Independent SA

by Columbus Mavhunga

29 August 2010

Zimbabwe’s government has been forced to fend off charges that it is encouraging teen sex after deciding to grant parental leave to pregnant schoolgirls and soon-to-be dads.

The education ministry of Zimbabwe’s power-sharing government last week announced that young girls who fall pregnant during the course of their studies will no longer face automatic expulsion from school.

Instead, they will be given three months’ leave and allowed to resume their studies shortly after giving birth.

Student nurses, who also faced the same sanction, will also be allowed pick up where they left off.

The move brings Zimbabwe in line with other countries in the region, including South Africa and Namibia, which try to accommodate rather than stigmatize teen moms.

Zimbabwe goes one further by also giving the boy who fathered the child three months’ leave, to encourage them to support the mother.

However, the development has not gone down well with conservative groups such as Tsika Dzedu (Our Culture), which conducts programmes in schools to teach Zimbabweans about their culture.

“It is taboo to allow such absurdity,” Muchineripi Marere, the group’s head, railed. “It is unmentionable in African culture to allow girls to get pregnant, let alone promote it.”

The government retorts that it is a matter of common sense.

“I think we have been punishing our children, who in most cases would have fallen pregnant because of a lack of knowledge of the hazards of what they are doing,” Minister of Education David Coltart told the German Press Agency dpa.

“I know we have received a bashing on this. But I think we are just being realistic. Teenage pregnancy happens and we can’t run away from that situation. Expelling them is retrogressive as it promotes illiteracy, something which we, as a government, are totally against.”

Intellectuals and parents of pregnant teenagers have applauded the move.

“It never made sense that in Zimbabwe, the girl who fell pregnant was expelled while the boy who made her pregnant remained in school to finish his education,” Zimbabwe’s Petina Gappah, author of the acclaimed short story collection An Elegy for Easterly, wrote on social network website Facebook.

“Here again, the government of Zimbabwe shows that, where it chooses to be, it can be progressive. More of the same please!”

A mother who saw her daughter’s dreams of a good job dashed when she was expelled from school took the same view.

After giving birth Rutendo Nyamasvisva moved to neighbouring Botswana in search of “piece jobs” or casual labour.

“If she had finished her school, I am sure she would be a teacher or a lawyer,” Anna Nyamasvisva told dpa.

“Now even her child might not be able to finish school because my daughter is not earning a lot of money,” Nyamasvisva, who works as a clerk in a courier company in Harare, complained.

There are no statistics available on the number of girls who fall pregnant in this conservative country of 12 million people, whose education system was the envy of Africa before President Robert Mugabe’s policies plunged the country into severe economic decline, between 2000 and 2008.

A headmaster at a public girl’s school in Harare said they had up to two pregnancies a year, out of 700 pupils.

Newsday

By Owen Gagare

29 August 2010

Government snubbed civil servants’ unions who requested a meeting a fortnight ago pressing for a minimum wage of $500 for the lowest paid worker.

Apex Council president Tendai Chikowore wrote to government seeking a meeting to kick-start salary negotiations but said their employer was dragging feet over the meeting.

Civil servants earn between US$150 and US$250 per month.

The Apex Council comprises the Zimbabwe Teachers Association (Zimta), Public Service Association (Psa), Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (Tuz) and the Progressive Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (Ptuz).

“I was talking to the government team leader (Prince Mupazviriho) and he says he has not received a mandate from Treasury and the Ministry of Public Service to start negotiations. We are still waiting,” she said.

Mupazviriho however said he had not yet received the mandate to enter into new negotiations and had not yet received the civil servants’ request as he had been away from work.

However, he admitted he had been discussing the issue of salaries with civil servants’ union leaders.

Although she refused to discuss their exact demands, Chikowore last week said the Apex council wanted the lowest paid civil servant to earn a salary above the poverty datum line. The poverty datum line is estimated at around $500.

She also said civil servants had not moved from last year’s salary demands when they failed to hold meaningful negotiations with government.

Civil servants went on strike at the beginning of last year, demanding a minimum salary of $502.

The strike was eventually called off after the government convinced its workers that it was cash-strapped.

“I have not been mandated by the various unions to divulge our demands, but naturally we would want the lowest paid civil servant to earn a salary above the poverty datum line,” she said.

“We also had a position last year, where we were looking at a minimum wage of $502. We did not get our demands, so, there is no reason for us to come up with new demands when previous demands have not been met. We will go for negotiations with the same demands.”

The proposal for negotiations by the civil servants is a direct result of the decision by the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme to certify Zimbabwe’s diamonds, resulting in the country being allowed to sell its gems.

The diamond sale was greeted with excitement by civil servants who for years had been assured by the government that their plight would be eased as soon as the country started to sell its diamonds.

Chikowore said civil servants wanted the government to honour its word.

“Last year we were told that the government could not increase salaries because of low revenue inflows. The government said its major handicap was that it was not allowed to sell its diamonds, so we expect action now that the diamonds are being sold,” she said.

Finance Minister Tendai Biti, Education, Sport, Art and Culture Minister David Coltart and Public Service Minister Professor Eliphas Mukonoweshuro are on record saying the government did not have money to pay civil servants competitive salaries.

The ministers have however said the salaries would be reviewed as cashflow improves.

www.cricketeurope4.net

by Michael Taylor

27 August 2010

Cricket civilises people and creates good gentlemen. I want everyone to play cricket in Zimbabwe; I want ours to be a nation of gentlemen.
– Robert Mugabe, The Sunday Times, 26 February 1984

Last Thursday the ICC confirmed that Ireland will travel to Zimbabwe in September to play three one day internationals and an Intercontinental Cup match. This article argues that, on three counts, Cricket Ireland’s decision to go to Zimbabwe is not only wrong, but entirely objectionable.

Sport, politics, and morality

The first and most important reason why Ireland should not tour Zimbabwe is that such an action would superficially appear to legitimise – or at least ignore – the brutality of a government which, despite the establishment of a coalition with the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in February 2009, remains controlled by Robert Mugabe. I do not need to elaborate on the horrendous crimes of Mugabe and his regime, and the purpose of this article is not to expose the many misdeeds of Zanu-PF. I will, however, list a few, just to keep them fresh in your mind as you read on:

• The slaughter in the 1980s of between 10,000 and 20,000 Matabeles in an ‘operation’ called gukurahundi (‘the rain that washes away the chaff’);
• Wanton land seizures which the UN estimates has destroyed the livelihood of 700,000 Zimbabweans and negatively affected 2.4m more;
• The murder of at least 85 political opponents during the first round of voting in the elections of 2008, as recorded by the Zimbabwe Association of Doctors for Human Rights;
• The murder of a cricket spectator who, during an ODI against Pakistan in Bulawayo in 2002, unveiled a banner protesting against Mugabe.

Of course, I am aware that the more general situation in Zimbabwe may be easing: the admission of the MDC to government has improved affairs; relative stability has returned to the economy, and Zimbabwean Sports Minister David Coltart flew to Belfast last week to make this point to the Irish players. Coltart, let it be understood, is one of the good guys, a human rights lawyer and a leading member of the MDC who survived an assassination attempt by Zanu-PF seven years ago. To his mind, an Irish tour of Zimbabwe would be a ‘good thing’, a step towards normality for a country ‘in transition’. ‘Normality’, however, remains a hollow concept for most Zimbabweans. Study, for a minute, these three questions:

• Has legally-owned land and property, stolen by ZANU-PF, been returned to its owners, or have those owners been compensated for their loss?
• Have those whose relatives were killed – or who were themselves injured by the same government – ever been given even an apology?
• Does the composition of the government reflect the democratically-expressed will of the Zimbabwean people?

If we answer those questions affirmatively, then the promise of a true democracy – of ‘normality’ – is perhaps realistic. Alas, we cannot, and it is worth reading the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s current advice to British nationals on the issue of travelling to Zimbabwe:

During the election campaign of 2008 and its aftermath, there were numerous politically motivated attacks across Zimbabwe, including abductions, and the assault, torture and murder of opposition supporters, NGO workers, lawyers and those perceived to be against President Mugabe and his ZANU(PF) party. The police cannot be relied upon to assist victims and have told some British Nationals that they will not respond to politically motivated crime. You should avoid engaging in overtly partisan political activity, or in activities which could be construed as such, including political discussions in public places, or criticism of the President. It is an offence to make derogatory or insulting comments about President Mugabe or to carry material considered to be offensive to the President’s office.

By this stage, you may already wish to dismiss my case. You may ask: ‘What does this have to do with cricket?’ You may wish to present the eternal counter-argument: that sport, as we are told by untold seers and sages, should not be mixed with politics. Such people, however, are not Cassandra; this is not Troy, and we should ignore them. Let me explain why. If sport is a mere diversion, then only the despicable man does not forgo it to serve a nobler cause. However, if sport is more than that – if it carries a weight, a meaning, values – then it should be suffused by the same morality which informs the rest of life, and which informs our politics. Moreover, sport has always been as politicised as any other facet of life: the sectarian divide in the demography of sports in Northern Ireland has been a common subject for academic study; the propriety of sports on the Sabbath is a prominent feature of British religious history, while even the resurrection of the Olympiad was an explicitly political act, a means by which France could reassert its international prestige in the wake of the Franco-Prussian War. Sport and politics go hand in hand, and ‘twas ever thus.

In the case of Zimbabwean cricket, however, politics becomes essential to the argument, primarily because of the peculiar relationship between Zimbabwe Cricket (formerly the Zimbabwe Cricket Union) and Zanu-PF. For one thing, Robert Mugabe’s name endures as an official patron of Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC). For another, Peter Chingoka, chairman of ZC, has been banned from entry to the European Union on the grounds of his links to Mugabe’s regime.

He has also been accused by former British sports minister Kate Hoey of using VIP pavilions at international matches ‘to host the ZANU-PF politicians, CIO (Central Intelligence Organisation) operatives and senior army officers on whom he relies for protection’. This, of course, is the same CIO which launched an investigation into ZC’s new logo, launched in 2005, on the suspicion it cryptically spelled out ‘MDC’ in its symbols.

Even more sinister is Ozias Bvute, CEO of Zimbabwe Cricket, whose railroading into the administration in 2001 as Integration Implementation Officer marked the politicisation of the Zimbabwean board. This is a man who has had to repeatedly deny links to the CIO, who forcibly removed Henry Olonga from the team bus following the black-armband protest during the 2003 World Cup, and who handed Olonga his ticket back to Zimbabwe with the kind words: ‘You’re on your own now’. Tell me, how does accepting the invitation of these men to play cricket under their jurisdiction not carry political weight?

If we accept, therefore, that travelling to Zimbabwe is an inescapably political decision, what are its implications? The first is that Irish cricket may be accused of compliance with and appeasement of Zimbabwe Cricket, which – given its leadership – is still nothing more than what some people may view as the recreational wing of Zanu-PF. If you think I exaggerate, look at how the rebel tourists to South Africa were treated in the 1980s: many of the West Indians who toured between 1982 and 1985 were ostracised for appearing to comply with the white-supremacist government of PW Botha; the English tourists of the early 1980s were labelled ‘the Dirty Dozen’ by the Commons for placing cricket above the principle of racial equality, while those papers that supported the National Party did their utmost to represent all tours as tacit support for apartheid. Of course, that was not the intent of the cricketers. Nor will it be the intent of the Irish, but intentions are often misconstrued, as John Elder – managing editor of CricketEurope – found on a Grasshoppers tour to South Africa in 1981:

‘Before I went there I believed that sport and politics should be kept separate. After that fortnight I changed my view totally. Some people we met in South Africa truly believed that our going there was a statement of our support for the evil manner in which their country was run. In going to Zimbabwe the Irish players are allowing themselves to be used by … the government of Zimbabwe.’

Conversely, the consequence of not travelling is the admirable engagement in a practical and effective means of protest. You think cricket is powerless in this respect? Not so. Dr Ali Bacher, speaking to Cricinfo in 2008, averred that:

‘Zimbabwe should be isolated and banished from the international arena … I say this because of what brought apartheid down in South Africa: it was the international isolation. The same thing must happen now with Zimbabwe. From all the reports I read and watch in the South African media, what is happening in Zimbabwe is genocide. People who say sport and politics is completely separate are being naïve.’

Barry Richards, who was himself denied international cricket by the sporting boycott of South Africa, agrees in this. At Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s 2008 Spirit of Cricket lecture at Lord’s, he argued that inaction was wrong:

‘I think the ICC are erring and it frustrates the hell out of me that Zimbabwe have not been brought to book. It’s a moral issue and what is doing everybody knows is simply not right … cricket can play a part in that and it’s not.’

Moreover, the likely penalties the ICC would have meted out if Ireland had chosen not travel are surely worth the ‘crime’. England’s failure to qualify for the Super Sixes of the 2003 World Cup, for example, is forgiven without thinking: they were eliminated because they refused to play Zimbabwe, and they were condemned only for hesitating to do so.

Whose master’s voice?

The second argument against travelling to Zimbabwe is that doing so will only reaffirm the second-class citizenry of Irish cricket. Some months ago, the Zimbabweans wrote to ICC stating they were unwilling to play either Scotland or Ireland on neutral ground, contrary to the conditions upon which they were admitted to the Intercontinental Cup. Then, in August of this year, the Zimbabwe Independent – one of the country’s few independent newspapers – ran an article suggesting that Ireland and Scotland were being placed under undue pressure to play these Intercontinental Cup matches onZimbabwean soil.

Predictably, the ICC took no action against ZC, even for such flagrant dereliction of a mutually-agreed contract. Indeed, the ICC even joined in, for the sole purpose of ICC’s David Morgan recent visit to Dublin was surely to pressurise Ireland into travelling to Harare.

The pressure told: where Cricket Scotland, understandably seething at this duplicity, has deferred its decision on whether to travel, Cricket Ireland has already agreed to go. When I asked for an explanation, one senior member of Irish cricket’s administration told me: ‘The only reason we are going to Zimbabwe is because we are contractually obliged to do so’. Contractually obliged, that is, in much the same way that the Zimbabweans were contractually obliged to play on neutral ground. Some nations are equal in world cricket; some are more equal than others; by travelling, the Irish are only proving that point.

Gotta be crazy to fly…

Lastly, one might also ask if there is anything to be gained on the pitch: Cricket Ireland, with respect to the Intercontinental Cup match, seems to be caught in something of a Catch-22. Should Ireland beat Zimbabwe, their hosts may claim – and correctly – that the ‘Zimbabwe XI’ is only their ‘A’ team. Meanwhile, if the Irish lose, we may hear the cry: ‘Look, even our 2nd XI is too strong for the Irish!’ Of course, the addition of three full ODIs to the schedule is an attractive carrot being cleverly dangled in front of Irish noses, and it makes cricketing sense to play those matches. The non-cricketing objections to playing those ODIs, however, have already been made and should not be ignored: remember, cricket is more than a game, and what do we know of cricket if we only cricket know?

The Chronicle

Editorial Comment

27 August 2010

Zimbabwe prides itself in having one of the highest literacy rate on the continent, a feat that took many years of investment in education to achieve. The quality of education is determined largely by the quality of teaching material and the competence of those imparting the knowledge.
The state of the economy has weighed heavily on the quality of education in the country due to the massive brain drain manifested through the large numbers of educators leaving the country for greener pastures over the past decade.
Though the advent of information technology has seen tertiary institutions rely on the Internet for research for their students, the country’s education system still relies largely on books. It is through the use of books that the country improved its literacy rate over the years, and sustained it.
Librarians meeting in Nyanga at a conference this week noted that investment in books and libraries had declined and warned that this had far reaching implications on the educational standards in the country.
We believe the country should develop a reading culture through supporting the local publishing industry to make local products affordable.
Local writers have the capacity to produce a lot of reading material and in our own languages for use in our schools if they receive the necessary support. We believe the industry should lobby for more resources from the Government since it plays a very important role in the education of the nation. For the reading material to make an impact, it should be affordable and readily available, hence the need for incentives for the publishers to achieve this.
We carried an article this week in which a local college was producing examination study packs in a bid to improve pass-rates and we believe such initiatives, if replicated on a large scale, could change the face of the publishing industry in the country.
A project to print primary school books through a Government co-ordinated programme is starting to bear fruit and it is our hope that this will bring life to our publishing industry that in turn will empower our people through providing information, the vital impetus to development.
“Information is vital for political, economic and social development, hence the libraries are courts of last resort,” said Education, Sport, Arts and Culture Minister David Coltart when he addressed librarians.
The librarians urged the Government to waive duty on book imports since the country’s publishers were not producing books anymore. This, they said, would ensure that the imported books would be affordable to readers. While in the short term, this might look like a solution, this is not sustainable in the long run since what the country needs is a strong publishing industry supported by its academics and a strong book reading culture that libraries also help in promoting.

VOA

by Peta Thornycroft

25 August 2010

The two Movement for Democratic Change parties have united in anger against Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe’s refusal to accord national hero status to Gibson Sibanda, a founding MDC leader who died earlier this week.

Gibson Sibanda, who died at age 66 in his home city, Bulawayo, was a life-long fighter for democracy, a former legislator, and a trade unionist  who was detained for his activism by both Rhodesia and Mr. Mugabe’s ZANU-PF administration.

Sibanda was the deputy president of the MDC when it became a political party 10 years ago, and had been on a committee promoting national healing and reconciliation within the 18-month-old unity government when he died.

Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, who is also president of the main MDC party, said Sibanda’s name “shall remain an indelible imprint in the sad narrative of our determined and brave march towards a new Zimbabwe.”

Tsvangirai spokesman Nelson Chamisa said Mr. Mugabe’s refusal to declare Sibanda a national hero was motivated by “cruelty, contempt and revenge.”

In a recent interview with VOA in Harare, Sibanda recalled his detention in the former white-ruled Rhodesia and his eventual release when former Prime Minister Ian Smith and Abel Muzorewa were leading a transitional government as peace talks to end the civil war began in London in 1979.

SIBANDA:  “I was charged with high treason with some other guys, and subsequently, and came to the high court and we defended successfully.  And we were discharged, but soon after being discharged we were served with indeterminate detention until 1979, during the Smith-Muzorewa coalition.  That is the one which reviewed our detention orders, but the talks were already under way.”

Education minister David Coltart says in 1997 Sibanda led the biggest anti-government demonstration he had ever seen in Zimbabwe.

“Gibson Sibanda deserves to be recognized as a national hero, because for the last 40 years he has persistently and consistently fought within the country for the promotion of human rights and for a new democratic Zimbabwe,” explained Coltart.  “He did so against the white minority government and he has done so for the last 30 years.  He was also president of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions and during his tenure, he was responsible, with others, for building it up to a very powerful organization.  So, on that basis alone he should be declared a national hero.”

Priscilla Misihairabwi, the deputy-secretary general of the smaller MDC faction said hero status is confined to members of Mr. Mugabe’s ZANU-PF Party.  She said Mr. Mugabe should tell taxpayers, who fund state funerals, that they have been supporting “a ZANU-PF burial society.”

Mr. Mugabe’s sister, Sabina, who political historians say played no role against white rule nor any significant part in post-1980 independent Zimbabwe was declared a national hero and buried with a state funeral last month at Hero’s Acre.

Mr. Mugabe told the pro-ZANU-PF daily newspaper, The Herald, he regretted Sibanda’s death and the state would assist with his private burial.

Sydney Morning Herald

by Staff Writer

19 August 2010

Former Test fast bowlers Jason Gillespie of Australia and South African Allan Donald are happy to start coaching in Zimbabwean domestic cricket and are looking forward to helping rebuild the sport in the African country.

The pair were presented on Wednesday as head coaches of franchises in the Zimbabwean league for the 2010-11 season, with Gillespie leading the Midwest Rhinos and Donald in charge of the Manicaland Mountaineers.

In line with some political reforms, Zimbabwean cricket has been improving following feuds between players and administrators, a factor which has resulted in experienced players, coaches and officials returning to the country.

The 35-year-old Gillespie, who played 71 Tests and 97 one-day internationals, praised Australia for taking steps to restore ties with Zimbabwe following years of tour boycotts on political grounds in opposition to the regime of President Robert Mugabe.

Australia have agreed to host the Zimbabwe national team next year after lobbying from Zimbabwe Sports Minister David Coltart.

“It’s really positive,” Gillespie said. “I was speaking to the chairman of Cricket Australia, Jack Clarke, when he came down here (to Zimbabwe). We spent some time together.

“The most important thing is he says he will not hesitate to engage Zimbabwe again.”

But while Australia appears to be reaching out to Zimbabwe, British Sports Minister Hugh Robertson last week ruled out the possibility of England resuming ties with the African country while Peter Chingoka remains chairman of Zimbabwe Cricket.

“I don’t get involved in the politics of sports,” Gillespie said.

“I’m sure other countries will do what Australia have done in future and everything will fall in place.

“I don’t see that being an issue moving forward.

“But from my perspective, things are looking up here in Zimbabwe. The right noise is coming out. To be part of it is humbling.

“You can just see it in the expectations of the public. It’s something we are looking to sink our teeth into.”

The 43-year-old Donald, who played 72 Tests and 164 one-day internationals, is delighted at becoming head coach after numerous roles as a specialist, including as England’s bowling coach.

“I was getting a bit frustrated,” Donald said. “I met a few people who were searching for a head coach but they kept saying ‘Sorry, you have got the pedigree, you haven’t got the experience’.

“But how do you get experience when you haven’t coached?

“This is a great opportunity for me to expose myself, to be in charge of the side. It’s not only good for us to get exposure as coaches, but to help the youngsters here develop.”

Donald will also work with Zimbabwe national team bowling coach Heath Streak.

BBC

17 August 2010

The Scottish Parliament is becoming an Edinburgh festival venue, with appearances from political figures such as former deputy PM John Prescott and Tory MP Sir Malcolm Rifkind.

The Festival of Politics, which runs at Holyrood until Saturday, is now in its sixth year.

It features 47 events, which are held in the parliament’s main chamber or its committee rooms

Singer Annie Lennox and comedian Mark Thomas will also take part.

Lennox, the former Eurythmics star, will be making a return visit to the event to talk about how her SING Campaign uses music to educate people about the threat of HIV and Aids in South Africa.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who has served as both defence secretary and foreign secretary, will lead a debate on the idea of a “just” war and peace and security in modern society.

Meanwhile Des Browne, who was defence secretary in the recent Labour government, will join former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell and David Coltart, Zimbabwe’s minister for education, sport arts and culture, to discuss the role Scotland could play in conflict mediation.

As the festival takes place in a World Cup year, there will also be a debate on the future of Scottish football.