UN High Commissioner for Human Rights calls for justice for victims of political violence

Last week the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navy Pillay, visited Zimbabwe. This is the first time Zimbabwe has allowed any High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit the country. She paid specific attention to the issue  of politically motivated violence against women, as evidenced by her comments at the end of her visit:

”Women’s groups, and the relevant United Nations agencies, believe that sexual, domestic and politically motivated violence against women are also widespread and on the rise, especially around election times. Zimbabwe has the necessary legal framework for dealing with these crimes, but – like many other aspects of the legal system – the relevant laws are not being implemented properly. Many women are reluctant to report violence because they have lost trust in the police. Little effort appears to have been made to establish how many women were subjected to sexual violence around the time of the 2008 elections, and even though the identity of a number of the alleged perpetrators is known, there has reportedly been little or no attempt to investigate, arrest and prosecute.”

Pillay’s visit has been planned shortly after the golden promises the Minister of Justice made, when Zimbabwe was reviewed at the Universal Periodic Review mechanism.

Read  Pillay’s full statement here

 

Students continue the struggle for democracy in spite of victimisation

Zimbabwean student and youth leaders continue to be targets of perpetual incarceration, victimization and political persecution under the current regime.

In the Independence Statement, the Zimbabwe National Students Union (Zinasu) notes with regret that the liberation history has been hijacked by the political elite by claiming that only those with liberation war credentials can legitimately claim power.

Zimbabwean youth continue to face a myriad of problems in their struggle for democracy and influence, such as dwindling resources for the education system and limited access to student grants and loans.

The continued victimisation, prosecution and persecution of student leaders by the police and court system adds on to the risks associated with youth activism, but the students commit to continue the struggle against repression.

Download Zinasu Independence Statement

NCA Independence Day Statement

Statement on Zimbabwe’s National Independence Day

The National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) today pays tribute to the gallant sons and daughters of this great country who fought fearlessly for the independence of this country. It is in the same spirit that we register our deep concerns over the way the ZANU-PF government has destroyed the national fabric of this great country.

As we celebrate these thirty two years of self rule we are disappointed that today the culture of ZANU-PF has become so endemic in our society. It is ironic that the state apparatus that are meant to protect the people of Zimbabwe and foster an environment of peace (the army and the police) have become the chief perpetrators of violence and chief violators of human rights. The skewed judiciary system is a total derailment of the gains of the liberation struggle. Those opposed to ZANU PF, are being treated unfairly in our courts of law. 32 years after our independence, the laws governing the land, reminiscent the colonial times were the infamous LOMA was arbitrarily used to crash dissenting voices.

We deplore in the strongest terms the abuse of state machinery by ZANU-PF for political gains.

The national Independence is coming right at a time when Zimbabwe is at the crossroads regarding the writing of a new constitution for the country. As all of you are aware that the Select Committee of Parliament known as ‘COPAC,’ has failed to produce a draft constitution despite all the time and the resources they got from donors.

As the NCA, we passed a vote of NO confidence in COPAC, since the day it was incepted, after a careful analysis that the model as articulated by Article 6 of the Global Political Agreement (GPA), was far from what the people of Zimbabwe envisaged as a process that can yield a truly democratic constitution for Zimbabwe.

Now we are eagerly waiting for the failed COPAC group to officially release their negotiated draft to be tabled for the referendum. Our campaign will be intensified in our villages, townships and farm meetings. As NCA we remain fully committed to the same National Working Peoples Convention resolutions and its commitment to democracy as well as social and economic justice. In the twelve or so years since the NWPC and the formation of the MDC, we have also steadfastly maintained that true democratic change can only be arrived at via a people driven constitution making process and this is reaffirmed in the Zimbabwe’s People’s Charter.

As we celebrate our independence we remain dedicated to our Take Charge campaign for a ‘NO’ vote in the pending constitutional referendum. In campaigning for a NO VOTE in the referendum the NCA is just re-affirming that Zimbabwe needs a home grown, people driven and democratic constitution.

A “NO” vote does not mean that people want to be governed by the current Lancaster House Constitution. It does not mean that we want future elections to be held under the current Lancaster House Constitution. It simply means that we want a good constitution and we are rejecting a bad one.

In opposing the COPAC process, we are not opposing this moral demand. We are fulfilling it. Our argument is that the mistakes of 1979 cannot be repeated. And neither should we settle principle for political expediency. Constitution making is in itself a continuation of a political struggle for democracy. It is the fight for a democratic constitution, we are qualifying the dream of a Zimbabwe we want.

This we cannot allow and we are convinced politicians will realise that Zimbabweans are clear on what they want and the Zimbabwe they want to build. We cannot have the process be driven by those whose power society seeks to limit! It has to be an independent commission – independent from this over-arching hand of politicians! We urge you all to be resolute and steady fast in this front line walk of advancement towards egalitarianism. Let us join hands, take charge and complete this change which is imminent.

Issued by
Madock Chivasa
NCA National Spokesperson
+263 775 614 471

Do you have the PHD Syndrome?

By Kudakwashe Chitsike, Research and Advocacy Unit, Zimbabwe

“Unless and until we get rid of PHD, women will not go far in any field.” In this context a PHD is not a doctorate degree, it is an acronym that stands for Pull Her Down. The Pull Her Down Syndrome is sadly one that most women suffer from regardless of status in society.  Upon hearing the term for the first time I was shocked as it seemed in the group there were a few of us who had never heard of the PHD, I knew what it was but I hadn’t realised that the behaviour had its own acronym!

The syndrome is based on an inferiority complex, “We look down upon each other and ourselves by saying we are not able to do it, let the men do it.”
The Research and Advocacy Unit (RAU) held 11 focus group discussions with women from different parts of the country to talk about politically motivated violence against women. The focus group discussions also explored what women are likely to face as we draw closer to elections, looking at what happened in past elections and what efforts are being made to protect women from violence.  Inevitably these discussions also brought about the issue of encouraging women to participate in national processes and aspire to hold positions of authority. It is within this context that we established that the PHD is holding women back as women do not support other women to occupy leadership positions. W “We grew up being told that men should be the ones’ to lead so we still have that mentality and letting it go is a bit difficult.”   It was stated repeatedly that when a woman is
standing for a political position, she has to struggle for acceptance from her peers as petty jealousies based mainly on gossip rear their ugly heads. The main reason for women selling out other women is seldom for their political affiliations but mostly because of the PHD syndrome; politics provides a
perfect cover for women to settle scores that have accumulated over years.

Another issue that features in the political PHD syndrome is marital status; if a woman is single, involved in politics and successful the most common misconception is that she used unscrupulous mainly immoral means to get to the top.“A married woman is said to be more honourable than one who is not married so when an unmarried woman runs for office she is judged harshly.”  If she is married then she doesn’t have a strong husband who can bring her to order as politics and marriage do not mix, never mind that men have been doing it for time immemorial.

A woman involved in politics, as with women in other male dominated fields has to work twice as hard to gain respect and ironically the people she has to impress the most are other women. Women would rather nominate a man than another woman for a political position, as “men are more educated and politically astute”, but when we asked how the women will ever become educated and
astute if we do not give them opportunities, the women had no response.

The women in the focus groups acknowledged that women need to be given the opportunities to learn on the job but stated that there is a need for a total change in mindset, so that we accept that women can do the same as men in politics and any other fields considered to be male domain. The way to address this is by having confidence building sessions for women which should start with
confidence in the home before addressing what happens in the public arena. The inferiority complex results in “women not standing up for what they want so if someone says that we are unable to do something then we start to doubt ourselves and believe that we will fail and thus we fail before we even begin.”

For there to be a change in mindset it is important to look at cultural and religious beliefs that perpetuate the myth that women are below men and they are overstepping their bounds when they participate in politics. It is important to involve the men and older women as they are the custodians of the beliefs that oppress women. Women’s organisations have to take on a much bigger role and
increase visibility particularly in the rural areas where cultural and religious beliefs which discriminate against women are deeply rooted.

It has been said often enough by women in high political positions that it is an uphill journey to the top for a woman to stand against a man for a position. They have to contend with sexual harassment and or sexual violence, superiority complexes from their male counterparts without having to deal with the PHD from women.  Instead of supporting the efforts of those who are brave enough to say ‘bring it on’ to the men, other women are scheming to find ways to bring her down.  The women stated that many times when a woman is elected, she stops behaving and thinking like a woman and takes on a ruthless male persona, where she has forgotten the struggles she endured as a woman to get there, she forgets about the women left behind in the struggle.

Women in these discussions varied in age, geographical locations, backgrounds and political affiliation but their responses were very similar with regard to PHD, “we women are our own worst enemies as we don’t want to see our peers succeed.”  The PHD syndrome however is not confined to the political realm it appears in every aspect of every woman’s life. It is about undermining the efforts
of another for usually very superficial reasons. As women we should implement programmes that encourage women and girls to grab equal opportunities with men as well as support each other in whatever areas we decide to venture into.

This post derives from RAU’s (the Research and Advocacy Unit) latest opinion piece. For more information about RAU go to: http://www.researchandadvocacyunit.org/

It is time for Zimbabwe to prosecute torturers

This week has seen a drama unfolding in Harare, when Munyaradzi Gwisai and five other activists were convicted for watching a video about the uprisings in Egypt and inciting violence designed to overthrow the government. The conviction is a statement from the regime that it will continue to clamp down on critical voices, but who will be taking the regime and its extended arms to court for their involvement in political violence and torture?

The six activists, as well as the 40 other people present at the video screening in February 2011, were peacefully exercising their freedom of assembly, association and expression. But rather than using the law to protect the rights of the citizens to form and articulate their political opinions freely and peacefully, the activists were arrested, kept in detention in 27 days and tortured.

According to defence lawyer, Alec Muchadehama, the six activists underwent torture sessions, with assaults all over the bodies, under their feet and buttocks through the use of broomsticks, metal rods, pieces of timber, open palms and some blunt objects.

It is a great paradox that the conviction was handed down a few days after Minister of Justice and Legal Affairs, Patrick Chinamasa promised United Nations Human Rights Council to ratify the Convention Against Torture. Chinamasa was quoted in the state-run Herald newspaper that “Under no circumstance should torture be used whether physical or mental to obtain information or confession from any person against who allegations of commission of crime are made… It is the responsibility of the judiciary to cause the investigation of every allegation of torture by an accused appearing before them.”

However, when Gwisai filed a case in High Court, against the Police and Home Affairs Co-Ministers, the Attorney-General’s Office denied the alleged torture charges and filed notice to oppose the application. The hearing on the matter is still pending.

The Gwisai case demonstrates the urgent need for access to justice for the thousands of victims of state-sponsored torture and political. The most notable examples are the Gukurahundi killing of 20.000 people in Matabeleland and Midlands in the 1980s, the illegal farm seizures in the 2000s and during elections, with the 2008 election violence being the most brutal. During these peaks in violence, the state has been directly implicated in establishing torture camps all over the country, where the police, military and militia have carried out systematic torture of people suspected to be opposition supporters.

Unfortunately, most of the reported cases of these atrocities have remained in the memories of the survivors and in the drawers of human rights lawyers and NGOs, because the police refuse to investigate the cases and the courts are nothing less than an extended arm of the political elite. Many activists who have sought to report cases of political violence and harassment have either been turned away or seen the case being reversed so the victim ended up being accused for political violence.

Time will show if the cases of state torture and violence will finally make it into the court rooms, and more importantly, if the judiciary will be able to secure a free and fair trial without political interference. If Gwisai is successful in suing the Police and Ministers of Home Affairs, there might be hope that a door can be opened for other survivors of torture and political violence to claim justice.

Zimbabwe promises respect for human rights

When Justice and Legal Affairs Minister, Patrick Chinamasa, attended the 19^th Session at the UN Human Rights Council in March 2012, he made a number of promises to improve the human rights situation, including special attention to women’s rights. But with the Government of National Unity’s poor track record when it comes to respecting human rights, it is questionable if these promises will translate into actual changes on the ground.

In October, 2011, Zimbabwe underwent the Universal Period Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Chinamasa, accepted a wide range of recommendations aiming to improve the human rights situation in Zimbabwe, including 15 recommendations directly dealing with women’s political participation and prevention of marginalisation and gender-based violence.

Since October, Chinamasa has had some time to think, and in his address to the Human Rights Council on 15^th March he made further promises, such as implementation of domestic policies to prevent political violence; ratification of the Convention Against Torture and operationalizing the Human Rights Commission to enable it to investigate human rights abuses.

Zimbabwe Minister of Justice and Legal Affairs, Patrick Chinamasa, speaking at the 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

These words are full of promises of a brighter future for women of Zimbabwe, but knowing the history of the current regime’s disregard of its obligations to protect its citizens and promote human rights and social justice for all, there is limited hope that the words will lead to significant changes for men and women of Zimbabwe.

On the contrary, Zimbabwe’s regime has over the years repeatedly proved that promises and signatures on conventions have very limited impact on the actual actions on ground. The Convention on the Elimination of All Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) serves as a good example.

Zimbabwe ratified CEDAW in 1991, but at the review by the CEDAW Committee in February this year, it became glaringly clear that the state had done very little to live up to its obligations to protect and promote women’s right to take part in the social, economic and political development of Zimbabwe. Despite rosy words and intentions laid out in the Zimbabwean State Report to the CEDAW Committee, the result of the review showed that in reality very little has been done to protect and promote the rights of women.

Women in Zimbabwe are still to a large extent excluded from influence on equal terms with men, and in addition female politicians and civic activists, associated with the democracy movement, are direct targets of state-sponsored political violence.  No serious efforts have been made to end impunity for perpetrators of political violence and make sure women are free and safe to participate in politics and public life.

In spite of the increased pressure on Zimbabwe’s government based on the international human rights obligations, these are only small steps towards greater respect for the rights of all Zimbabweans.

International human rights treaties and review mechanisms are important ways of identifying and addressing human rights violations, but the only way Zimbabweans will see real improvements on the ground is when people stand up and demand their rights as human beings and as citizens of Zimbabwe. Civil society and the broader democracy movement plays an important role in mobilising and organising Zimbabweans to push for the government to become accountable to its people.