they know that
we have fallen daughters and sons of the revolution who paid the
ultimate sacrifice through their lives to bring us this freedom
and democracy that we enjoy today, all of us including the MDC formations.
It so happens that there is a historical connection between that
fact and Zanu-PF because it is Zanu-PF which fought the liberation
war. Or putting it differently, the liberation war was fought under
Zanu-PF as represented by Zanla and Zipra respectively.
Now if certain statements
have been made and so forth, I’ve seen some reports suggesting
– it’s even in the facilitators’ report to the
last summit of SADC in Maputo on the 15th of June that these people
should make statements disassociating themselves from what they
said in the past in light of the new constitution, that is barbaric.
There’s no law which is retroactive. You don’t come
up with a law today to say ‘you said that statement in 2002’;
it’s nonsensical and you know, we are not going to be forced
to do nonsensical things just because some people have a problem.
Tsvangirai said ‘Mugabe
go out peacefully or else we will remove you violently’, has
he ever retracted that statement? If he is willing to retract that
statement, let him show by example. We heard him, he said it at
Rufaro Stadium, he has never retracted. Now he wants to tell us
Nyikayaramba retract this, Chedondo this one, and this one because
we now have section 208 in the new constitution. There are some
lawyers who were trying to come up with this argument that there’s
a new constitution, some of the provisions have become operational,
in the light of those provisions, Jonathan Moyo, if you called me
a dog yesterday, that was hate speech, retract that in terms of
the new constitution, that’s foolish. That’s really
barbaric. There’s no constitution which operates like that.
What is happening right
now is the confirmation of a very simple fact that on the 29th of
June, this government of the GPA and so forth will come to an end,
that is a fact so it is natural for parties which are running primary
elections, which are now putting their manifestos to the public
to be trembling, which is why we need a referee who is not one of
the parties and who is not an external body, who is not Zuma, who
is not SADC, who is not the AU. The referee is our own court, if
you think the referee has no legal mandate to officiate then you
have a problem, don’t play the game.
Violet: It’s said
that even after the dissolution of power in parliament, there are
ninety days where the President can actually call an election. The
President is allowed ninety days?
Moyo: You know Violet,
can you hold on there. This is where my compatriots have a problem,
you continue to trust your colleagues over your court. The court
has rejected that argument. The court has spoken that’s false.
As we speak right now elections are on the 31st because that’s
what the court said and the President has complied and issued a
proclamation in accordance with the judgement of the court. But
of course you and I know there is a pending application seeking
an extension of that date but that has not been granted or rejected.
Violet: On the issue
of political parties playing games can you tell us, why Zanu-PF
ministers walked out of a crucial cabinet meeting that was going
to discuss the election road map?
Moyo: First of all I
think it’s reckless of them to talk about cabinet issues because
cabinet deliberations are protected and they know this and they
have taken an oath to that effect but it is not correct to say that
the particular issue was on the agenda as the main issue. Secondly,
the allegation that Zanu-PF ministers walked out is false because
the fact is the cabinet is coming to an end and elections are upon
us. We in Zanu-PF had a very important national election directorate
meeting and critical members of the election directorate include
the same cabinet ministers we are talking about such as Chinamasa
and others. In fact I don’t think Chinamasa even managed to
go to that cabinet meeting because he had serious business elsewhere
and had to excuse himself.
Violet: Finance Minister
Tendai Biti actually says that there’s a chaos faction in
Zanu-PF and he mentioned Patrick Chinamasa and of course other people
say you are a part of this chaos faction that is bend on causing
confusion. Some people imply that the President is not really in
Moyo: It’s flattering
to note that Tendai Biti has nothing to say about the MDC whose
leadership he is seeking from Tsvangirai and has everything to say
about us and is following our party. That shows we are the only
relevant party to talk about and his view that the so called chaos
faction and so forth is typical of his delinquency. He is known
for coming up with such hyperbolic descriptions of everything under
the sun and there’s no need to take him serious on that. But
he is a member of the inclusive government and if within the inclusive
government, he’s being kept busy and sees that as chaos in
the sense that he is unable to implement the instructions he got
from his sponsors to grab power from within.
Violet: And a final word
Moyo: I think that we
should as Zimbabweans be proud of our country, be proud of our constitution,
of our institutions and of our laws and of our culture. We must
be our own liberators, shape our own destiny. This business of people
who want to run our country, becoming cry-babies, crossing the Limpopo
thinking that there’s some kind of a big brother who should
poke his nose into our affairs must come to an end. We will never
ever reach a time when we will agree on everything, that is the
nature of the human spirit. We were created with differences but
there are many many fundamental things that tie us together. Let
us focus on those things when it comes to such issues as determining
our own national affairs and running them.
Violet: Thank you very
much Professor Jonathan Moyo for talking to us on the programme
Moyo: You are welcome.
Violet: Hot Seat is back
in its usual Thursday slot next week.
Africa is Zimbabwe's Independent Voice and broadcasts on Short Wave
4880 KHz in the 60m band.
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.