Address given to the Theological College of Zimbabwe Seminar: 18 May 1995

In Nehemiah 9:13 we read:

“You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just and right, and decrees and commands that are good.”

There is a major difference between law and justice. Very often we mix up the two concepts and believe that laws must be inherently just. God’s laws are always just. Man’s laws are sometimes just but very often unjust and wrong. Man’s laws therefore must always be compared with God’s laws. Ultimately we are called upon to obey God and his laws and standards of justice, not man and his laws.

Accordingly as we come to study the legal and justice situation in Zimbabwe we need to do the same. It is important that we do not take a superficial view of our laws and legal system. On the face of it we do appear to have reasonable laws, a Constitution which is complied with by our Government and a strong justice system. On closer inspection, and especially as we consider our laws and legal system in comparison with God’s laws and God’s standards of justice I believe you will realise that there is very little justice in Zimbabwe, many of our laws are wholly unjust and our legal system as a whole is faltering and in danger of becoming unjust in itself.

Dr Makombe spoke on Monday regarding the political situation. One of the vital points he made was that in 1990 ZANU (PF) realised that they would not be able to bring about a de facto one party state because of the collapse of socialism. I agree with him that they decided in 1990 that they would do all in their power to bring about a de facto one party state. In other words they would do all in their power to maintain the facade of democracy, to maintain the facade of a civilised pluralistic system of Government but that in reality they would do everything to ensure that behind that facade they were in absolute control of power. I believe that in 1990 they looked around and identified where the potential sources of political opposition would come from and they singled out opposition parties, the independent press, student movements, human rights groups and the judiciary. I would like to briefly analyse what Government has done regarding these various manifestations of political opposition and then I will go into more depth as I analyse how the judiciary has been undermined by Government. The purpose in doing so is to show that one cannot fully understand what is happening to the justice system unless one realises that ZANU (PF) perceives it as a source of opposition which must be crushed.

Dr Makombe made the startling statement on Monday that he believed that Mr Tekere was a pseudo opposition politician, a man actually acting in the interests of ZANU (PF). I have felt the same for a number of years. I am convinced that some of the political parties established since 1990 are simply designed to create the impression in the minds of the people, and more importantly, in the minds of the International community, that this is a pluralistic society, that this is a vibrant multi-party democracy. Where I disagree with Dr Makombe is that he is concerned that Dr Dumbutshena of the Forum Party may be an agent provocateur as well. I do not believe that but what I do believe is that Government has infiltrated and undermined genuine opposition parties and has used its control over the media to complete the job. The reality of the situation is that in 1995 there is no meaningful opposition political party and following the elections the new parliament is to all intents and purposes a one-party parliament.

The independent press was another major threat. It is interesting to note that in 1990 it was a Government controlled bank, Zimbank, which enabled the buy-out of Modus. I believe that Government allowed this to happen because they realised that the Financial Gazette actually served a very useful purpose. It is a newspaper which is expensive and which is only read by a very small sector of Zimbabwean society. In essence the Financial Gazette preaches to the converted. It does not reach the core of ZANU (PF’s) support base, namely those in the rural areas. To that extent the articles which regularly appear in the Financial Gazette which are critical of Government are a luxury ZANU can afford. ZANU knows that those articles will not change the thinking of the vast majority of the electorate and it also knows that those same articles are interpreted by the diplomatic community as evidence that we have a free press. The reality of Government’s commitment to a free press however was shown in the closing down of the Daily Gazette and the recent arrest of the Editor of the Financial Gazette this past weekend. The Daily Gazette in the course of 1994 began growing in stature. It was responsible for exposing the land scandal and, in the run-up to the 1995 elections, could have proved to be very damaging to ZANU (PF) and very useful to emerging opposition parties. Three months before the election, under pressure from a Government controlled bank, Modus closed the Daily Gazette. And now the Financial Gazette has finally overstepped the mark in its criticism. It is fine to criticise Government in general terms but it is wrong for it to criticise the very core of ZANU (PF), namely the President himself. I do not have time to comment in more detail regarding the case. Suffice it to say that in my view the arrests of these journalists were designed to intimidate them and to get crucial evidence regarding the sources of their information. The lesson we learn is that Government will tolerate the independent press only so long as it does not shake the roots of power. The moment the press starts to shake the roots of power then we see the true face and intent of ZANU (PF).

At the beginning of 1990 University of Zimbabwe students were becoming a major problem for Government. It was students who protested against corruption in September 1989. It was students who continued to protest thereafter and embarrassed Government during the 1991 Chogum meeting. The result was the promulgation of the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act which was designed to clamp down on student dissent. The Act has been extremely useful and students have now complied and indeed one used by Government to protest.

Since 1990 we have seen the growth and strengthening of civil society organisations such as Zimrights, the Legal Resources Foundation and the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace. Whilst the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace has been a serious thorn in Government’s side for many years. ZANU has in the recent past been able to dismiss its claims, accusing it of being white lead and non-indigenous. The growth of organisations such as Zimrights and the Legal Resources Foundation, both thoroughly indigenous organisations, presents a more serious problem for Government. It is interesting to note that one of the first Acts signed by the President since the elections was the Welfare Organisations Amendment Act No. 6 of 1995. This Act has received very little publicity but it presents one of the most serious threats to organisations such as Zimrights and the Legal Resources Foundation since Independence. In terms of Section 20 A of the new Act the Minister of Labour can, acting on information given to him (in other words without an enquiry), suspend the leadership of organisations such as Zimrights and replace the leadership with his own nominees. In terms of the Act the leader so suspended has no rights of appeal to the Minister and in a sentence the entire amendment is thoroughly undemocratic and draconian. Dr. Makombe spoke of Minister Shamuyarira’s shift to this Ministry as being a demotion. I am not convinced that that is so and fear that the move, as President Mugabe himself stated, was not a demotion but deliberately designed so that Minister Shamuyarira can use this Act to undermine civil society and thus weaken another potential source of political opposition. Only time will tell whether I am right or not.

One of the principal sources of political opposition, in the broadest sense of that phrase, faced by ZANU (PF) came from the judiciary and this is the focus of my talk this morning. In 1990, the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe, under the leadership of the then Chief Justice Enoch Dumbutshena had established a reputation for being one of the most fiercely independent benches in Africa. It had repeatedly handed down judgments against the Government’s wishes and had decided a number of landmark decisions which promoted human rights and checked the powers of Government. Sadly Dr Dumbutshena reached retirement age in 1990 and despite efforts behind the scenes to have him stay on it was clear that Government had no intention of introducing the necessary legislation to enable this. Coincidentally at the end of 1990 a major Constitutional Amendment was passed introducing three crucial amendments to Sections 15 and 16 of the Declaration of Rights.

In 1991 I wrote an article which was published in the Financial Gazette which stated that it was my belief that the amendments to the Constitution were not just an effort to amend the Constitution and to bring the Constitution in conformity with ZANU’s views on hanging, whipping and land resettlement. I argued at the time that there was an ulterior motive and that was to undermine respect for the Supreme Court and to undermine respect for the Declaration of Rights. The hanging provision effectively forestalled the Supreme Court from making a decision regarding whether hanging was a Constitutional form of carrying out the death penalty. The whipping of juvenile’s amendment reversed a Supreme Court judgment. And the land provision excluded the Supreme Court from determining a fair value for compensation of land. Time does not permit in this speech for me to explain fully why these amendments had an ulterior purpose and perhaps in question time I can go into that in more detail.

Suffice it to say that since 1990 the Government appears to be more determined than ever to undermine the Supreme Court and to minimise the importance of the Constitution and its Declaration of Rights.

Since May 1991 Government’s conduct in this regard has been marked by the following:

1. There have been further constitutional amendments which have withdrawn rights of citizens rather than enhance them. For example, Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe v Attorney General and Others 1993 (1) ZLR the Supreme Court ruled that a long delay in executing a sentence of death constituted degrading and inhuman punishment in violation of section 15 (1) of the Constitution. Shortly after the ruling, Act 9 of 1993 was passed, amending section 15 of the Constitution again and reversing the Supreme Court’s decision. Indeed, section 15 (1), which reads “no person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading punishment or other such treatment”) has now been amended so many times by Government (there are now 5 provisos to subsection 1) that it has been almost totally emasculated. This has all happened in a space of 3 years. To give you some idea how ridiculous these frequent amendments are, I should mention that the United States Constitution has only been amended 26 times since 1776. Another recent example of the Governments’ attitude is given in the Minister of Home Affairs, reaction to the Supreme Court’s recent decision regarding the right of citizens to demonstrate. The Minister’s response was to say that legislation will be introduced, to reverse, water down or negate the decision. It will be interesting to see whether Government does act to amend the provisions in the Declaration of Rights enshrining the freedoms of association and expression.

2. Government has on a number of occasions in the last 18 months shown utter contempt for the Courts and the judicial system as a whole. The most serious example was given in the Churu Farm episode which occurred in November 1993. The Minister of Home Affairs, the Minister of Local Government and the Police effectively disregarded an order of the High Court compelling them to allow the residents of Churu Farm to continue residing on the property. Indeed, that contempt continues to this day. President Mugabe’s statement reported in the Herald on 17 July 1993, to the effect that the Government would not accept a court decision against “Government’s rights” to acquire land under the Land Acquisition Act, shows very serious contempt for the Supreme Court and the judicial system as a whole.

3. Government has also manipulated the due process of law for its own political ends. The most obvious example of this was the President’s pardoning of the men who attempted to murder Patrick Kombayi after their appeals had been dismissed by the Supreme Court 1. The pardons have attracted a lot of publicity 2 and I do not propose to go into them in any detail. What needs to be said, however, is that the pardoning was an abuse of the President’s Constitutional prerogative and a manipulation of our Constitution. It also needs to be said that the pardons were but one of a long line of Government manipulations of the legal system to suit its own ends. To give but one example, I would draw your attention to the case of the Masiwa 1992 (2) ZLR 7 (S). This little known case involved a person who was brutally beaten to death, after making some derogatory remarks about the then Prime Minister Mr Mugabe. The perpetrator of this crime was indeed fortunate that the State only levelled a charge of culpable homicide and that the Attorney General declined to transfer the case to the High Court for sentence; as a result he was only sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment which was the maximum sentence which the magistrate could impose within his sentencing jurisdiction. This case illustrates the fact that there appears to be one law for those who support Government and another law for those who do not. The recent pardoning by the President serves to emphasise this point.

The trend of holding the Courts in contempt continues. Last year the Bulawayo Legal Projects Centre brought a test case to challenge Government’s immigration policies to deny the foreign husbands of Zimbabwean women citizens the right to reside in the country. This policy was discriminatory as foreign wives were allowed to reside in the country. The landmark Rattigan versus the Department of Immigration case was decided in June last year and established the right of foreign husbands to reside permanently in the country. Since the judgment was handed down however the Department of Immigration has persistently sought to ignore the judgment so much so that the Bulawayo Legal Projects Centre is now bringing a further application to order the Department of Immigration to issue permanent residence permits to the people involved. Furthermore in the past year we have seen very serious attacks on the Supreme Court emanating from the editorial columns of Government controlled papers. The Supreme Court and the High Court have been directly and indirectly attacked for the McGown judgment and the Immigration cases.

Recently you will have all read about the so-called Nyamandlovu Kangaroo Court involving Judge Blackie and myself. I do not propose in this forum to defend myself or Judge Blackie as it would be inappropriate.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that incident are, the fact is that a High Court Judge granted a bail order. It may be, although I do not think so, that the bail order was granted incorrectly. However if any order of the High Court is granted incorrectly the correct method of rectifying the order is to bring an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court. The Attorney General, as Government’s principal legal advisor, knows this better than anyone else in Government. Instead of appealing Judge Blackie’s order the Attorney General and the Home Affairs Minister ordered the re-arrest of one of the men granted bail in defiance of the bail order. No matter how wrong the Attorney General may have thought the circumstances leading to the granting of bail were he should have brought an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court. As it is that appeal was never brought and the High Court order was simply ignored and to this day the public of Zimbabwe do not know whether the Judge acted correctly or not as the Supreme Court has not determined the matter. What everyone seems to have missed is that the Attorney General’s actions in many ways were worse than any perceived irregularity in procedure committed by the Judge. A precedent has now been set whereby the Attorney General and a Government Minister can simply ignore a High Court order. This attitude strikes at the heart of respect for the rule of law. The rule of law principle dictates that once a Court order has been issued, unless that order is set aside by another Court, it must be obeyed by everyone, including Government. I am afraid that the Nyamandlovu
incident is yet another example of the undermining of our judicial system.

At the time when the Nyamandlovu incident hit the headlines an elder in our church, Denson Dube, came across Psalm 64 in his quiet time and he felt that the Lord had given him this scripture specifically for me. Psalm 64:4 – 8 reads:

“They shoot from ambush the innocent man; they shoot at him suddenly, without fear. They encourage each other in evil plans, they talk about hiding their snares; they say, “Who will see them?” They plot injustice and say, “We have devised a perfect plan!” surely the mind and heart of a man are cunning. But God will shoot them with arrows; suddenly they will be struck down. They will turn their own tongues against them and bring them to ruin; all who see them will shake their heads in scorn”.

The reason I mention that verse now is that in the arrest of the Financial Gazette journalists this past weekend I believe we will see ZANU’s tongue being turned against it. As you are aware the three Modus men were arrested early on Saturday morning because they were accused of criminally defaming the good name and reputation of Mr Justice Garwe and Minister Chikowore. Whilst I do not believe that the alleged defamation of the Government Minister is sufficiently serious to warrant a prosecution I fully agree that the alleged defamation of Justice Garwe is serious. Any defamatory statement made regarding a Judge, if untrue, is extremely serious as it undermines respect for the judicial system as a whole. However if we consider this case of Justice Garwe in the light of the Judge Blackie case we see a very serious apparent inconsistency in the approach taken by the prosecuting authorities. As you will recall at the beginning of March the Herald published the Nyamandlovu story regarding Mr Justice Blackie in very emotional and defamatory terms. He was accused of conducting a Kangaroo Court and of being a racialist. Whilst I am obviously very close to this issue I believe that objectively I can say that those comments were more defamatory of Mr Justice Blackie than the Financial Gazette’s statements were of Mr Justice Garwe and yet no action has been taken the Editor and publisher of the Herald, Mr Tommy Sithole in the Blackie matter. And it is no answer to claim that the story about Mr Justice Blackie is true and that the story about Mr Justice Garwe is not. Whether defamatory statements are true is something that the person who made the statement has to prove if he is to be acquitted. For the prosecuting authorities, in this case the Attorney General, to decide in advance the truth of the statements (and act on that decision) is to usurp the function of the trial court. The point I am simply making is that the Financial Gazette case once again illustrates how badly undermined our judiciary has become through political manoeuvring.

The judiciary has been further undermined by the fact that conditions of service are still relatively bad for Judges even although they have been improved recently. Of great concern to me is that there are several Judges who are overtly political and at the very least subservient to Government. I fear that the present Supreme Court bench and other Judges have already been softened up by attacks on them by the Government controlled media and that as a result they may feel constraint to act as fearlessly as the Supreme Court bench did under Dr Dumbutshena. I have great sympathy for the Chief Justice especially. He is a fine Judge and I know he is a man of absolute integrity. However I believe that he cannot act as fearlessly as Dr Dumbutshena did, ironically, because he is white. In several editorials in both the Herald and the Chronicle there have been innuendos that because he is white he has handed down certain judgments which are racist in nature. There has been no apparent effort made by Government to reign in these Editors. The Supreme Court Judges must be somewhat bemused by the alacrity and efficiency of the arrest and prosecution of the Financial Gazette journalists whose perceived sins against Justice Garwe are far less serious than a variety of attacks made against the Supreme Court. But what I fear even more is that when the current Supreme Court bench retires there is a strong likelihood that they will be replaced with political Judges and then the entire justice system will be seriously undermined. This is a somewhat gloomy picture I have painted but from it you will see that Government is very close to its goals on undermining what in many ways has become the last bastion of democracy, the last check on Government power in this country. In doing so it has weakened a potential source of opposition. In summary let me say that the legal and justice situation in Zimbabwe is grave. ZANU through its dominance of Parliament can make virtually any law it likes. The Courts are under attack and there is the very real danger that they will lose whatever boldness and independence they have been renowned for in the next 5 to 10 years.

There is of course one final sector of political opposition I have not spoken about. I must stress that I use this phrase political opposition in the wider sense of the word. That source of political opposition is of course the church. It is fascinating in my mind that the Government has not sought to crush or intimidate the church since 1990. Why is this?

Before I answer that question let me emphasise that I do not believe that the church should be involved in formal politics in any manner whatsoever. I have spoken publicly on this topic and firmly believe that the church as an institution should distance itself from any individual political party or agenda. Of course I strongly believe that individual Christians should be involved in formal politics. However it is the church’s role to stand up for God’s standards of justice and to speak out whenever the Government of the day and its citizens are violating those standards. Sadly the history of the church in Zimbabwe in the last 30 years, albeit with a few notable exceptions, shows that it is thoroughly compromised and weak. In the pre-independence era the white church by and large did not stand up for God’s standards of justice regarding racism and discrimination. In the 1980’s the church by and large was silent on the genocide which happened in Matabeleland and indeed is still silent. In the 1990’s the church has been mute in the face of rampant corruption and abuse of power.

In October last year I was encouraged to read that Africa Enterprise had organised a presidential prayer breakfast. As you all know in the breakfast his Excellency the President told the church not to be afraid to deliver “a message of light”. In November last year I wrote an open letter to the President in response to his challenge highlighting four areas of concern, namely:

(a) Corruption. I referred the President to Isaiah 1:23 – 31:

“Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves, they all love bribes and chase after gifts…. therefore… I will purge my hand against you, I will thoroughly purge away your dross…. the mighty man will become timber and his work as spark; both will burn together, with no-one to quench the fire”.

(b) Failure to compensate the widows of Matabeleland I referred the President to Exodus 22:21 – 24:

“Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan. If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry. My anger will be aroused, and I will kill you with the sword; your wives will become widows and your children fatherless”.

(c) Perverting justice I referred the President to Micah 3:9:

“You rulers… who despise justice and distort all that is right… therefore because of you, Zion will be ploughed like a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of rubble, the temple hill a mound overgrown with thickets”.

(d) Idolatry. I referred the President to Acts 12: 21 – 23:

“On the appointed day Herod, arrayed in his royal robes, took his seat on the throne and made a public address to them. The mob shouted, “the voice of a God and not of a man!”. But instantly an angel of the Lord stuck him, because he did not ascribe the glory to God. He was eaten by words and died.

Time does not permit me to go into why I felt that the President should take heed of the warnings contained in these scriptures. Suffice it to say that I warned that history was replete with examples of leaders who flouted God’s standards of justice and whose political careers had come to a sorry end. The letter concluded with a quotation from Isaiah 40:23-24:

“He brings Princes to nought and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing. No sooner are they planted, no sooner are they sown, no sooner do they take root in the ground, and he blows on them and they wither, and a whirlwind sweeps them away like chaff”.

I need to stress that the letter was also addressed to the wider church. I did not expect a response from the President. What disturbs me is that I have received no response from the church. At the very least I expected some form of criticism. Perhaps the verses I used were wrongly applied. Whilst of course it may be that people in the church have not read the letter I am concerned by the lack of debate. Is it that the church is not concerned about these issues?

I fear that the church has become so compromised that it has lost its voice. The only response I have seen to the Presidential breakfast is contained in the latest Zimbabwe Update published by African Enterprise. In that there is a paragraph which reads:

“The Christian community in this country is blessed to have a State President who can publicly pronounce with his own mouth that “Jesus Christ is Lord!” Another national presidential prayer breakfast is in the pipeline and we must thank the Lord for that”.

Presumably this Zimbabwe Update was printed before the revelation that the President committed adultery (and sired two children) with a woman before his wife died. Dr Makombe spoke of the silence of the Church on this issue. Why is it that the church has been so silent? It is not good enough to have a State President who can pronounce with his mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord. Once he has made that pronouncement he is proclaiming himself to be a Christian and a very public one at that. Once he has proclaimed himself as a Christian then he must become subject to the discipline of the wider church.
I do not mention this issue to focus in on the sins of the President. All of us have sinned, none of us are without blemish. The point I seek to make is that the Church is in danger of becoming irrelevant if it displays double standards. There is a price the Church has to pay for lauding somebody and yet not to seek to make that person accountable.

There are frightening parallels between the Church in Germany in the 1930’s and the Church in Zimbabwe in the 1990’s. The Church in Germany collaborated with the Nazis. It turned a blind eye to injustice and in doing so became irrelevant.

This year I have sought solace by reading a biography regarding Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Writing from a Gestapo controlled prison in 1944 Bonhoeffer said:

“We are once again being driven right back to the beginnings of our understanding. Reconciliation and redemption, regeneration and the Holy Ghost, love of our enemies, cross and resurrection, life in Christ and Christian discipleship – all these things are so difficult and so remote that we hardly venture anymore to speak of them. Our church, which has been fighting in these years only for its self-preservation, as though that it were an end in itself, is incapable of taking the word of reconciliation and redemption to mankind and the world. The day will come when men will once more be called so to utter the word of God and the world will be changed and renewed by it. It will be a new language, perhaps quite non-religious, but liberating and redeeming – as was Jesus’s language; it will shock people and yet overcome them by its power; it will be the language of a new righteousness and truth, proclaiming God’s peace with men and the coming of his Kingdom. “They shall fear and tremble because of all the good and all the prosperity I provide for it” (Jeremiah 33:9).”

As I read these words for the first time I was struck by the fact that they could just as easily apply to Zimbabwe today.

Is there not a real danger that the reason why our Nation’s morality has become so decayed is because of the frailty of the church? And is it not also true that one of the reasons why the church in Zimbabwe is so frail is because we have been fighting for our self-preservation? The church in Zimbabwe, and I include myself, has been compromised by materialism, selfishness, and an unwillingness to take God’s Word seriously. Boenhoffer once wrote:

“What does it really mean to be a Christian? It is the life described in the beatitudes, the life of the followers of Jesus, the light which lights the world, the city set on the hill, the way of self-renunciation, of utter love, of absolute purity,
truthfulness and meekness. It is unreserved love for our enemies, for the unloving and the unloved, love for our religious, political and personal adversaries. In every case it is the love which was fulfilled in the cross of Christ. The Cross is the differential of the Christian religion, the power which enables the Christian to transcend the world and to win the victory.”

It is necessary to come full circle back to Nehemiah. In Nehemiah 9:26 we read:

“But they were disobedient and rebelled against you; they put your Law behind their backs. They killed your prophets, who admonished them in order to turn them back to you; they committed awful blasphemies. So you handed them over to their enemies, who oppressed them. But when they were oppressed they cried out to you. From heaven you heard them, and in your great compassion you gave them deliverance, who rescued them from the hand of their enemies.”

Is it not true that we as a church have put God’s Law, God’s standards of justice behind our backs? We have been timid as individuals and collectively in proclaiming God’s standards and laws. Because we as a church have failed to do this for the last 30 years we as individual Christians have been handed over to our enemies, who oppress us.

But we must take comfort in the fact that our Lord is compassionate. We need to learn to put His law in front of us and let it be our shield and our light. We need to learn to analyse everything that happens in this country in the light of God’s standards of justice and his laws. When bad actions happen in Zimbabwe which violate God’s laws and standards of justice we as individuals, churches and parachurch organisations have the duty to speak out boldly to proclaim God’s laws and standards and to point out where the actions of man do not meet those laws and standards. In doing so we need not be depressed regarding the calamitous situation facing the justice system as our Lord’s promise is that we will be rescued from our enemies.

Legal and Justice Situation in Zimbabwe:  1995

By David Coltart

18th May 1995

Address to be given to the Theological College of Zimbabwe

In Nehemiah 9:13 we read:

“You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just and right, and decrees and commands that are good.”

There is a major difference between law and justice.  Very often, we mix up the two concepts and we believe that laws must be inherently just.  God’s laws are always just.  Man’s laws are sometimes just but very often unjust and wrong.  Man’s laws therefore must always be compared with God’s laws.  Ultimately, we are called upon to obey God and his laws and standards of justice, not man and his laws.

Accordingly, as we come to study the legal and justice situation in Zimbabwe we need to do the same.  It is important that we do not take a superficial view of our laws and legal system.  On the face of it we do appear to have reasonable laws, a Constitution which is compiled by our Government and a strong justice system.  On closer inspection, and especially as we consider our laws and legal system in comparison with God’s laws and God’s standards of justice, I believe you will realise that there is very little justice in Zimbabwe. Many of our laws are wholly unjust and the legal system as a whole is faltering, and in danger of becoming unjust in itself.

Dr Makombe spoke on Monday regarding the political situation.  One of the vital points he made was that in 1990 ZANU (PF) realised that they would not be able to bring about a de facto one-party state because of the collapse of socialism.  I agree with him that they decided in 1990 that they would do all in their power to bring about a de facto one party state.  In other words, they would do all in their power to maintain the facade of democracy, to maintain the facade of a civilised, pluralistic system of Government but that in reality they would do everything to ensure that behind the facade they were in absolute control of power.  I believe that in 1990 they looked around and identified where the potential sources of political opposition would come from and they singled out opposition parties, the independent press, student movements, human rights groups and the judiciary.  I would like to briefly analyse what Government has done regarding these various manifestations of political opposition. Then I will go into more depth as I analyse how the judiciary has been undermined by Government. The purpose in doing so is to show that one cannot fully understand what is happening to the justice system unless one realises that ZANU (PF) perceives it as a source of opposition which must be crushed.

Dr Makombe made the startling statement on Monday that he believed that Mr Tekere was a pseudo opposition politician, a man actually acting in the interests of ZANU (PF).  I have felt the same for a number of years.  I am convinced that some of the political parties established since 1990 are simply designed to create the impression in the minds of the people, and more importantly in the minds of the international community, that this is a pluralistic society, that this is a vibrant multi-party democracy.  Where I disagree with Dr Makombe is that he is concerned that Dr Dumbutshena of the Forum Party may be an agent provocateur as well.  I do not believe that but what I do believe is that Government has infiltrated and undermined genuine opposition parties and has used its control over the media to complete the job.  The reality of the situation is that in 1995 there is no meaningful opposition political party and following the elections, the new parliament is to all intents and purposes a one-party parliament.

The independent press was another major threat.  It is interesting to note that in 1990 it was a Government-controlled bank, Zimbank, which enabled the buyout of Modus.  I believe the Government allowed this to happen because they realised that the Financial Gazette actually served a very useful purpose.  It is a newspaper which is expensive and which is only read by a very small sector of Zimbabwean society. In essence the Financial Gazette preaches to the converted. It does not reach the core of ZANU (PF’s) support base, namely those in rural areas.  To that extent the articles which regularly appear in the Financial Gazette which are critical of the Government are a luxury ZANU can afford.  ZANU knows that those articles will not change the thinking of the vast majority of the electorate, and it also knows that those same articles are interpreted by the diplomatic community as evidence that we have a free press.  The reality of Government’s commitment to a free press, however, was shown in the closing down of the Daily Gazette and the recent arrest of the editor of the Financial Gazette this past weekend. The Daily Gazette in the course of 1994 began growing in stature.  It was responsible for exposing the land scandal and, in the run-up to the 1995 elections, could have proved to be very damaging to ZANU (PF) and very useful to emerging opposition parties.  Three months before the election, under pressure from a Government-controlled bank, Modus closed the Daily Gazette.  And now the Financial Gazette has finally overstepped the mark in its criticism.  It is fine to criticise Government in general terms but it is wrong for it to criticise the very core of ZANU (PF), namely the President himself.  I do not have time to comment in more detail regarding the case.  Suffice to say that in my view, the arrests of these journalists were designed to intimidate them and to get crucial evidence regarding the sources of their information.  The lesson we learn is that Government will tolerate the independent press as long as it does not shake the roots of power.  The moment the press starts to shake the roots of power then we see the true face and intent of ZANU (PF).

At the beginning of 1990, University of Zimbabwe students were becoming a major problem for Government.  It was students who protested against corruption in September 1989.  It was students who continued to protest thereafter and embarrassed Government during the 1991 Chogum meeting.  The result was the promulgation of the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act, which was designed to clamp down on student dissent. The Act has been extremely useful and students have now complied and indeed are used by Government to protest.

Since 1990 we have seen that the growth and strengthening of civil society organisations such as the Zimrights, the Legal Resources Foundation and the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace has been a serious thorn in Government’s side.  ZANU has in the recent past been able to dismiss its claims, accusing it of being white led and non-indigenous.  The growth of organisations such as Zimrights and the Legal Resources Foundation, both thoroughly indigenous organisations, presents a more serious problem for Government.  It is interesting to note that one of the first Acts signed by the President since elections was the Welfare Organisation Amendment Act No. 6 of 1995. This Act has received very little publicity but it presents one of the most serious threats to organisations such as Zimrights and the Legal Resources Foundation since Independence.  In terms of section 20A of the new Act the Minister of Labour can, acting on information given to him (in other words without an enquiry), suspend the leadership of organisations such as Zimrights and replace the leadership with his own nominees.  In terms of the Act the leader so suspended has no right of appeal to the Minister and, in a sentence, the entire amendment is thoroughly undemocratic and draconian. Dr Makombe spoke of Minister Shamuyarira’s shift to this Ministry as being a demotion.  I am not convinced that that is so and fear that the move, as President Mugabe himself stated, was not a demotion but deliberately designed so that Minister Shamuyarira can use this Act to undermine civil society and thus weaken another potential source of political opposition. Only time will tell whether I am right or not.

One of the principal sources of political opposition, in the broadest sense of the phrase, faced by ZANU (PF) comes from the judiciary and this is the focus of my talk this morning.  In 1990 the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe, under the leadership of the then Chief Justice Enoch Dumbutshena, had established a reputation for being one of the most fiercely independent benches in Africa.  It had repeatedly handed down judgement against the Government’s wishes and had decided a number of landmark decisions which promoted human rights and checked the powers of Government.  Sadly, Dr Dumbutshena reached retirement age in 1990 and despite efforts behind the scenes to have him stay on, it was clear Government had no intention of introducing the necessary legislation to enable this.  Coincidentally, at the end of 1990, a major Constitutional Amendment was passed introducing three crucial amendments to Section 15 and 16 of the Declaration of Rights.

In 1991 I wrote an article which was published in the Financial Gazette, which stated that it was my belief that the amendments to the Constitution were not just an effort to amend to the Constitution and to bring the Constitution in conformity with ZANU’s views on hanging, whipping and land resettlement.  I argued at the time that there was an ulterior motive and that was to undermine respect for the Supreme Court and to undermine respect for the Declaration of Rights.  The hanging provision effectively forestalled the Supreme Court from making a decision regarding whether hanging was a Constitutional form of carrying out the death penalty.  The whipping of juveniles amendment reversed a Supreme Court judgement, and the land provision excluded the Supreme Court from determining a fair value for compensation of land.  Time does not permit in this speech for me to explain fully why these amendments had an ulterior purpose and perhaps in the question time I can go into that in more detail. Suffice it to say that since 1990 the Government appears to be more determined than ever to undermine the Supreme Court and to minimise the importance of the Constitution and its Declaration of Rights.
Since May 1991 Government’s conduct in this regard has been marked by the following:

1. There have been further constitutional amendments which have withdrawn rights of citizens, rather than enhance them.  For example, Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe v Attorney General and Others 1993 (1) ZLR, the Supreme Court ruled that a long delay in executing a sentence of death constituted degrading and inhumane punishment in violation of Section 15 (1) of the Constitution.  Shortly after the ruling, Act 9 of 1993 was passed, amending Section 15 of the Constitution again and reversing the Supreme Court’s decision.  Indeed, Section 15 (1), which reads, ‘no person shall be subjected to torture or to inhumane or degrading punishment or other such treatment,’ has now been amended so many times by Government (there are now 5 provisos to subsection 1) that it has been almost totally emasculated.  This has all happened in a space of three years.  To give you some idea of how ridiculous these frequent amendments are I should mention that the United States Constitution has only been amended 26 times since 1776.  Another recent example of Government’s attitude is given in the Minister of Home Affairs’ reaction to the Supreme Court’s recent decision regarding the right of citizens to demonstrate.  The Minister’s response was to say that legislation will be introduced to reverse, water-down or negate the decision.  It will be interesting to see whether Government does act to amend the provisions in the Declaration of Rights enshrining the freedoms of association and expression.
2. Government has on a number of occasions in the last 18 months shown utter contempt for the Courts and the judicial system as a whole.  The most serious example was given in the Churu Farm episode which occurred in November 1993.  The Minister of Home Affairs, the Minister of Local Government and the Police effectively disregarded an order of the High Court, compelling them to allow the residents of Churu Farm to continue residing on the property.  Indeed, that contempt continues to this day.  President Mugabe’s statement reported in the Herald on 17 July 1993, to the effect that the Government would not accept a court decision against “Government Right’s” to acquire land under the Land Acquisition Act, shows very serious contempt for the Supreme Court and the judicial system as a whole.
3. Government has also manipulated the due process of law for its own political ends.  The most obvious example of this was the President’s pardoning of the men who attempted to murder Patrick Kombayi after their appeals had been dismissed by the Supreme Court.  The pardons have attracted a lot of publicity, and I do not propose to go into them in any detail.  What needs to be said, however, is that the pardoning was an abuse of the President’s Constitutional prerogative and manipulation of our Constitution.  It also needs to be said that the pardons were but one of the long line of Government manipulations of the legal system to suit its own ends.  To give but one example, I would draw your attention to the case of Masiwa 1992 (2) ZLR 7(s). This little-known case involved a person who was brutally beaten to death after making some derogatory remarks about the then Prime Minister Mr Mugabe.  The perpetrator of this crime was indeed fortunate that the State only levelled a charge of culpable homicide, and the Attorney General declined to transfer the case to the High Court for sentence; as a result, he was only sentenced to 7 years imprisonment, which was the maximum sentence which the magistrate could impose within his sentencing jurisdiction.  This case illustrates the fact there appears to be one law for those who support Government and another law for those who do not.  The recent pardoning by the President serves to emphasise this point.

The trend of holding the courts in contempt continues.  Last year, the Bulawayo Legal Projects Centre brought a test case to challenge Government’s immigration policies to deny the foreign husbands of Zimbabwean women citizens the right to reside in the country.  This policy was discriminatory, as foreign wives were allowed to reside in the country.  The landmark Rattigan v The Department of Immigration case was decided in June last year and established the right of foreign husbands to reside permanently in the country.  Since the judgement was handed down however, the Department of Immigration has persistently sought to ignore the judgement – so much so that the Bulawayo Legal Projects Centre is now bringing a further application to order the Department of Immigration to issue permanent residence permits to the people involved.  Furthermore, in the past year we have seen very serious attacks on the Supreme Court emanating from the editorial columns of Government controlled papers.  The Supreme Court and the High Court have been directly and indirectly attacked for the McGown judgement and immigration cases.

Recently you will have all read about the so-called Nyamandlovu Kangaroo Court involving Judge Blackie and myself.  I do not propose in this forum to defend myself or Judge Blackie, as it would be inappropriate.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that incident are, the fact is that a High Court Judge granted bail order.  It may be, although I don’t think so, that the bail order was granted incorrectly.  However, if any order of the High Court is granted incorrectly, the correct method of rectifying the order is to bring an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court.  The Attorney General, as Government’s principle legal adviser, knows this better than anyone else in Government.  Instead of appealing Judge Blackie’s order, the Attorney General and the Home Affairs Minister ordered the re-arrest of one of the men granted bail in defiance of the bail order.  No matter how wrong the Attorney General may have thought the circumstances leading to the granting of bail were, he should have brought an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court.  As it is, that appeal was never brought and the High Court order was simply ignored. To this day the public of Zimbabwe do not know whether the Judge acted correctly or not, as the Supreme Court has not determined the matter.  What everyone seems to have missed is that the Attorney General’s actions in many ways were worse than any perceived irregularity in procedure committed by the Judge.  A precedent has now been set, whereby the Attorney General and a Government Minister can simply ignore a High Court order. This attitude strikes at the heart of respect for the rule of law.  The rule of law principle dictates that once a Court order has been issued unless the order is set aside by another Court it must be obeyed by everyone, including Government.  I am afraid that the Nyamandlovu incident is yet another example of the undermining of our judicial system.

At the time when the Nyamandlovu incident hit the headlines an elder in our church, Denson Dube, came across Psalm 64 in his quiet time and he felt that the Lord had given him this scripture specifically for me. Psalm 64:4 – 8 reads:

“They shoot from ambush the innocent man; they shoot at him suddenly, without fear. They encourage each other in evil plans, they talk about hiding their snares; they say, ‘Who will see them?’  They plot injustice and say, ‘We have devised a perfect plan!’ Surely the mind and heart of a man are cunning.  But God will shoot them with arrows; suddenly they will be struck down.  They will turn their own tongues against them and bring them to ruin; all who see them will shake their heads in scorn.”

The reason I mention that verse now is because of the arrest of the Financial Gazette journalist this past weekend – I believe we will see ZANU’s tongue being turned against it.  As you are aware, the three Modus men were arrested early on Saturday morning because they were accused of criminally defaming the good name and reputation of Mr Justice Garwe and Minister Chikowore.  Whilst I do not believe that the alleged defamation of the Government Minister is sufficiently serious to warrant a prosecution, I fully agree that the alleged defamation of Justice Garwe is serious.  Any defamatory statement made regarding a Judge, if untrue, is extremely serious as it undermines respect of the judicial system as a whole.  However, if we consider this case of Justice Garwe in the light of the Judge Blackie case, we see a very serious apparent inconsistency in the approach taken by the prosecuting authorities.  As you will recall, at the beginning of March the Herald published the Nyamandlovu story regarding Mr Justice Blackie in very emotional and defamatory terms.  He was accused of conducting a Kangaroo Court and of being a racialist.  Whilst I am obviously very close to this issue I believe that objectively I can say that those comments were more defamatory of Mr Justice Blackie than the Financial Gazette’s statements were of Mr Justice Garwe, yet no action has been taken by the editor and the publisher of the Herald, Mr Tommy Sithole, in the Blackie matter.  And it is no answer to claim that the story about Mr Justice Blackie is true and that the story about Mr Justice Garwe is not.  Whether defamatory statements are true is something that the person who made the statement has to prove if he is to be acquitted.  For the prosecuting authorities, in this case the Attorney General, to decide in advance the truth of the statements (and act on that decision) is to usurp the function of the trial court.  The point I am simply making is that the Financial Gazette case once again illustrates how badly undermined our judiciary has become through political manoeuvring.

The judiciary has been further undermined by the fact that conditions of service are still relatively bad for Judges, even though they have been improved recently.  Of great concern to me is that there are several Judges who are overtly political and, at the very least, subservient to Government.  I fear that the present Supreme Court bench and other Judges have already been softened up by attacks on them by the Government-controlled media and that as a result, they may feel constrained to act as fiercely as the Supreme Court bench did under Dr Dumbutshena.  I have great sympathy for the Chief Justice especially.  He is a fine Judge, and I know he is a man of absolute integrity.  However, I believe that he cannot act as fiercely as Dr Dumbutshena did, ironically, because he is white.  In several editorials in both the Herald and the Chronicle there have been innuendos that because he is white he has handed down certain judgements which are racist in nature.  There has been no apparent effort made by Government to rein in these editors.  The Supreme Court Judges must be somewhat bemused by the alacrity and efficiency of the arrest and prosecution of the Financial Gazette journalists, whose perceived sins against Justice Garwe are far less serious than a variety of attacks made against the Supreme Court.  But what I fear even more is that when the current Supreme Court bench retires there is a strong likelihood that they will be replaced with political judges and then the entire justice system will be seriously undermined.  This is a somewhat gloomy picture I have painted, but from it you will see that Government is very close to its goals on undermining what in many ways has become the last bastion of democracy, the last check on Government power in this country.  In doing so, it has weakened a potential source of opposition.  In summary, let me say that the legal and justice situation in Zimbabwe is grave. ZANU through its dominance of Parliament can make virtually any law it likes.  The Courts are under attack, and there is the very real danger that they will lose whatever boldness and independence they have been renowned for in the next five to ten years.

There is of course one final sector of political opposition I have not spoken about. I must stress that I use this phrase political opposition in the widest sense of the word.  That source of political opposition is of course the church.  It is fascinating in my mind that the Government has not sought to crush or intimidate the church since 1990.  Why is this?
Before I answer that question, let me emphasise that I do not believe that the church should be involved in formal politics in any manner whatsoever.  I have spoken publicly on this topic and firmly believe that the church as an institution should distance itself from any individual political party or agenda.  Of course, I strongly believe that individual Christians should be involved in formal politics.  However, it is the church’s role to stand up for God’s standards of justice and to speak out whenever the Government of the day and its citizens are violating those standards.  Sadly, the history of the church in Zimbabwe in the last 30 years, albeit with a few notable exceptions, shows that it is thoroughly compromised and weak.  In the pre-independence era the white church by and large did not stand up God’s standards of justice regarding racism and discrimination.  In the 1980s the church by and large was silent on the genocide which happened in Matabeleland and indeed is still silent.  In the 1990s the church has been mute in the face of rampant corruption and abuse of power.

In October last year, I was encouraged to read that Africa Enterprise had organised a presidential prayer breakfast.  As you all know, in the breakfast his Excellency the President told the church not to be afraid to deliver “a message of light”.  In November last year, I wrote an open letter to the President in response to his challenge highlighting for areas of concern, namely:

a)     Corruption – I referred the President to Isaiah 1:23 -31:

“Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves; they all love bribes and chase after gifts… therefore… I will purge my hand against you, I will thoroughly purge away your dross… the mighty man will become timber and his work as spark; both will burn together, with no-one to quench the fire.”
b)    Failure to compensate the windows of Matabeleland – I referred the President to Exodus 22:21 -24:

“Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan.  If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry.  My anger will be aroused, and I will kill you with the sword; your wives will become widows and your children fatherless”.

c)     Perverting justice – I referred the President to Micah 3:9:

“You rulers… who despise justice and distort all that is right… therefore because of you, Zion will be ploughed like a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of rubble, the temple hill a mound overgrown with thickets.”

d)    Idolatry – I referred the President to Acts 12:21 -23:

“On the appointed day Herod, arrayed in his royal robes, took his seat on the throne and made a public address to them.  The mob shouted, “The voice of a God and not of a man!”  But instantly an angel of the Lord struck him, because he did not ascribe the glory to God.  He was eaten by words and died.”

Time does not permit me to go into why I felt that the President should take heed of the warnings contained in these scriptures.  Suffice it say that I warned that history was replete with examples of leaders who flouted God’s standards of justice and whose political careers had come to a sorry end.  The letter concluded with a quotation from Isaiah 40:23 -24:
“He brings Princes to nought and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing.  No sooner are they planted, no sooner are they sown, no sooner do they take root in the ground, and he blows on them and they wither, and a whirlwind sweeps them away like chaff.”

I need to stress that the letter was also addressed to the wider church.  I did not expect a response from the President.  What disturbs me is that I have received no response from the church.  At the very least I expected some form of criticism. Perhaps the verses I used were wrongly applied.  Whilst of course it may be that people in the church have not read the letter I am concerned by the lack of debate.  Is it that the church is not concerned about these issues?

I fear the church has become so compromised that it has lost its voice.  The only response I have seen to the Presidential breakfast is contained in the latest Zimbabwe Update published by African Enterprise.  In that there is a paragraph which reads:
“The Christian community in this country is blessed to have a State President who           can publically pronounce with his own mouth that “Jesus Christ is Lord!”  Another  national presidential prayer breakfast is in the pipeline and we must thank the Lord   for that.”

Presumably this Zimbabwe Update was printed before the revelation that the President committed adultery (and sired two children) with a woman before his wife died.  Dr Makombe spoke of the silence of the Church on this issue.  Why is it that the church has been so silent? Is it not good enough to have a State President who can pronounce with his mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord.  Once he has made that pronouncement he is proclaiming himself to be a Christian and a very public one at that.  Once he has proclaimed himself as a Christian then he must become subject to the discipline of the wider church.  I do not mention this issue to focus in on the sins of the President.  All of us have sinned; none of us are without blemish.  The point I seek to make is that the Church is in danger of becoming irrelevant if it displays double standards.  There is a price the Church has to pay for lauding somebody and yet not to seek to make that person accountable.

There are frightening parallels between the Church in Germany in the 1930s and the Church in Zimbabwe in the 1990s.  The Church in Germany collaborated with the Nazis.  It turned a blind eye to injustice and in doing so became irrelevant.

This year I have sought solace by reading a biography regarding Dietrich Bonheoffer.  Writing from a Gestapo controlled prison in1944 Bonheoffer said:

“We are once again being driven right back to the beginnings of our understanding. Reconciliation and redemption, regeneration and the Holy Ghost, love our enemies, cross and resurrection, life in Christ and Christian discipleship – all these things are so difficult and so remote that we hardly venture anymore to think of them.  Our church, which has been fighting in these years only for its self-preservation, as though that were an end in itself, is incapable of taking the word of reconciliation and redemption to mankind and the world.  The day will come when men will once more be called to utter the word of God and the world will be changed and renewed by it.  It will be a new language, perhaps quite non-religious, but liberating and redeeming- as was Jesus’s language; it will shock people and yet overcome them by its power; it will be the language of a new righteousness and truth, proclaiming God’s peace with men and the coming of his Kingdom. “They shall fear and tremble because of all the good and all the prosperity I provide for it” (Jeremiah 33:9).”

As I read these words for the first time I was struck by the fact that they could just as easily apply to Zimbabwe today.

Is there not a real danger that the reason why our Nation’s morality has become so decayed is because of the frailty of the church?  And is it not also true that one of the reasons why the church in Zimbabwe is so frail is because we have been fighting for our self-preservation? The church in Zimbabwe, and I include myself, has been compromised by materialism, selfishness, and an unwillingness to take God’s Word seriously.  Bonheoffer once wrote:

“What does it really mean to be a Christian?  It is the life described in the beatitudes, the life of the followers of Jesus, the light which lights the world, the city set on the hill, the way of self-renunciation, of utter love, of absolute purity, truthfulness and meekness.  It is unreserved love for our enemies, for the unloving and the unloved, love for our religious, political and personal adversaries.  In every case it is the love which was fulfilled in the cross of Christ.  The Cross is the differential of the Christian religion, the power which enables the Christian to transcend the world and to win the victory.”

It is necessary to come full circle back to Nehemiah.  In Nehemiah 9:26 we read:

“But they were disobedient and rebelled against you; they put your Law behind their backs.  They killed your Prophets, who admonished them in order to turn them back to you; they committed awful blasphemies so that you handed them over to their enemies, who oppressed them.  But when they were oppressed they cried out to you.  From heaven you heard them, and in your great compassion you gave them deliverers, who rescued them from the hand of their enemies.”

Is it not true that we as a church have put God’s Law, God’s standards of justice, behind our backs?  We have been timid as individuals and collectively in proclaiming God’s standards and laws.  Because we as a church have failed to do this for the last 30 years, we as individual Christians have been handed over to our enemies who oppress us.

But we must take comfort in the fact that our Lord is compassionate.  We need to learn to put His law in front of us and let it be our shield and our light.  We need to learn to analyse everything that happens in this country in light of God’s standards of justice and his laws.  When bad actions happen in Zimbabwe which violate God’s laws and standards of justice we as individuals, churches and para-church organisations have the duty to speak out boldly to proclaim God’s laws and standards and to point out where the actions of man do not meet those laws and standards.  In doing so we need not be depressed regarding the calamitous situation facing the justice system, as our Lord’s promise is that we will be rescued from our enemies.

SENIOR GOLFER’S SOCIETY: NATIONALS

Mr President, Honoured guests, Senior Golfers,

When Mike Greenfield asked me to propose a toast tonight my first thought was: “What the hang can I say that will be vaguely relevant to Senior Golfers?” And then I thought: “Why reflect on the last 20 years or so I have been playing golf – many of the old codgers have been greatly responsible for moulding the game in this country….. and perhaps we can learn something”. I think it is always important to reflect on the past so that we can learn for the future.

I think golf in this country has matured and improved in parallel with our wines. Drinking a fine wine tonight I recalled my first contact with Rhodesian wines at the wedding of one of Jack Gorton daughter’s weddings in the early seventies. I had an excess of terrible wine and suffered greatly. Monty Python once did a spoof regarding Australian wines and the Australian Wino Society which went as follows: “The Sydney syrup is a fine wine with a bouquet like an aborigine’s armpit. For those keen on regurgitation another fighting wine is the Perth Pink. Every bottle has a message on it. And the message is: “Beware. This is not a wine for drinking – this is a wine for laying down and avoiding!” I should think that the same epithets could be used to describe Rhodesian wines. Except that the bouquet would probably smell like a Bushman’s armpit. Be that as it may our wines have certainly improved since then and now our international standing in golf has improved as well through the likes of Nick Price.

In fact my one and only claim to fame in golf is that in September 1972 I was selected to go and play in a pro-am at Hwange with Nick Price and Fred Beaver. I am not sure why I was asked to go along as I wasn’t in their class. Perhaps it was to provide a contrast; how golf should be played and how it should not be played – but it was a wonderful experience nevertheless. Nick is the same age as me – we were then 15 and I can remember being awestruck by the length and accuracy of his play.

Thinking of Nick Price I am reminded of the story of Agnes Brown. Agnes was a middle aged spinster attending a wedding as bridesmaid for the umpteenth time. Half way through the ceremony she started giggling. The dour Presbyterian Minister turned to her and said “Agnes do ye no ken that marriage is an awfully serious business?” To which she replied “Och aye Minister but, not getting married is awfully more serious!”

Nick even then took golf seriously but achieved a balance. Nick was the ultimate golfer even then but he was able to get the game in perspective and didn’t seem to get too up tight. I was delighted to read after he won the US PGA that golf writers felt it couldn’t have been won by a “nicer guy”. Obviously he hasn’t changed.

Someone who has matured greatly in his outlook is Tony Johnson. Tony was a year ahead of me at CBC and was the opposite of Nick Price. My father once banned him from playing at Country Club for breaking coke bottles on the 1st tee. I can recall playing with him at Country Club – at the old 3rd hole – the present 10th – he displayed remarkable athletic skills in throwing his sand wedge across the green in pursuit of his ball which had been hit thin out of a bunker. It was also quite a nerve wracking experience watching Ovies (his nick name) prepare to drive; his contortions were quite remarkable. Tony never had the natural skill of Nick but he has made up for that disparity by sheer determination to succeed. Tony reminds me of the Dutch Reformed Dominee who was hacking badly in the company of one of his elders. After cursing furiously he said “I’ll just have to give it up!” His elder looked horrified and asked: “What golf?” To which the Minister replied “No the Ministry!”.

But getting back to junior golf 20 years ago I am always amazed at the talent this country produced. In 1973 Manicaland couldn’t get a full team together so Mat, Mid and Mashonaland provided a few of their players, on the brink of selection, to play for Manicaland in the Interprovincial Match play championships. In this way I managed to play Interprovincial Junior golf in April 1973 at Greta Park in Mashaba as it then was. The Mashonaland side that year included Mark McNulty, Dennis Watson and Nick Price? The Matabeleland side included Tony Johnson and he didn’t even play number one! Those really were glory days. Greta Park is a wonderful course and it was exhilarating being able to play in such great company. I remember being firmly bitten by the golfing bug at the time.

Had cricket, rugby and the war not intervened I think I may have ended up like the golfer who was putting out on the 16th green with his playing partner. As he was about to putt a funeral cortege passed by on the road running next to the course. The golfer immediately stood up and without putting reverently removed his cap and waited until the hearse had passed. His partner asked him why he had waited so long and so reverently to which he replied “She was a good wife to me for 40 years!”.

Sadly I have not been able to become completely addicted. After my stint of travelling around the country going to exotic places to meet exotic people I went to the University of Cape Town. Any illusion I had of spending most of my spare time at Royal Cape Golf course were shattered in the first week of my ROMAN LAW course. We had an austere Austrian Professor complete with monocle named Schiller, who taught the course. He gave us a mound of assignments and one of my unfortunate class mates asked whether the assignments were compulsory. He replied:

“No zey are not compulsory, but zere again breathing is not compulsory. If you do not breath you die, if you do not do my assignments you fail!”

I got the message and foolishly let LATIN, ROMAN LAW and TAXATION take precedence over golf. That is not to say I didn’t get in any golf in Cape Town. It has wonderful courses and I played frequently at Royal Cape, Mowbray, Rondebosch, Milnerton and at a Jewish Club near D.F Malan Airport. We were always made to feel most welcome at the Jewish Club and it always puzzled me why the AWB in South Africa barred Jews from their membership. Just last week a Jewish friend told me why: Apparently you have to be a complete dick to join.

But I digress. I returned to Zimbabwe after University and once again harboured misguided notions of playing a lot of golf. My partners, my wife and children and our heroic comrades have shattered that dream. Incidentally I have become increasingly concerned about the continued use of the word COMRADE since the advent of ESAP. I have had, up until recently, great difficulty in reconciling the word COMRADE with someone who generally drives a Mercedes Benz, owns several farms and flies 1st class. However you will be pleased to hear that my problems have been resolved. I am told that the word COMRADE is in fact an ANAGRAM standing for either “Communists only made rich after duping the electorate” or “Communists only made rich after diddling economy”.

But I digress again. The trouble about rambling on like this is that one loses the point of the speech. And the point of this magical mystery tour over the last 20 years is that through all our collective toils and trouble you Senior Golfers can say that all the effort you have put into the development of golf in this country has born much fruit and that is seen in the wonderful successes of Price, McNulty and Johnson. My appeal to you is that you recognize that you still have a major role to play. The strategies you employed 20 years ago to foster junior golf in this country must be shared with the next generation so that our proud traditions can continue. As my Austrian Professor said “It is not compulsory…..” but sure enough if you don’t give that input our present glory days on the international scene will not be perpetuated.

In closing I am reminded of the two dour Scottish professionals involved in a tense match play game. Not a word had been exchanged between the two in a ding dong battle until the 17th hole when the one got the better of the other. “Dormie” he uttered as he won the hole. To which the other replied “Chatterbox!”.

Lest you accuse me of being a chatterbox I shall end. I ask you to charge your glasses and join me in a toast to the Senior Golfers Society.

BULAWAYO SOUTH ROTARY CLUB

Ladies and Gentlemen

Rotary has a proud history of promoting understanding and peace in the world and as I understand the position it is one of your prime objectives. I first had a taste of Rotary’s role of promoting understanding and peace in 1985 when I was fortunate enough to be a member of a group study exchange team to the United States. Two South Africans, two Zimbabweans and one Malawian made for an interesting combination.

One of the South African team members was extremely conservative, just right of Attila the Hun. Our team leader as well was not particularly impressed by any notions that there was life after apartheid. There was one black Zimbabwean and one black Malawian and I was very much wet behind the ears having recently graduated from the University of Cape Town, or little Moscow on the hill as it was quaintly described by the Bureau of State Security in South Africa, and thus was a lily livered liberal.

At the time South Africa was in great trauma. Whilst we were in the United States there were daily reports of violence and increasing unrest. Because of this the Americans wanted to know what was going on and we very soon had to agree on the tour that we would not comment on each other’s internal affairs. Accordingly the analysis of what was going on in South Africa was left to our South African team members who insisted that 99% of the people were happy and that the unrest was caused by a small clique of agitators. Of course it was untrue and history has borne that out. Truth is stubborn and will come out. It cannot be silenced permanently like a person. However at the time it required immense restraint on behalf of the non-South African members of the team to keep quite.

I learnt a great deal from that tour and despite our obvious political differences at the end of the tour we had established firm friendships both amongst ourselves and with our American hosts. Dialogue performed wonders in establishing friendships. Indeed it is dialogue which promotes understanding. Dialogue and understanding are prerequisites of peace. And peace is a prerequisite for development. If my logic is correct as we look at our own country Zimbabwe and the region as a whole the promotion of peace is fundamental to the success of the structural adjustment program and development.

Since 1985 we have been fortunate in the region to witness a steady progression towards peace. In Zimbabwe a unity accord was signed in 1987 and that was followed by a transition to dialogue and democracy in South Africa and Mozambique.

My concern however is whether we are building true peace, whether we are building sustainable peace in the Region and especially in Zimbabwe.

Martin Luther King once said “True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice”. I believe that this statement gives us another prerequisite to peace, namely the presence of justice. I think that we can say with confidence that peace is founded on understanding of each other’s problems and the presence of justice in any country.

Applying those principles to Zimbabwe can we say with any confidence that true peace is entrenched in our society. Are we secure in feeling that the absence of conflict which characterises our society at present will last? I fear that there are serious cracks appearing in our society which could result in the superficial peace we have at present being destroyed. I would like to touch on a few areas of concern this afternoon as I believe that there are ways that Rotary and Rotarians can promote in bringing about true peace in our country.

The first area of concern relates to the effects of structural adjustment and the resultant widening gap between rich and poor. Zimbabweans are long suffering and to that extent the economic suffering felt by many in this country has not resulted in serious civil unrest. It is interesting to note that through history different peoples have endured great sufferings without resorting to civil unrest and yet other peoples have rioted without being subjected to much suffering at all. An obvious example of the former is given in the fortitude shown by both British and German people in the face of catastrophic bombing. The people showed tremendous resilience and got on with their lives without complaining. I am sure that the reason for that was because of their perception that everyone had to tighten their belts together including the leadership of the country. Certainly the photographs of the King and Queen and the Prime Minister walking the streets of London reinforced this perception in the minds of many. As a result in the midst of immense destruction there was true peace amongst the British people if not between themselves and their German enemies. That true peace came from their perception that justice was present in their own country. The danger in Zimbabwe is that many poor people perceive that they are the only ones who have to tighten their belts. One of the ironic consequences of structural adjustment is that consumer goods are more readily available to tempt people; to remind people of what they are missing out on. When poor people are battling to buy a loaf of bread and they do not see expensive consumer items on shop shelves then the perception in their minds is that all people are suffering. However when they are struggling to buy bread and they see others driving around in flashy new cars there is bound to be a perception that there is an injustice somewhere.

The problem is ultimately an economic one and I do not propose to offer solutions today. It is for Government to address the economic problems this country faces. However if we as individuals and Rotarians are to promote peace we must start with ourselves. Perhaps this is just a token suggestion: I think that all people who are reasonably well off need to consider, for example, how much they pay their domestic workers. Have we stopped to consider who much it costs to buy a loaf of bread or a pint of milk these days? Even if we are paying over the minimum wage is what we are paying sufficient for our domestic workers to survive?

The second concern I have is more parochial in that it concerns the suffering of the people of Matabeleland. The March edition of Moto has just come out and the headline is “More Bones”. If ever Martin Luther King’s statement had application to any situation it does in relation to the horrors perpetrated against the people of Matabeleland and Midlands during the period 1982 to 1987 by dissidents and members of the Zimbabwe National Army. Moto in its editorial admits that it will be accused of opening painful old wounds but it states that it is necessary that the story be told and I agree. There is undoubtedly in Matabeleland an absence of overt tension regarding this issue. Government has persistently tried to sweep the issue under the carpet but it forgets that the issue is still very much alive in the minds of many people in Matabeleland and Midlands. Until there is a just resolution to the problem we cannot hope to have true peace in this part of the country and therefore Zimbabwe.

I am aware that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of people who suffered at the hands of both dissidents and members of the Zimbabwe National Army. It is important to stress that people suffered in the hands of both and to that extent this is not a political issue. Just last Friday I paid my first visit to New Adams Farm since the massacre which occurred there on November 25th 1987. A memorial has been set up to those who lost their lives on that terrible night. Those people were killed by dissidents not members of the National Army. There are unresolved issues arising from those murders. Likewise there are hundreds of others who still to this day do not know where their husbands are, who cannot get birth certificates, who no longer have bread winners and so cannot send their children to school. Concerns like these fester and until a commitment is made by Government to compensate people who have suffered there will not be true peace.

The President is on record as stating that too much concern has been shown towards those who suffered during this period and that not enough concern has been shown for those who died or suffered during the liberation struggle. With respect to the President that statement is not true. In 1980 the Government enacted the War Victims Compensation Act (Act 22 of 1980) which allows any people who suffered during the liberation struggle to claim compensation. I believe that Government needs to commit itself to amending the War Victims Compensation Act to enable people who suffered between 1982 and 1987 to claim compensation. If Government takes this step then we may be able to say that justice is present in our society. Then wounds can heal and true peace will result.

What can you as Rotarians do about this? Well obviously it is a very hot political issue but there is a personal side to this. Individuals have suffered and if Government will not compensate then perhaps organisations like Rotary and Lions should consider raising funds to support victims.

The third and final issue I wish to address today which I believe threatens true peace is the resurgence of racial tensions in Zimbabwe. In just yesterday’s Sunday Mail Mr Bornwell Chakaodza, the Director of Information of the Government of Zimbabwe wrote an article entitled “No Vicious Race Campaign in Zimbabwe”. Mr Chakaodza, for those of you who did not read the article, was responding to a February the 5th Reuter entitled “Zimbabwe Race Campaign Hitting Investors”. The Reuter article stated that a campaign to excite racial animosity was hurting Zimbabwe’s investment drive and may well affect the forthcoming Paris Donors Conference. Whilst I am the first to conceive that there is still a good deal of racism in this country I have been appalled by what appears on the surface at least to be campaign orchestrated by Government to raise racial tensions. What Mr Chakaodza omitted in his article was the fact that this debate was first started by Vice-President Nkomo way back in September 1993 when very serious threats were levelled at minority communities in Zimbabwe. Since then others have jumped on the band wagon to such an extent that much of the racial harmony in this country, such as it was, has been undermined.

It is no use complaining about what has happened. It is important that we deal with the issue now. As I stated at the beginning of this talk two fundamental prerequisites for peace are understanding and the presence of justice. Those prerequisites must be applied to the Zimbabwean situation if we are to have true racial harmony and peace.

We in the white community must learn to acknowledge the role that we have played in undermining racial harmony. On our part it often boils down to a lack of understanding. I think one of the greatest tragedies of the Colonial area was that most of us were not taught to speak a local language. I did a smattering of Shona at University but cannot say that I am in any way fluent in either Shona or Ndebele. As I said earlier without dialogue it is very hard to achieve understanding. Without any knowledge of the language spoken in the home by the majority it is very difficult for us to have meaningful dialogue with our fellow citizens. This is something I think that Rotary could address in promoting peace. Would it not send a signal to our fellow citizens if minority groups, encouraged by organisations such as Rotary, made an effort to embark on mass language courses so that more of us could engage in meaningful dialogue.

Likewise it is necessary that we understand that there is an unjust situation prevailing in the country. That black people, for a variety of reasons, have been prejudiced because of history. There is a need for some form of affirmative action. There is injustice and there is a need for justice to become more present. However I do not believe that justice regarding this issue can come about through the stirring up of racial tension and the ad hoc and peace meal allocation of resources to disadvantaged people who in many cases are not that disadvantaged. Both the South African and the Namibian Constitution have provisions which allow for a structured legal framework in which affirmative action can take place. In Zimbabwe we need a legislative framework; we need constitutional amendments to facilitate an orderly affair program of affirmative action and I believe that privileged minority groups should be coming up with ideas in this regard and that this in itself will promote peace.

In conclusion may I encourage you as Rotarians to continue the wonderful work you do. However it is important that you do not shy away from the serious issues confronting Zimbabwe and the region. Whilst group study exchanges with countries far away are vital in the promotion of world understanding and peace these must not be embarked upon to the neglect of promoting understanding and peace in our own country and region.

MILTON HIGH SCHOOL, BULAWAYO, ZIMBABWE

Headmaster, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen and last, but not least, boys.

I am greatly honoured by your invitation to deliver the 1994 Milton Address. Shortly after receiving the invitation I was sent copies of previous addresses and I confess to being daunted by the illustrious speakers you have had in the past. At the Milton address given on your 75th Anniversary in 1985 Sir Garfield Todd told Milton High School pupils that they should aspire to address the school at the age of 65. I am only 36 so am doubly honoured to be invited to address you at such a tender age. Perhaps Mr Mandikate made a mistake and presumed that my baldness indicated sufficient old age to merit this invitation.

Milton High School was established in the same year as the formation of the South African Union in 1910. In preparing this address I was reminded of the wonderful inauguration of President Mandela at the Union Buildings in Pretoria in April this year. It was entirely appropriate that the inauguration of such a great man and such a significant occasion should have taken place at such a gracious and historic location. President Mandela’s coming to power and South Africa’s transformation over the last few years has been almost miraculous and it stands in such vivid contrast to the gloom that overshadows most of the rest of Africa. Tonight I would like us to look at Africa’s woes and to consider some of the lessons I believe we can learn from our Southern neighbour this evening and from President Mandela himself.

Africa is at a cross-roads. The last bastion of colonialism and racism in Africa has gone with the demise of apartheid ruled South Africa. No longer does Africa have a common enemy; no longer does it have any form of scapegoat. It now has to face its own problems squarely and we as Africans have a choice: either we can recognise our abundant potential and progress or we can continue our gradual slide into oblivion.

With a few exceptions Africa is in a dreadful mess. The frightening images of Rwanda and Zaire over the past few weeks and days merely highlight a malaise that affects the majority of African states. The list of catastrophe in Africa is long: Somalia, Liberia, Sudan, Angola, Mozambique and Ethiopia have been the focus of some of the worst human suffering the world has seen. And yet the list does not end there. Just this past weekend we heard of another coup d’eta in the Gambia. That shocked me to the core because I had always perceived Gambia as being one of Africa’s more enlightened and stable states.

One is numbed by Africa. Here is a continent of unsurpassed natural resources, blessed with wonderful climates, bountiful land, strong and able people. And yet it is this continent that is the basket case of the world. As we analyse the trouble spots of Africa over the last five years or so it is important that we understand the root causes of the chaos. Those who cannot learn from history are destined to re-live it. Many of the countries which are stricken by conflict were, a few years ago, on the surface at least, stable societies. Liberia is an appropriate example. As recently as 1987 the then US Secretary of State, George Schultz, passed through Monrovia and praised the late President Doe’s Government for what he called “genuine progress” towards democracy. At the same time the then US Assistant Secretary of State, Chester Crocker issued a series of unforgettable statements about “positive aspects” of a rigged election. It shocked the world when an all-out civil war erupted in 1990.

And yet the signs were there for all to see. The foundations of disaster were laid as far back as the 1960’s during the rule of President William V.S. Tubman. In the December 1992 edition of the American magazine, The Atlantic, Bill Berkely wrote:

“the combination of graft and repression reached its peak during his rule. He donated one per cent of the national budget to the upkeep of his presidential perks. He created a personality cult based on an elaborate network of kinship and patronage, personal loyalty, the manipulation and co-option of tribal chiefs – and force. He built an extensive secret – police network, and laid the foundations for much of what was to come: an individual autocracy rooted in weak institutions and contempt for the rule of law”.

We need to think about those words and see whether they have application in other African countries. Invariably whenever they have had application those countries have become susceptible to the same horrors which erupted in Liberia. It is also important to remember that the horrors in Liberia only erupted in 1990, some 19 years after Tubman left office. The volatile ingredients of civil war, once mixed, can simmer for years before exploding with an all consuming fire.

Gambia has become another example of this. Just yesterday I listened to a BBC interview with the coup leader Lieutenant Yahah Jammeh. Jammeh said that Sir Dawda Gawara and his predecessors had ruled uninterrupted for 30 years and had developed a thoroughly corrupt regime. He said a further interesting thing which was an echo of Liberia: that whilst the outside world had perceived Gambia as a progressive democracy it was in fact a repressive corrupt regime. And so yet again, democracy in Africa has been retarded. And we are all affected because with every coup d’eta the image of Africa as a no-hope case is strengthened in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Bernard Levin, writing in the Times earlier this year, asks the question “Why has Africa, with all its massive potential failed its people?”. It is a question all of us, as Africans, need to ask. I think that the answer is found in some old wisdom. In Isaiah 58 we read of a nation in a similar predicament to ourselves as Africans today. I do not have time to read it all to you tonight but I commend it to you.

In verse 2 we read:

“for day after day they seek me out; they seem eager to know my ways, as if they were a nation that does what is right and has not forsaken the commands of its God. They ask me for just decision.”

In verse 3 the same people say:

“why have we humbled ourselves, and you have not noticed”.

Africa is a religious continent. Its people have been crying out for many years. We all at times feel as if God has not heard our supplications.

In verses 3 to 5 God turns to the nation of Israelites and says in effect that he will not listen to the nation because their fasting, their processes of humbling only result in people doing as they please. Their fasting ends in quarrelling and strife. He says that they cannot expect their voice to be heard on high as long as they fast as they do.

In verses 6 to 10 God gives the Israelites advice as to what has to happen before he will listen to their pleas. They are told to “loose the chains of injustice, to “untie the cords of the yoke” to “set the oppressed free” to “do away with the yoke of oppression and with the pointing finger and malicious talk”. In other words he tells the nation that they can pray and fast and humble themselves as much as they like but unless they as a nation move to establish a just order he as God Almighty will not have compassion for their plight. The chapter ends with wonderful promises contained in verses 9 through to 14. It gives the promise that if the chains of injustice are loosened then light will break forth like the dawn, healing will quickly appear, God will satisfy our needs in a sun scorched land, the people will rebuild ancient ruins, they will be called Repairer of Broken Walls, Restorer of streets with dwellings and we will find our joy.

I believe the answer to Africa’s woes is contained in this very chapter. The answer in modern worldly terms is as follows: Africa cannot expect to see light, a new dawn and healing until some of the fundamental chains of injustice and yokes of oppression still existent in Africa have been shattered.

What are these chains and yokes in Africa today? I think a clue is given in the Liberian situation. As I said earlier it had a Government described as “an individual autocracy rooted in weak institutions and contempt for the rule of law”.

That description is common of many countries throughout Africa. We can identify three chains or yokes in that description.

The first chain or yoke is autocracy. Autocracy is defined variably as self-sustained power or absolute government. An autocrat is a leader with uncontrolled authority. Is it not true that Africa is characterised by governments whose power is self-sustained by leaders who have been in power for decades and whose rule is absolute and unchecked? This is not to say that the ruler has acted unconstitutionally in the sense that the constitution of the country has been breached.
Sadly much of the rule in Africa, is constitutional in the sense that the respective countries constitutions allow this absolute, unchecked power.

Zimbabwe’s constitution is a case of point. It was flawed from the very beginning but since 1980 it has been lawfully amended:

– concentrating extensive powers in an Executive President;
– abolishing an arm of the legislature, namely the Senate;
– giving the Executive President the power to appoint people to the legislature.

These amendments and others have had the effect of vesting enormous power in the hands of a few people whose rule is largely absolute and unchecked.

Writing in the federalist papers in 1787 one of the fathers of the American constitution, James Madison wrote:

“but the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resisting encroachments of the others. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections
of human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls of government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is no doubt the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions”.

Madison believed that man cannot be trusted with power. He believed that because man could not be trusted one should not vest unchecked power in one department of government. If democracy was to work there should be checks on the power of anyone in control of any aspect of government.

To bring my talk back full circle I believe we have much to learn from the South African constitution which was greatly influenced by Nelson Mandela and the ANC team of constitutional lawyers such as Albie Sachs, Nic Haysom and Arthur Chaskalson. The new South Africa Constitution is framed in such a way that there will be a variety of checks in the power of central government. The Constitution creates the office of President, Senate and House of Assembly. The fundamental rights contained in the Constitution are entrenched and will override the will of Parliament as expressed in legislation. The South African courts, and especially the Constitutional Court, will be in effect a fourth chamber (aside from the President, Senate and House of Assembly), a negative legislature. In essence the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty has been abandoned in South Africa. In other words Parliament is no longer all powerful and is subject to scrutiny by the Constitutional Court. South Africans have heeded the warnings of James Madison. The Constitution does not allow for the encroachment of autocracy in South Africa. South Africans are clearly determined that this is one chain that will not be able to strangle the process of bringing about of a new democracy, of a new bright dawn and of healing in South Africa.

The second chain or yoke is the presence of weak institutions in any nation. Perhaps the most powerful institution which acts as a check on power, which prevents the establishment of an autocracy, is the media. Conversely, as happened in Liberia, autocracies are often built on the foundation of a weak subservient media. This is especially so of the electronic media which in most African countries is rigidly controlled by Government. Radio is by far the most powerful medium in under-developed African countries and is many governments’ ultimate propaganda tool. A tightly controlled broadcasting service is almost automatically a weak one; unable to expose corruption and abuse of power. Conversely an independent bold broadcasting service is a corrupt Government’s nemesis.

Most African countries are characterised by a weak subservient broadcasting service. Zimbabwe’s broadcasting service is no exception. We are still afflicted by a colonial law: Section 27 of the Broadcasting Act, Chapter 248 rules that “no person other than the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation shall carry on a broadcasting service in Zimbabwe”. The result has been a narrow-minded service which has slavishly served the interests of the two political parties which have governed this country for the last thirty years. As a result the ZBC, and the RBC before it, has, for the last thirty years, been a propaganda arm of government; a weak institution which has only given one side of every story and in so doing has fostered the emergence of two different autocracies over the last thirty years.

In contrast the new South African Constitution will not allow this situation to develop. Section 15 of the Bill of Rights reads:

(1) “every person shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media;
(2) all media financed by or under the control of the state shall be regulated in a manner which ensures impartiality and the expression of a diversity of opinion”.

Subsection 2 goes a step further than the provision contained in two recently enacted African Constitutions, namely the Ghanian Constitution and the Namibian Constitution. Both of those constitutions all persons shall have the right to “freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media”. Those provisions on the face of it ensure that the media will be opened to all but do not expressly say that state funded broadcasting must be fair. The South African Constitution puts the issue beyond doubt. The electronic media in South Africa, whether funded or controlled by Government or not is destined to be a strong institution. The Constitution obliges it to ensure that all points of view are covered and in doing so State broadcasting services will not be allowed to become a propaganda tool.

The third yoke or chain of oppression is found in contempt for the rule of law. Liberia like most African countries had a constitution. It had a body of criminal law which in theory applied to all people. The doctrine of the rule of law holds that predetermined laws of the country must be applied equally to all. The rule of law is held in contempt when those laws are applied to some people but not to others. The rule of law is also held in contempt when fundamental human rights provisions are arbitrarily changed or watered down to suit the whim of government. Africa is blighted by these types of contempt. Throughout Africa powerful politicians and their supporters are often not charged with criminal offences they have committed; others are pardoned. Internationally accepted fundamental human rights contained in constitutional provisions are changed and watered down. Zimbabwe is not immune to this type of contempt; our Declaration of Rights has been consistently watered down so much so that some of the rights contained therein are now virtually meaningless. Our laws have been applied unfairly and in a discriminatory fashion. Court orders have been wilfully disobeyed by Government. Government operatives, guilty of serious crimes, have been pardoned. All of this constitutes contempt for the rule of law.

President Mandela and those South Africans responsible for the drafting of its new Constitution appear to have been alert to this problem. They have fashioned their Constitution in such a way as to give the new Constitutional Court immense powers to combat contempt for the rule of law. Firstly, the fundamental rights contained in Chapter 3 of the South African Constitution are entrenched and cannot be changed or watered down in any way. Secondly, Section 7 of the Constitution binds all legislative and Executive organs of State to respect those fundamental rights. The fundamental rights apply to all administrative decisions and, most importantly, administrative Acts. The Constitutional Court is given the power to strike down any law, decision or Act which it feels violates the Constitution. Accordingly any government action in contempt of the rule of law will be met with the wrath of the Constitutional Court.

The Ghanian Constitution, which came into force on the 7th of January 1993, is equally fascinating in this regard. In terms of Section 2 (2) the Supreme Court has authority to make orders giving effect to the Declaration of Rights. In terms of Section 2 (4) any failure to obey and to carry out the terms of an order made by the Supreme Court constitutes “a high crime” and shall, in the case of a President or the Vice-President, constitute a ground for removal from office. In other words if the President or Vice-President of Ghana is responsible for holding the rule of law in contempt he can be removed from office.

The point of my talk tonight is this: Africa is in a mess. Three countries in Africa, South Africa, Namibia and Ghana have pointed the way forward for Africa. South Africans, and President Mandela and the ANC in particular, have identified that the attainment of a new dawn, of healing, of the process of reconstruction and of making Africa proud again begins with a new Constitution. A new strong Constitution is obviously just the start. On it must be built strong institutions and a deep respect for the rule of law. Constitutions, as has often been argued are just pieces of paper which can be torn apart. This has certainly been so in Africa in the past where both the letter and spirit of Constitutions have been wantonly breached by a variety of African governments. But in the present age, in the post-cold war situation we find ourselves in, Constitutions are now harder to ignore than they were in the past. The World Bank and IMF link aid to respect for Constitutionality and human rights observance. Many governments in Africa hide behind a facade of acting in terms of their Constitutions. “We have acted Constitutionally” they say whilst perpetrating serious violations of human rights. If we change and strengthen African Constitutions those governments will no longer be able to hide behind that facade.

Where does all of this leave us as Zimbabweans? Where does this leave you young men on the threshold of your careers? I believe that more than anything else in Zimbabwe today we need a new Constitution in line with the South African, Namibian and Ghanian Constitutions. A Constitution which will act to prevent Zimbabwe sliding down the same slippery slope as Liberia did. A Constitution which will not allow an individual autocracy to emerge and consolidate. A Constitution which strengthens institutions which in themselves will act as a check on the abuse of power. A Constitution which will prevent Government acting in contempt of the rule of law.

This of course is lofty talk and you as young men here tonight may be asking what you can do about it. You are not lawyers you have little knowledge of what should be in a Constitution. However you as young men have the world at your feet. You have received a good education from a great school. You have a head start over your fellow young men in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe among the nations of Africa is in a similar position – it is in better shape than most of Africa. We have not slipped as far down the slope as others. But both you as individuals and Zimbabwe are at a cross-roads. You as an individual have a choice: you can accept the world and your country as you find it or you can rectify it.

Martin Luther King once said:

“The hope of the world is still in dedicated minorities. The trail blazers’ in human, academic, scientific and religious freedom have always been in the minority. It will take such a small committed minority to work unrelentingly to win the uncommitted majority. Such a group may well transform America’s greatest dilemma into her most glorious opportunity”.

The challenge is yours. Zimbabwe is in a dilemma at present but it has immense potential. If we as individuals work hard we can transform that dilemma into a most glorious opportunity for Zimbabwe. We need to dream a bit. I believe that Zimbabwe has the potential to become one of the great nations of the world; all it needs is your commitment.

I want to leave you with a story which some of you may have heard before. It concerns an incident involving my professor of Roman Law at University, an austere Austrian law professor called Schiller. Roman Law was the course used by the University to weed out two thirds of potential lawyers in their second year. In the first week of Roman Law Professor Schiller gave us a vast number of assignments. Once of my colleagues had the misfortune to ask whether the assignments were compulsory. In reply Professor Schiller said “no the assignments are not compulsory, but there again breathing is not compulsory. If you do not breathe you die, if you do not do my assignments you fail!”

It is not compulsory for you to be a trail-blazer. You can go and live a quiet life. But I believe that unless we act to bring about a new Constitution all that we hold dear in this country could be lost. I will end with another quote from one of my heroes Martin Luther King:

“human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable. Even a superficial look at history reveals that no social advance rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. Every step towards the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering and struggle; tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals. Without persistent effort, time itself becomes an ally of the insurgent and primitive forces of irrational emotionalism and social destruction. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action”.