Accountability Problems in Zimbabwean Politics

By David Coltart

Address given to the Institute of Bankers: Bulawayo Branch

Tuesday 19^th May 1992

Accountability is a concept very close to the hearts of all bankers. Not only are you concerned to ensure that your clients are always accountable for their actions to you when they owe you a lot of money but also no doubt you are fully aware of your own accountability to your Head Office. You all know that if you do not perform properly your head is likely to roll; likewise if your clients do not perform as they have agreed to, you ensure that their heads roll. Banks only operate efficiently and profitably when close attention is paid to the word “accountability”; it doesn’t matter how much window dressing you do or how clever your marketing is, if you do not ensure that your clients are accountable for their actions and if you do not ensure that your subordinates are accountable for their actions your operations will collapse. The same, of course, applies to families as it does to all businesses and indeed nations. I recently heard a remarkable story about the bullet train in Japan. The Japanese apparently take great pride in the punctuality of their train services and especially the bullet train; they don’t talk in terms of it arriving to the nearest minute, they talk in terms of arriving to the nearest second. A businessman was recently in Japan at the time when a typhoon ripped up some of the tracks on which the bullet train runs which resulted in delays. The story goes that the businessman asked a station master why the train was late. The station master made no effort to blame the delay on the typhoon and said that it was entirely “their” fault. Statements such as these are apparently not uncommon in Japan where accountability is held very dear by all sectors of society.

I believe that as we analyse Zimbabwe one of the major reasons why we are facing such tremendous problems at present is because accountability is not to be found in the present Government’s vocabulary. In the last 12 years Government and the ZANU-PF hierarchy have by and large been totally unaccountable for many acts of corruption, mismanagement and sheer chicanery. In other words, they have been allowed to get away with much that would have brought down Governments in more accountable societies.

I do not propose to catalogue every last detail of Government unaccountability as time does not permit. However, I shall highlight various historical incidents in the last 12 years and shall then try to make constructive suggestions as to how we can bring about a more accountable society.

Presidential Unaccountability

I was fascinated to read of the recent meeting of the War Veterans in Chinhoyi when the President was advised to dismiss his entire cabinet as they had failed the nation. At face value this would seem to imply that the President himself is not to be held accountable for our county’s woes; that he is somehow exonerated from all responsibility for the pitiful state we find ourselves in. But surely it is the President who appointed these men in the first place and if they fail collectively he should be held responsible. The President of this country, or any country for that matter, is simply one man, fallible like the rest of us. And if he fails, even vicariously, they he should be held accountable. If the leader of any organisation is not held accountable then it is almost inevitable that his subordinates will be unaccountable as well.

Ministerial Accountability

Sadly this is the case in Zimbabwe where very few of our Ministers have ever been held accountable for their actions. There are three very pertinent examples at present.

1. Ministry of Agriculture

Several people and organisations, citing FAO warnings, warnings of the Grain Producers Associations and other bodies have recently called for the resignation of Mr Mangwende. I do not have enough knowledge about Zimbabwe’s grain reserves etc to say with any degree of accuracy who was to blame for the maize shortage. Two facts stand out however: Firstly our neighbours, South Africa, Botswana, Zambia and Malawi did not run out of grain as we did at the end of February. To my knowledge there were not any queues for mealie meal in those countries. Secondly, my farmer friends tell me that even had we been blessed with good rains and a bumper harvest that would have only been delivered in significant quantities towards the end of April. Clearly somebody in the Ministry of Agriculture bungled badly. That bungling has not only resulted in near starvation for thousands of Zimbabweans but now has the potential of destroying much of our livestock industry as there is no stock feed in the country.

What has astonished me is that no one has taken the blame for this monumental calamity. Rest assured, had the same thing happened in Japan Minister Mangwende would not only have been forced to resign but would also be virtually unemployable in any other sector of society. This has not happened: on the contrary, I was interested to watch a ZBC programme “Views and Issues” last week when the Secretary for Agriculture and others sought to explain away their incompetence by stating that the food shortage in February and March was due to the drought and “other factors” without going on to say what the other factors were. Another senior Government official on the same programme said that there was no point in pointing fingers and that we should just get on with the job of feeding the nation. Whilst to a certain extent I accept this, it is also important that we identify who was to blame so that that person is not allowed to mismanage anything else again.

2. The Ministry of Energy and Water Resources

Enough has been said regarding Bulawayo and Mutare’s water crisis and the various solutions required to sort the problem out. The citizens of Bulawayo are now waiting for the photo finish end to the Nyamandhlovu Aquifer race to see whether we will get water from the aquifer before our dams run out. Two facts however have not received enough attention: Firstly, Government was warned as far back as March and April last year that Bulawayo was facing a major crisis. It eventually took a concerned group of Bulawayo citizens to motivate Government and the relevant Ministry and even after they had done so all we received were confused signals and dilatory actions. Secondly, we should remember that the same Ministry is responsible for initiating the oil pipeline (in conjunction with Lonrho) between Mutare and Harare which is going to cost the nation in excess of $400 million. Whilst no doubt the oil pipeline will be most beneficial to the country in years to come it is not a project which is a matter of life or death to the nation. One wonders why an oil pipeline has seemingly taken precedence over a water pipeline to Zimbabwe’s second largest city.

The problems with this particular Ministry do not end there. I am advised by sugar farmers that the Tokwe Dam should have been built in the early 1980s but the project was either shelved or postponed. Had the dam been built as requested, Chiredzi and Triangle would not have been brought to near collapse. Government, I understand, in the past used the excuse that it did not have enough money. The fact remains, however, that at the time when the Tokwe Dam should have been built Government concentrated on other prestige projects such as the International Conference Centre, the National Sports Stadium and ZANU-PF Headquarters. We were only saved the expense of an elaborate new parliamentary building by a massive public outcry.

The operations of the Ministry are fraught with problems: allegations and counter-allegations of corruption by the previous board and the Minister, load shedding, disagreements with the Zambian Government regarding importation of power, allegations that power should be imported from South Africa and finally allegations that power should have been sourced from Caborra Bassa years ago.

To put it mildly, The Ministry of Energy and Water Development would appear to be in a chaotic state at present. Once again, this Ministry and its Minister, Mr Ushewokunze, have sought to lay the blame elsewhere, including the drought. The drought obviously has a bearing on the matter but it does not explain the allegations of corruption, non-existent or at best last minute, confused planning and sheer incompetence.

Whist one cannot blame Minister Ushewokunze for the policies of this Ministry prior to 1990 (the blame for that must, at least partly, lie on the shoulders of Minister Kangai) he is responsible for the actions of the Ministry since April 1990. When one considers that it is the same man who has been responsible for slashing crops wearing army fatigues, has got into unseemly public disputes with members of the ZESA board and members of the soccer team which enjoys his patronage, one is amazed that he still remains in office. When one considers that this particular man has been dogged by controversy in virtually every single ministry he has headed one wonders how it is that he keeps on bouncing back. Once again unaccountability raises its ugly head.

3. Ministry of Home Affairs/Police

A letter to the Financial Gazette on 14th May 1992 chronicles the various trials of senior policemen which have occurred in recent months and calls upon the President to act to restore public confidence in the Police. It is shameful that the Acting Commissioner of Police, the Deputy Commissioners of Police and other senior officers have been charged with a variety of criminal offences. I should stress that as a lawyer I am the first to hold that a man is innocent until proven guilty and I am not for a moment saying that the mere pressing of charges should result in the instant dismissal of police officers. What I am saying, however, is that whenever any police officer is charged with a serious criminal offence that man should at least be asked to go on leave or should be suspended pending the outcome of the trial. This has not happened and we have had the spectre senior Police Officers appearing in Court on one day and continuing with their duties the next. These actions immediately bring the police force into gave disrepute.

Added to this has been the remarkable clash between the Attorney-General and senior police officers. According to press reports the Minister of Home Affairs has been quoted as saying he is powerless to intervene. If this is correct, what he is saying is that he has absolutely no control over his policemen.

The buck has to stop somewhere. The suspension of senior police officers facing criminal charges and the resolution of the dispute between the Attorney-General’s office and the police is the Minister of Home Affairs’ responsibility. The effect of the Minister of Home Affairs’ inaction with regard to the good name of the police is just as grave and far-reaching as the consequences of Minister Mangwende and Ushewonkunze’s bungling. However, in line with overall Government policy there does not appear to be any accountability required from Minister Mahachi and this intolerable situation is being allowed to continue.

Sadly, the examples I have mentioned above are commonplace in Government. I have not dwelt on corruption or economic mismanagement and abuse of power in our society. No sane person can seriously dispute that our country is riddled with corruption, much of which is concentrated in the higher echelons of Government. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence knows that ESAP itself is not the cause of our economic woes. Our economic woes must be traced back to 10 years of bankrupt policies; policies which scared off investors, bloated our civil service and ultimately brought our economy to its knees. By and large Government has not been held responsible for this rampant corruption and economic decay. Certainly while fingers are being pointed they have not had to pay any price for their actions.

The Causes of and Remedies for Unaccountability

I do not believe that the reason for the level of unaccountability in Government is because of the actual personalities we have in power at present. I do not believe that a change in Government per se would necessarily bring about more accountability. The dictum that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely should be taken heed of as we consider this problem. The reason I started off by looking at the accountability of the President was specifically because it is my belief that our present Constitution vests far too much power in the hands of a few people without any checks and balances. Our Constitution was modelled on the Westminster system of Government, as were many African Constitutions. I believe that the Westminster system works well in a society where there are other checks and balances outside of the executive and legislature. In Britain, for example, there is a strong and independent press and electronic media which do not let Government get away with anything. There are also strong traditions whereby people who blunder are expected to resign. Ultimately, of course, one has the monarchy which has tremendous popular support although no formal political power. The monarchy does act as a check against abuse of power.

The Zimbabwean Constitution was flawed right from the very beginning but it has become even more flawed by the various amendments which have been introduced since 1987. Far too much power has been concentrated in the hands of the President without any of the necessary checks and balances. The President and Legislature are not in real terms accountable to anyone other than the electorate every 6 and 5 years respectively. Because of their grip over the military, Central Intelligence Organisation, the daily newspapers and the electronic media even their accountability at the ballot box is limited.

And rest assured that even if ZANU-PF was voted out of power any new political force that came to power would be just as susceptible to the corruption that absolute power brings. There are very few political saints in the world and the people of Zimbabwe know this. I strongly believe that the reason why there is so much political apathy in this country at present is because none of the present opposition political parties are offering any policies which will ensure that they become fully accountable for their actions when they come to power. The people of Zimbabwe are astute enough to know that any politician given the same unfettered powers as allowed by our present Constitution will eventually also succumb to the trappings of power.

Remedies

1. The Constitutional Amendments

I should state that the Constitution should not be amended simply for the sake of amending it or of bringing back past structures. The supreme body of legislation in the land needs to be amended so that there is a meaningful separation of powers between the executive and the legislature, a strengthening of the judiciary, and the entrenchment of fundamental rights.

a)      Separation of Powers

Law making powers and executive powers must be separated. What has happened in Zimbabwe is that Parliament has simply become a rubber stamp for executive action. The President and Cabinet of Zimbabwe are not in practice accountable to the legislature. When the President and Cabinet decide on a certain course of action there is, in practice, very little that the legislature can do about it. Likewise, the President and Cabinet exercise immense power over the judiciary and the independence of our judiciary is not due so much to constitutional safeguards as to the characters of the men who presently preside over our Supreme Court Bench. Time does not permit for me to go into specific proposals; suffice it to say that the Constitution has to be amended to allow for an effective balance of power primarily between executive and legislature. Likewise, further constitutional provisions are needed to ensure that the judiciary’s independence relies not only on the calibre of the judges by also on constitutional safeguards.

b)      Entrenchment of Bill of Rights

One of the ways of cutting down the power of both the legislature and the executive is by entrenching fundamental human rights. In this way the rights of the people cannot be abrogated in any way by Government. The people and the courts can act together to curtail and prevent Government’s abuse of rights. As the Constitution is presently framed the executive can, in effect, introduce any change it likes to the Bill of Rights, and indeed the Bill of Rights has been seriously watered-down in the last few years. This should not be allowed to happen in the future.

2. Accountability Legislation

There are various pieces of legislation which I believe need to be introduced to make Government and individual politicians more accountable for their actions. The following pieces of legislation, I believe, are absolutely essential if we are to make our governmental system accountable to the people in future.

a)      Hong Kong Bribery Ordinance

Section 10 of the Hong Kong Prevention of Bribery Ordinance makes it an offence for a civil servant to maintain a standard of living above that which is commensurate with his present or past official emoluments unless he can give a satisfactory explanation to court as to how he was able to maintain such a standard of living or how such property came under his control. The legislation seems to work very well in Hong Kong and does have the effect of making Government officials in Hong Kong accountable for their actions. In Zimbabwe we seem to have numerous Cabinet Ministers and other members of ZANU-PF hierarchy who are multi-millionaires, judging by the properties they own and the investments they have. It is important that they should be forced to explain how they came to be so rich. Likewise, it is important that there be a check on any future politicians to explain their standard of living if it doesn’t tally with their income.

b)      Blind Trusts

When politicians take office in the United States they are obliged to put all their business interests under the control of a “Blind Trust”. When they take office they are not allowed to participate in business activities and any of their existing business interests are controlled by trusts over which the politicians have no say. It goes without saying that when a politician’s assets are taken over by a trust the politician is obliged to make a full disclosure of all his assets and business activities. This public disclosure makes politicians effectively accountable to their electorate.

c)       Corruption Commission

Serious thought should be given to establishing an independent commission against corruption. Once again, the Hong Kong Independent Commission is a useful guide for Zimbabwe. The value of such commission in Zimbabwe is that it would not fall under any Ministry, nor would it fall under the police. Many people in Zimbabwe are aware of horrifying acts of corruption but believe that the police will not or cannot investigate such cases. A commission could at the very least be an organisation which polices the police, which is useful in any society.

d)      An Apolitical Police Force and Civil Service

One of the main reasons why there is so little accountability in our police force and civil service is because promotions are generally done on the basis of one’s position or connections within ZANU-PF rather than on merit. The hierarchy in the civil service and police accordingly are generally only accountable to the Party hierarchy and thus serve their interests. Legislation needs to be introduced to ensure as far as possible that the civil service and police force especially are apolitical, and in doing so individual policemen and civil servants will know that their career prospects will rely more on their expertise than in keeping in favour with certain politicians.

e)      Government Accountability for Foreign Exchange Expenditure

At present, Parliament and the public have the ability to vet Government’s internal budget. In other words, the public can scrutinise how much money Government receives internally and how it spends the same. At present there is no accountability regarding how Government spends all the foreign exchange this country earns. It is no secret that with the foreign currency shortage experienced in Zimbabwe, the spending and allocation of foreign exchange gives immense power to Government and individuals within the Reserve Bank. You as bankers know of the vast amounts of foreign exchange that this country earns; you are also aware of the immense problems faced by industry and commerce in obtaining foreign exchange for the importation of equipment and the like. For years there has been a shroud of secrecy over the expenditure of our foreign exchange. I have no doubt that scandals such as Willowgate would pale into insignificance were the distribution of Zimbabwe’s foreign exchange earnings exposed. There are only two ways of dealing with the problem. One is to float our currency so that everyone has equal access to the purchase of foreign exchange. That, however, is probably not practical or expedient for the foreseeable future at least. Accordingly, the only other way of making Government accountable is for there to be full disclosure of how we spend our foreign exchange earnings. I would suggest that an independent commission, chaired by a chartered accountant, should be set up and given legislated powers to audit and report on foreign exchange expenditure earned by both private and public sectors. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of the Reserve Bank and commercial banks and accordingly think that commercial banks have an important role to play in making suggestions as to how any such proposal could operate.

3. Freedom of Expression

An article in last Thursday’s Financial Gazette finishes with the question, “If the media aren’t there to make politicians and businessmen accountable, who is?” Sadly, in Zimbabwe up until recently the media has been controlled almost entirely by the Government and is one of the principle reasons why the Government has been able to get away with so much corruption, incompetency, mismanagement and abuse of power. Control of the media, especially the electronic media, was not invented by ZANU-PF and this country has never really had a truly free electronic media and press. I am not convinced that a change of government would mean any increased freedom of the press and electronic media. I believe that if the media is to perform an effective role in making Government accountable several policy and legislative changes need to be made.

a)      Mass Media Trust

The Zimbabwe Newspaper Group is at present simply a mouthpiece for Government and the danger is that if any new Government comes to power the Group will simply switch allegiance to whatever party is in power. Whilst I support the right of political parties to own newspapers sympathetic to their respective points of view, I think that it is entirely wrong for a newspaper group which is purportedly held in trust for the people of Zimbabwe to support one particular party slavishly. One suggestion is that the shares held by the Mass Media Trust in the Zimbabwe Newspaper Group should be sold off to as many individual shareholders as possible. Another suggestion is that legislation should be introduced to prevent Government interference with the editorial policy of newspapers. However, the latter is fraught with difficulty and I think that ultimately the best solution is to level the playing fields and allow the operation of as many dailies as the market will bear.

b)      Electronic Media

The Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation has, as far as I am aware, never run a single programme or news item in its 12 year history which has seriously sought to make Government accountable for its actions. In a country as small as Zimbabwe it is hard to envisage that many broadcasting services could operate profitably. However, in my view legislation should be passed to allow for the free operation of broadcasting services. Likewise, any public money used to support a broadcasting corporation such as the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation should be advanced without any strings attached. Perhaps like the police force and civil service, board members should be apolitical. Ultimately, however, I believe that if you introduce legislation to allow for the operation of private broadcasting services, any public broadcasting corporation will soon lose money if it does not have the support of the people. Broadcasting services which critically investigate and analyse Government policies not only help to make Government accountable by also enjoy massive popularity amongst the viewing public.

c)       Freedom of Information Act

Several Commonwealth countries and the United States of America have introduced legislation which enables individuals and corporations to have access to Government documentation. Obviously, there are certain safeguards which prevent the disclosure of documentation which is prejudicial to the security of the State. However, these Acts have been used to great advantage by the press and prospective litigants in the countries I have mentioned in making Governments more accountable for their actions. Consideration should be given to introduce similar legislation in Zimbabwe.

The clarion call in Zimbabwe at present is for democracy, respect for human rights and accountable Government. Democracy and human rights mean many different things to many different people; whilst I would be the first to proclaim that Zimbabwe needs genuine democracy and increased respect for human rights I recognise that both of these concepts often seem ethereal and hard to grasp. Everyone, however, understands accountability. All citizens demand that if Government or individual politicians are guilty of incompetence, mismanagement, corruption or criminal activities they must be held responsible for their actions. If Zimbabwe is to progress it is vital that we do everything in our power to bring about legislation and policies which make Government and politicians more accountable than they are at present. Undoubtedly there are those in Government who will resist any attempts to expose their misconduct and thus to be held responsible. There are those in opposition who do not want change to legislation so that they can benefit. In closing I would quote from the words of Martin Luther King, who said: “Where evil men would seek to perpetuate an unjust status quo, good men must seek to bring into being a real order of justice”. We cannot expect those who benefit from the status quo to make themselves accountable. The time has come for good, honest, common Zimbabweans to demand that the status quo be changed to ensure that Government, its Ministers and civil servants are all held responsible for their actions in future.

PRISON FELLOWSHIP ZAMBIA: CONSULTATION ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM – 26 to 28 MARCH 1992

INTRODUCTION

At the outset let me say what a great privilege and honour it is for me to be here today not. For many of us in Zimbabwe who have been battling with grave human rights abuses and the oppression that is synonymous with a party committed to de facto one party rule, what has happened in Zambia over the last few months has been the source of great encouragement. I bring greetings from the human rights community in Zimbabwe and the Christian community who salute the people of Zambia. I should stress that we salute not just the MMD for being so gracious in victory but also UNIP for allowing a peaceful transition to take place. The people of Zambia have done a great thing for Africa; a great precedent has been set and we pray and trust that what the people of Zambia have done and have allowed to happen, will act as a catalyst in the whole region.

We in the Christian community in Zimbabwe are perhaps more encouraged than anything else by the obvious faith of President Frederick Chiluba. From what he has done thus far it seems to us as if he is committed to bringing true justice, justice based on Biblical principles, to Zambia. The first sign of this was when he appointed Dr Rodger Chongwe to be Minister of Justice. I first met Dr Chongwe when we both attended a judicial colloquium in Harare in l989 and it has been a great pleasure to get to know him. I am aware that he is a man with a deep commitment to human rights and that he is open to reforming the complete justice system in Zambia and the criminal justice system in particular. With such men at the helm I am reminded of the true fast mentioned by the Prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 58: 6 – l0

“Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen;
to loose the chains of injustice and untie
the cords of the yoke,
to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?
Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to
provide the poor wanderer with shelter:
when you see the naked to clothe them,
and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
Then your light will break forth like the dawn,
and your healing will quickly appear;
Then your righteousness will go before you,
and the glory of the Lord will be your rear guard
Then you will call, and the Lord will answer;
you will cry for help, and he will say:
Here I am.
If you do away with the yoke of oppression
with the pointing finger and malicious talk,
and if you spend yourselves on behalf of the hungry
and satisfy the needs of the oppressed,
then your light will rise in the darkness,
and your night will become like the noon day.”
Zambia indeed faces much darkness at present and there are many cries for help, but I am convinced that if the nation humbles itself, sets the oppressed free and, for example, reforms the criminal justice system then the light will break, healing will quickly appear and the Lord will answer your cry for help.

The important point I wish to stress however is that the Church and scripture has a major role to play in the reformation not only of the criminal justice system in Zambia but also in the entire rebuilding of Zambia. Much faith may be put in economic programmes and fashionable western concepts of criminal justice but I believe that scripture has all the fundamental answers to all the problems that Zambia, and indeed that many other countries in Africa face at present. When the Lord Jesus said that “(we) are the salt of the earth … (and) the light of the world” (Matthew 4: l3-l4) he stated quite clearly that Christians are the people who can provide salt to preserve the good things in any nation and they are the light to show a way out of the darkness that hangs over any nation. Much then as we might want to rely on the wisdom of the world, the weight of bringing about true justice and true rehabilitation in Zambia lies on the shoulders of those who are committed to the Lord.

Definition of Crime

Before we look at the origins of crime I think that we need to know and understand what crime is. And before I go any further I would like to acknowledge the work of the Founder of Prison Fellowship International, Mr Charles Colson, whose paper “Towards an Understanding of the Origins of Crime” published in a book called “Crime in the Responsible Community” has been most useful to me. In fact I have drawn greatly on his thinking and rather than give individual acknowledgements through the course of this paper I would simply like to give a blanket acknowledgement at the beginning.

Charles Colson refers to a definition of crime given by Edwin Sutherland which is:
“the essential characteristic of crime is that it is behaviour which is prohibited by the State as an injury to the State and against which the State may react, at least as a last resort, by punishment. The two abstract criteria generally regarded by legal scholars is necessary elements in a definition of crime are:

(i) legal description of an act is socially harmful, and
(ii) legal provision of a penalty for the act.”

That is a commonly held secular definition of crime but there are problems with it:

A. Firstly the State must define crime. What may be a crime in one country is a right in another. This is particularly so in Africa where one party governments define crimes which are often created with a view to maintaining their privilege and power. This is so not just in a country like South Africa where the white minority have developed laws to maintain the status quo but also in countries such as Zimbabwe where many “crimes” are rights in other countries. This is even more so in de jure one party countries such as Malawi where, for example, the freedoms to express ones views and associate with parties of one’s choice are crimes, punishable by the State.
B. Secondly, in any society there are often conflicts between what overall society perceives to be the greatest good for the greatest number and the rights of individuals. A good and relevant example of this is given in the debate which is raging at present in Zimbabwe regarding the Land Acquisition Act. Many people dispossessed of land believe that it is a crime that so much of the land in Zimbabwe is still in the hands of the minority; that minority thinks that it is a crime that they should not be compensated fairly for their hard work when the land is compulsorily acquired from them.

C. Thirdly, crimes by the State are usually not defined. Likewise crimes by political parties and politicians are often not defined. This is particularly so in Africa where the crimes of oppression, corruption and wholesale theft by government parties and politicians are not to be found on the statute books and even if they are, they are not prosecuted.
D. Fourthly, and finally, there is a conflict in that the definition of crime is often biased against the poor and in favour of the rich. It is a crime to steal bread to feed one’s family, but it is not a crime for a President to so grossly mismanage an economy that thousands of people die from starvation.

The danger is that the church and Christians slip into the thinking that crime is simply defined in terms of the Ten Commandments. Certainly all the principal common law crimes including murder, rape, kidnap, theft, robbery, extortion, fraud, arson, bigamy and perjury (to name but a few) stem from the Ten Commandments found in Deuteronomy 5. My concern however is that the Ten Commandments tend to dominate our thinking when it comes to us defining crime.

The Lord God has a much wider definition of crime. In Isaiah l: 2l – 26 we read:

“See how the faithful city has become a harlot!
She once was full of justice;
righteousness used to dwell in her:
but now murderers!
Your silver has become dross,
your choice wine is diluted with water.
Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves;
they all love bribes and chase after gifts.
They do not defend the cause of the fatherless;
the widow’s case does not come before them.

Therefore the Lord, the Lord Almighty,
the mighty one of Israel, declares:
Ah, I will get relief from my foes
and avenge myself on my enemies.
I will turn my hand against you;
I will thoroughly purge away your dross
and remove your impurities.
I will restore your Judges as in days of old,
your Counsellors as at the beginning.
Afterwards you will be called the City of Righteousness,
The Faithful City”

Likewise in Amos 2: 6 – 7 we read:
“This is what the Lord says:
For three sins of Israel, even for four,
I will not turn back my wrath.
They sell the righteous for silver
and the needy for a pair of sandals.
They trample on the heads of the poor
as upon the dust of the ground and deny justice
to the oppressed”
And as you are aware the Bible is full of similar statements speaking out against crimes committed against individuals by rulers, kings and governments.

The words I have read to you from Isaiah 2, are particularly relevant to Zimbabwe and to many countries throughout the world. For example in Zimbabwe we have seen a great suppression of people speaking out against injustice and mass murder of people in Matabeleland by the Five Brigade in l983; many of our rulers are “companions of thieves”; many of our rulers love bribes and chase after gifts; many of our leaders do not defend the cause of the fatherless and are only motivated by what will keep them in power without thought for the plight of the poor.

What I am conveying is that we must not have a narrow view of crime. The church and Christians must not blandly accept that the State’s definition of crime is the be all and end all. Crime as defined by the State must always be measured against scripture. There are certain crimes which are defined by the state in such a way that they are contrary to God’s word. The church and Christians should say boldly that they do not view those particular acts as crimes. A good example of this was given in South Africa a few years ago when the Immorality Act prohibited marriage between people of different races. If people of different races married that was a crime punishable by the State. The church spoke out against that and refused to comply with that law.

Likewise the church has a role in defining what should be legislated as crime. I think particularly in the central African context where states, governments, political parties and politicians regularly commit acts which are not state defined “crimes” but which are acts which clearly contravene the dictates of scripture and which should be declared by the State to be crimes. For example where government policies are such that individual politicians accumulate great wealth at the expense of the common people these acts should be viewed as criminal by the church. In fact the church has a duty to speak out publicly against such acts.

In essence what I am saying is that as we look at the reformation of the criminal justice system in Zambia we must not just look conservatively at the existing common law crimes, criminal procedure and prison policy. All these things are obviously important but we need to have a wider view of things. We need to press not just for alternatives to imprisonment, not just for alternative sentencing and not just for ways of getting people through the court system more efficiently and more quickly. We need to have a broad view of the entire society and to recognise that, for example, gross human rights violations by the State should be crimes and that such crimes should be met with penalties and that these penalties should be paid by the people in Government responsible for perpetrating such human rights violations. In doing so we will recognise that our definition of crime should not simply be the behaviour which is presently prohibited by the state as an injury to the state and against which the state may react. Crime is in essence whatever acts are done by men against each other which conflict with those portions of the Ten Commandments and scripture generally which relate to human beings’ relationships with one another. I deliberately exclude the commands contained in scripture regarding our relationship with God. Our definition of crime must be restricted to relationships between people because it is in those relationships that God has given us the power to punish and reform one another. Any disobedience of God’s commands as they relate to our relationship with Him are to be dealt with by Him and it is not the place of Christians to impose these commands upon entire nations.

Theories regarding the origins of crime

In view of the very broad definition of crime I have attempted to give above we need to consider the origins of crime. Why do individuals commit crime whether those crimes are those as currently defined by the State or crimes as per my wider definition, namely those acts which are contrary to God’s laid down decrees dictating how we should relate to one another? The origins of crime have concerned psychiatrists, academics and others for hundreds of years and many studies have been done. I do not propose to look at all the various theories regarding the origins of crime and will confine myself to the following:
l. Psychological.
2. Economic.
3. Constitutional or physical defects and
4. Sociological.

l. Psychological Theories
In early 20th century Charles Goring, an Englishman, and Henry H. Goddard, an American, developed theories that “feeblemindedness” (that is, limited educational or intellectual capacities) was the single most important correlate of crime. These theories were shattered after World War I when several studies showed that the percentage of “feeblemindedness” was no higher among prison populations than among the public at large and one study even revealed that 86% of inmates had average or better than average IQs (Intelligence Quotients).

Notwithstanding the above, mental imbalances and psychiatric disorders often lead to types of deviant conduct which society punishes. Alcoholism too, for example, often leads to conduct which society punishes. But it is hard to say that such imbalances or disorders are the origins of crime.

2. Economic Theories

The Dutch criminologist, W A Bonger who held a Marxist world view, was one of the first to expand on the theory of economic circumstances as a cause of crime. His theories have gained great currency amongst Marxist criminologists who have argued that crime is the direct result of the inequalities and inequities of social and economic order. Later studies have taken the theory a step further and it is argued that criminal law is an instrument of oppression; that criminal law is designed by the ruling classes, the petty bourgeois, to maintain the existing social order and status quo. The theory goes that if the perfect environment was created with a classless society then there would be no crime.

These theories are obviously in direct conflict with the Christian view point which holds that man is inherently sinful and even if one creates the perfect environment, a utopia, man will still sin and will still commit crime. Having said that however, there is no doubt that the economic conditions that people find themselves in are a factor in crime. The prison population in Zimbabwe (and Zambia no doubt) is predominantly poor. Some 95% of people passing through our criminal justice system are unrepresented in Zimbabwe and studies have shown that the unrepresented accused person has a much smaller chance of obtaining a fine or of being acquitted than the represented accused person.

The statistics found in annexure “A” to this paper (gleaned from Volume I No. 3 of Legal Forum published by the Legal Resources Foundation in March l989) reveal that an overwhelming majority of common law crimes in Zimbabwe in the period January to September l988 involved theft. Whilst one cannot tell from bare statistics the circumstances in which these thefts were perpetrated I know from my own experience as a trial lawyer that many thefts are committed by unemployed people who are victims of economic stagnation and collapse in Zimbabwe.

However it is important to remember, when considering these statistics, that there are literally millions of people in Zimbabwe who live below the poverty datum line and only a small proportion of those people become criminals. Poverty alone then is not sufficient to explain criminality.

3. Constitutional or physical defect theories
In l876 an Italian surgeon, Cesare Lombrosa wrote a book entitled “Criminal Man” in which he theorised that criminals are identifiable by the manifestation of measurable physical characteristics. In other words, if a man looks like a criminal, he must be one. Whilst on the face of it this may seem a comfortable theory – all of us I am sure have from time to time judged people just by the way they look – the theory has been discredited. The obvious rebuttal to the theory is given in the case of the average “con-artist” who is able to swindle people of their money simply because they are so plausible.

4. Sociological Theories
This theory is vaguely similar to the economic theories propounded earlier on. Many sociologists have argued that the primary cause of crime is to be found in an individual’s social and environmental influences. The theory goes that a person’s values are determined by his or her family or local community. For example if one grows up as a member of a Mafia family, state defined crimes are legitimate, so long as the members of one’s family or the residents of the immediate community are not the victims.

Another interesting sociological theory of the cause of crime has been put forward by Robert K Merton. His theory has particular relevance in today’s materialistic world. Merton believes that high crime rates are a direct reflection of the values which society places upon individual success, hard work, ambition, and the concept of getting ahead at all costs. This is particularly relevant in a country such as Zimbabwe where there is such great disparity of wealth and so many temptations. The dream of owning a Mercedes Benz, living in a large house, owning a farm and having a luxurious lifestyle is unattainable for most people: legitimate means for attaining these luxuries are not, and indeed cannot be, equally distributed throughout society. Most people in Zimbabwe are condemned to a life of poverty in high density suburbs or communal areas and some resort to illegitimate means to secure these goals.

The more affluent portions of society are, the harder it is for people to come to grips with the reality of their poverty. In Zimbabwe this is compounded by the fact that many of our leaders seem to have acquired instant wealth, many of them are terribly corrupt and, what is perhaps more important, have got away with their corrupt actions. Corrupt activities amongst common Zimbabweans thus becomes extremely attractive. Not only are they means to acquire wealth but they seem to be fairly safe means that will not attract the attention of the police and the criminal justice system generally. In fact Zimbabwe is so riddled with corruption at present, especially amongst the hierarchy of the political leadership, that the entire criminal justice system is threatened by it. For example many people who were formally honest and who in the past regularly paid every last cent of tax due to the state are now seeking ways to evade tax which of course is not just a crime in terms of Zimbabwean law but is also a crime in terms of God’s law: the Lord Jesus told us to render unto Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar.

Furthermore, because of the economic decay in Zimbabwe, crime is often an occupational choice. Many Zimbabweans have resorted to stealing motor vehicles and to smuggling goods simply to survive. In this sense people then are victims of family disintegration, poverty, social conditions, economic decay, government corruption and mismanagement.

The trouble with this theory, however is that not all people commit these crimes. Furthermore the theory removes culpability from offenders. For these reasons the sociological theory cannot alone describe the origin of crime.

Judeo Christian View
I do not propose to steal Joe Kapolyo’s thunder by discussing in detail the Judeo Christian view. Joe I see will be talking tomorrow on the Biblical perspective on crime and punishment. Let me just say however that I believe that the basic origin of crime lies in man himself. Man was created perfect, in the image of God, but he was given a free will, and one of his first free acts was to disobey God.

Romans III : l0 – l2 states:
“There is no-one righteous, not even one;
there is no-one who understands,
no-one who seeks God.
All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no-one who does good,
not even one.”

In essence man falls short of the glory of God (Romans 3 : 23), and is his heart is depraved (Mark 7 : 20 – 23). Because of this he continues to live in revolt and rebellion against God and therefore at enmity with God’s creations – his own neighbours, his environment and even himself.

In my view crime is simply a manifestation of man’s nature both in individuals committing crime and individuals creating environments in all nations in which people are pushed into criminal activity. What do I mean by this?

l. Sinfulness of man as an individual
Because we have all turned away from God the environment we find ourselves in or the conditions in which we find ourselves placed are not the actual cause of crime. Ultimately each person sins simply because he chooses to sin. To be put it another way – people who commit crimes do so because they chose to commit crimes.

2. Sinful society
Individuals with a choice to commit crime have things made even difficult because they live in societies filled with sinful people who create difficult environments and circumstances. In essence what I am saying is that crime is not just the result of sinful individuals choosing to commit crime; it is also the result of sinful society being so riddled with greed and selfishness that inequitable conditions result causing poverty, desperation, anger and often criminal activity. It is man’s collective sin which results in oppressive governments, economic and environmental degradation all of which usually combine to bring about grinding poverty and desperation for common people in any nation. This has the effect of exacerbating the incidence of criminal activity.

CONCLUSION

Having considered the definition of crime and the origins of crime. How do we apply all of this to the reformation of the criminal justice system in Zambia or in any other country for that matter? I would like to leave you with four points to consider which I hope will be relevant to the rest of our deliberations.

l. We must recognise that, fundamentally, crime is simply a manifestation of sin. Whilst, no doubt, other factors such as physiological imbalances, economic decay, social and environmental influences all aggravate crime and play a role in breeding crime, we must recognise that every sane person has a choice between doing what is right and doing what is wrong in God’s eyes. As we tackle the criminal justice system it is important that we recognise this and that we do not blame society, or our environment for everything. Repentance is an essential concept to remember if our aim is to produce a criminal justice system that truly brings about justice to criminals and victims alike. True rehabilitation of criminals can only take place within a system which causes them to repent individually for what they have done. As long as the individual criminal is allowed to blame something else for what he has done, society will not have been improved by the criminal justice system. Accordingly the entire criminal justice system should be designed in such a way that the individual is confronted with the wrongfulness of his own actions.

This is not achieved in a system which, for example, favours the rich through unequal defence representation in court, produces lengthy remand delays or which channel people into communities which reinforces the individual’s view that what he or she has done, is justifiable. If any of these factors are present in a criminal justice system the individual will be able to divert his focus of attention away from himself to the inequalities of the system or to the fact that everyone else is doing what he is doing, so it must be alright. The tragedy of the unrepresented accused who is sent to prison is that often it simply confirms in his mind that there is no justice and that his theft, for example, was justifiable. The tragedy of our present prison system, and our pre-occupation with imprisoning criminals, is that it breeds whole communities of criminals who justify their conduct to each other. In doing so criminals do not repent before God and thus are not truly rehabilitated.

2. We as a church and Christians need to consider the wider effect of man’s sin in society. Through sin in government, which manifests itself in abusive power, corruption, self aggrandizement, mismanagement and human rights abuses, criminal activity, in the broader scriptural sense of the word, is fostered. We need to recognise that no matter how good the criminal justice system is, if Government’s elective sin is not tackled, the danger is that the entire criminal justice system can be undone.

We need to recognise that the answer does not lie in good constitutions or good ideologies. The answer ultimately lies in Governments being made accountable to uphold God’s standards of justice in the broadest possible sense. We as Christians need to take seriously the Lord Jesus’ commands that we have to be the salt and light in any community. We as Christians must not just be involved in trying to reform the penal system. Our salt and light must be directed towards Government itself. The church must be bold in standing up for God’s standards of justice and for speaking out against Government wherever Government action runs contrary to those standards.

3. Finally I am of the view that it is a healthy thing for any criminal justice system to be completely reviewed periodically in the light of scripture. In Zambia at present you have an opportunity that will not present itself again for many years. Now you have the chance to review your entire criminal justice system in the light of scripture. I am not for a moment suggesting that this should become a fundamentalist Christian state – far from it. As indicated above I believe that our criminal justice system should merely reflect God’s commandments pertaining to our relationships between man and man, not man and God. With this in mind I believe that Government and the churches should together consider the following:
(a) are Zambian statutory crimes consistent with scripture?;
(b) are their actions of Government, politicians and people in high positions which offend against God’s fundamental laws which should become statutory crimes?
(c) do punishments handed down by the criminal justice system meet the needs to:
(i) help criminals come to terms with their need for repentance;
(ii) help criminals to recognise that in Christ they are forgiven and can lead new lives and be truly rehabilitated back into society;
(iii) assist the victims of crime so that they feel that justice has been done;
(iv) prevent the spread of crime.

These are all matters which will be debated at great length not just over the next two days but no doubt in the weeks, months and years that lie ahead. Because we are all fallible and sinful there will be no perfect answer but in conclusion I would simply remind you of Paul’s words in Philippians 3 : l2 – l6:

“Not that I have already attained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: forgetting what is behind and straining towards what is ahead, I press on towards the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus. All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained.”

With these words in mind I believe that together we can bring about more of God’s justice not just in Zambia but in the entire subregion.

An Introduction to ESAP: Zimbabwe 1992

By David Coltart

31^st January 1992

Danish Volunteer Service Development Workers Meeting, Maphisa

It is a great pleasure to have been asked to address you today, but before commencing I should warn you that not much weight should be attached to what I and Jonathan Moyo have to say today. According to the Editor in Chief of Zimbabwe Newspapers, Mr Tommy Sithole, in an editorial written by him in The Herald in December 1991, I am only a “weekend adviser” and Jonathan Moyo is merely a “fruitcake lecturer”! The problem is compounded by the fact that it is neither the weekend nor do I see any fruitcake around. Despite these overwhelming odds we hope that together we might be able to adjust your minds structurally today.

I have been asked to cover the basic issues of ESAP and will look at three main areas, namely:

1. What ESAP actually is, including its main components;
2. Why it was initiated;
3. The implementation of the programme in the light of the budget and other legislation passed and about to be passed in Zimbabwe.

1. What is ESAP?

With all the radio and television hype and literature on ESAP floating around these days it seems as if structural adjustment has been with us since the beginning of time. It is important to remember, however, that structural adjustment only became in vogue in 1990; prior to that it was a phrase unknown in Zimbabwe. The same does not apply to the rest of Africa where many countries implemented Structural Adjustment Programmes years ago. Without stealing Jonathan’s thunder in this regard, suffice it to say that it has not been the panacea everyone hoped it would be.

Despite all the rhetoric that structural adjustment is a home-grown programme, the fact of the matter is that it is a concoction developed by the International Monetary Fund and organisations like the World Bank. An important point to grasp is that Structural Adjustment Programmes have only been implemented in countries where the economy is in a complete mess. It seems to have been designed by the IMF as an equivalent of a dose of castor oil which, though unpleasant, is nevertheless good shock treatment to cure an economy which is in decidedly bad health. It is important to note that Structural Adjustment Programmes have never been prescribed for countries with thriving economies such as Botswana, Hong Kong and Singapore. In other words, it is only applied to countries which have maintained tight control of the economy and the political environment. It is applied in countries where there is economic stagnation, as a result of rigid, centralised control. It does not seem to have been applied in countries where there is small government, low taxation, few foreign exchange controls and democratic government.

But what exactly is structural adjustment? No one to my knowledge in Government had given a precise definition of the term and I am sure that it means many different things to many different people in Government. As we look at what is happening in Zimbabwe it appears as if we are moving away from a centrally controlled economy to a free-market, capitalistic economy. We are seeing a drift from state ownership or state control to African styled privatisation in which the key players are well connected men and women not too far from the seats of power. Government has not actually admitted yet that structural adjustment marks a shift from socialism to capitalism and a free-market economy. Indeed Government, or rather the ruling party, every now and then reiterates its commitment to socialism/Marxist-Leninism, but this flies in the face of what is actually happening in the country. Furthermore, in all the television programmes organised by Government they have not actually come out and said that they are now committed to capitalism. In my view, the term “structural adjustment” in Zimbabwe is simply a smoke screen or a euphemism; it is a convenient phrase to disguise the “U” turn that Government is now taking. It is too embarrassing for Government to admit that it has formally abandoned socialism to embrace this elitist, tribally-based capitalism. It is not only embarrassing for Government but also, for certain people in Government, painful to come to grips with the reality that socialism and/or Marxist-Leninism has been abandoned. It is important to grasp this fact and it will help us to understand later on why the whole programme is endangered by the very fact that it is being implemented by people whose deeply-held political convictions are absolute anathema to the very spirit of Economic Structural Adjustment Programmes. The important question to be asked when considering structural adjustment in Zimbabwe is the following: “Is the present Government part of the answer to our economic problems or is it part of the problem itself?”

What are the Main Components of the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme?

I think that we need to look at the theory first and thereafter take a quick look at how it is actually being implemented in Zimbabwe.

The Theory

The underlying premise of any Structural Adjustment Programme is that the market must control the economy of any country. Most centralised controls of the economy are in the long term completely contrary to the objectives of the programme. Bearing in mind this fundamental premise, the following are some of the theoretical components of the Structural Adjustment Programme:

(a) Trade Liberalisation

Domestic business has to learn to compete in the world market and accordingly many measures designed to protect local industry must be removed so that local industry has to become efficient if it is to compete internationally.

(b) Loosening of exchange controls

There must be a gradual progression towards allowing people to import what they want. This is an integral part of trade liberalisation and the removal of existing protections in place for the domestic economy. The loosening of foreign exchange controls is designed to enable a country to import foreign manufactured products which in itself provides considerable competition for domestic industry.

(c) The removal of subsidies and the reduction of Government expenditure

Loss-making parastatals and subsidies generally are taboo. Parastatals should ideally be privatised and food and other subsidies withdrawn, once again to allow the market to determine the pricing of goods and services.

(d) Small Government

An integral part of the programme is the cutting down of Government expenditure generally and the bloated civil service must be cut.

In essence, ESAP is a top-down economic strategy which is designed to resuscitate an economy using massive doses of foreign exchange (acquired mostly through loans) and hugely increased exports. The idea being that the massive injection of foreign capital will enable domestic industry to re-gear itself and thereafter perpetuate economic recovery and growth by dramatically increasing export earnings, and therefore foreign earnings which in turn are used to repay the loans incurred to pay for the initial injection of capital and to build a healthy balance of payments situation for the future. The bottom line, however, is that for it to work Governments must relinquish a large amount of control over the economy so that the private sector can do the work. If the private sector is hindered in any way the whole process can break down catastrophically. To illustrate what I mean one must just imagine the situation which can result where large foreign currency loans are incurred and thereafter squandered through mismanagement, corruption and misdirection. As a result the exports required to repay the loans, and to perpetuate the foreign exchange cycle, do not materialise and the country is left with an economy in the same state it was in prior to the implementation of the project plus a huge foreign debt that it now has to repay.

1. Why has Government seen it fit to implement ESAP?

In answering this question I need to remind you of an article written by my colleague in the Financial Gazette on 5^th September 1991. Jonathan pointed out that ZANU-PF ran its 1990 election campaign on the ticket of socialism. Its manifesto did not make any mention of structural adjustment and trade liberalisation. Accordingly, in answering this question it is imperative that we go back to the 1990 election to see why Government changed its mind. It is also imperative that we consider the answer to that question in the context of other legislation passed by Government since 1990.

I believe that it is important to grasp the fact that ESAP has not been introduced by Government because it has had a change of ideological heart. It is not because Government, or at least those in the higher echelons of Government, have suddenly realised the error of their socialist ways and are reborn capitalists. I believe that the reason why ESAP has been introduced is simply because Government realised in 1990 that it was in a severe economic mess, and therefore political mess, and that it had to do something dramatic prior to 1995 if it wished to stay in power.

Despite all Government’s bluster after 1990 election that the election provided a landslide victory etc, the fact is that in their terms they took a powerful hammering. The facts of the election are that there were some 4.6 million people registered to vote, less than half the people eligible to vote went to the poll, Government was forced to add one day to the voting, throw the voting open to anyone who could prove identity and place of residence, and of the votes cast there were 138,865 spoilt ballot papers and 396,108 votes for opposition parties. Even more worrying to Government was the fact that there was a dramatic swing against Government by the young and the urban-based. It did not take them very long to realise that in 1995 there would be at least another one and a half million unemployed voters who would have nothing to lose by voting against Government. They realised that their only remaining secure support base was in the rural areas.

To compound the problem was the fact that Zimbabwe’s post-independence economic performance has been unimpressive to say the least. In many ways we have been driving our economy on a tank of fuel filled up many years ago. The tank is now depleted and the economy is spluttering in the form of maize shortages, higher inflation and general stagnation. The facts are dismal; per capita incomes today are only fractionally higher than in 1980. Unemployment has risen fivefold. Inflation in 1990 exceeded 20% and the balance of payments deficit was 6% of gross domestic product. Foreign capital inflows have been negligible and in 1989 investment, at less than 11% of gross domestic product, was at its lowest level since World War Two. Clearly something had to be done about the economy.

I also believe that the Structural Adjustment Programme and legislation such as the Constitutional Amendments, the proposed Land Bill, the University Amendment Acts and the like must all be seen in the same context of the whittling away of ZANU-PF’s support base and the chaotic situation we face. All these policies and acts are entirely politically motivated and are designed to improve ZANU-PF’s political lot more than anything else. Let me explain what I mean by looking at other legislation introduced since the 1990 elections:

(a)    University of Zimbabwe Amendments

Government recognised that a major threat to its power base came from young intellectuals in the country who have been able to articulate concerns regarding corruption and mismanagement of the economy. Government has made a conscious decision to clamp down on this and the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act has been the result. I believe that Government hopes that through this Act it can quell these voices of discontent and thus stem the haemorrhage of urban and young supporters away from Government.

(b)   Constitutional Amendments regarding hanging and whipping

Another source of concern as far as the Government is concerned is the independence of the Judiciary. It cannot attack the Judiciary directly as this would undermine its standing in the world community. It can achieve the same affect, however, by undermining the power of the Court by reversing Constitutional decisions and forestalling the Court from interpreting the Constitution in the manner it wishes to. The Courts are further undermined by the fact that their budget is kept at a minimum.

(c)    The Land Bill

Whilst land has always been an emotive issue, Government’s sudden preoccupation with the redistribution of land is not because they have suddenly realised how unjust the distribution of land is in this country. The rhetoric about the Land Acquisition Bill and redistribution of land in the country is simple and effort to shore up the rural support base of Government. The Land Acquisition Bill as presently envisaged is incompatible with the entire Structural Adjustment Programme. As I stated above, the Structural Adjustment Programme is in essence the introduction of a free market economy. The moment one starts designating which land will be acquired and the price it will be acquired for, the entire economic infrastructure of the country will be threatened. I do not propose to go into detail in this as it is not the purpose of this meeting to discuss the Land Acquisition Bill. Suffice it to say, however, that the Land Acquisition Bill as presently constituted will inevitably negate the entire Structural Adjustment Programme as envisaged by Government. If Government is committed to structural adjustment then the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the Land Acquisition Bill is simply a political manoeuvre, a carrot dangled in front of the rural populous to keep their support without Government having any intention of actually implementing it as threatened.

Seen in the context of the other policies and laws implemented, the Structural Adjustment Programme should be seen as a mechanism by which jobs can be created and the demands of the urban population satisfied. Government sees it as its salvation; it sees ESAP as a means to an end of political survival.

It knows that its half-baked socialist state or party capitalism policies have failed the country and if the country drifts any further down this path total chaos will result. Government hopes that it can ride the rough couple of years ahead and that by the time the 1995 elections have come the medicine will have done its work and we will have a healthy growing economy with unemployment dropping and confidence in ZANU-PF rule restored.

1. The implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme to date

I am not an economist and accordingly cannot comment with authority on the success or otherwise of the Structural Adjustment Programme to date. Reading yesterday’s Financial Gazette I see that Mr Christiaan Portman, the World Bank’s resident representative in Zimbabwe, believes that the economic reform programme is on target despite a few setbacks. According to him, progress has been made on monetary policy reform and the reduction of the budget deficit, although Government is still behind schedule on its plans to cut down the size of the civil service. The Editorial in the same copy of the Financial Gazette states that it is worrying that some targets have not been met. In particular they point out that the long awaited plan to trim the bloated civil service and cut the size of the Cabinet seems to be on hold. Government apparently also intended to put 50% of all imports on the Open General Import Licence list by the end of 1991 but only managed 14% mainly due to lack of funds. The same Editorial points out that the drought threatens to make the situation even more perilous. All of this is, of course, a short term view and the reform programme must be given some time to run before we can adequately assess whether or not it is going to work.

The concern I have, however, regarding the long term successful implementation of the programme is summed up in the question I posed earlier: “Is the present Government part of the problem or part of the answer to our current economic plight?” Let me explain what I mean.

For ESAP to work we require a radical loosening up of all kinds of controls within Zimbabwean society. We need to loosen up controls of foreign exchange, we need to loosen up on restrictive business practices which hinder investment and economic growth, and most of all we need an overall reduction in the amount of control that the Government exercises in all sectors of our society. This inevitably means a smaller Government, not just in terms of size but also attitude. It must entail a cut down in Government expenditure in areas such as the military. The moment controls are reduced inevitably there will be a shift of power from state society to civil society and an increase in democracy in the true sense of the word. However, economic controls give power to Government. The more economic controls a Government exercises in any given society the more power it has over that society. Our Government is fully aware of this fact and like any Government is reluctant to relinquish control. I have already spoken about the various acts brought in since the implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme concerning University Students, the Court and land.

The 1991 Budget reinforces me in my view that Government is reluctant to give up a large degree of control over Zimbabwean society. At a time when Zimbabwe has, on the face of it, committed itself to multi-party democracy and at a time when the whole Southern African region is stabilising the following aspects of the Budget are disturbing:

(a)    The CIO – In the vote for the office of the President and the Cabinet is a grant for “special services” in the sum of $70 million. The Budget estimate states that part of the expenditure on this item will not be subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The term “special services” is in fact the vote for the Central Intelligence Organisation. To give you some idea of how this has grown, the CIO was first given a vote in 1971/1972 by the Smith Government of $825,000.00. The CIO’s job is primarily to gain information on Government’s opponents. Whilst I concede that the CIO also gathers intelligence on enemies of the State (which I have no quarrel with), its most visible role in Zimbabwe is to report on political renegades. If Government is truly committed to an open society and multi-party democracy, freedom of association and expression, one questions why the CIO budget is so large and has been increased?

(b)   Defence Spending – When Dr Chidzero delivered his Budget speech he stated that, and I quote, “the defence vote remains as the second largest on the current expenditure allocation at $1.45 million, a nominal increase of 10% over the 1990/1991 out turn. The increase on this vote has been due mainly to contractual obligations. The vote would have otherwise remained stagnant in nominal terms.” Regrettably, the statement does not show the whole picture. Firstly, of the Ministry of Public Construction and National Housing vote of $552 million, over a third was allocated to the Ministry of Defence in the sum of $177 million. During the current year the Ministry of Defence building budge has increased by just under 16%. Included in the building programmes are $6 million spent on Harare KGVI offices and $40 million being spent on Five Brigade Battlefields. To get this vote in perspective one needs to point out that the entire Budget for the Ministry of Health for the same period is $28.7 million and the social fund to cushion the impact of structural adjustment is at present only $20 million. The actual increase therefore of the overall defence budget is 11.1% and the total expenditure is $1.32 billion. Given the changing situation in Mozambique and South Africa, the question has to be asked why Government is still spending so much on defence, and most of it at home? I believe that it is because it needs to maintain control militarily if they cannot retain control through other means.

(c)    The Ministry of Political Affairs – There was much trumpeting about the fact that the Ministry of Political Affairs vote was reduced by $14.7 million in the 1991 Budget. The fact remains, however, that the reduction was effected by reducing the costs of national service which was always a non-starter. The real facts are that the actual salaries for people in the Ministry of Political Affairs went up by 27% and the actual budget for those involved in the Ministry of Political Affairs (aside from National Service) increased from 29.4 million to 33.1 million, an increase of just under 13%. If Zimbabwe is committed to opening up the political system and multi-party democracy, why is some $33 million tax payers’ money going to one political party?

There are other disturbing features of Government policy: The timing of the publication of the Land Bill in last week’s Government Gazette just two weeks prior to the next Paris Donor Conference for Structural Adjustment is bizarre. It goes without saying that the provisions of the Bill, as I have stated above, are entirely contrary to the spirit of structural adjustment in that they seek to control the largest sector of the Zimbabwean economy. In terms of the Bill, Government seeks to designate certain land which will be expropriated at prices determined by Government. Economists will tell you that if the Bill is enacted and Government seeks to enforce it, the entire agricultural sector will be destroyed and the financial sector’s collapse will follow shortly thereafter. Government’s intention of course is to appease its rural electorate. However, the Bill, and especially the timing of its publication, has the potential to stall the entire Structural Adjustment Programme. As I have said before, the essence of the Structural Adjustment Programme is the loosening up of the economy, the Land Bill and other Acts and actions I have mentioned above are a fundamental contradiction of that principle.

I do not propose to steal Jonathan’s thunder by giving a critical review of ESAP. Suffice it to say that as long as Government wishes to have its cake and eat it in the form of implementing structural adjustment but wishing to retain control over several important sectors of society, the success of the programme must be threatened. Whatever one thinks of an IMF-imposed Structural Adjustment Programme, the fact of the matter is that unless it is implemented wholeheartedly and with the utmost vigour without any contradictions being allowed to remain in the system, it will fail. Just as President Gorbachev and President de Klerk set a process of liberalisation in motion in their respective countries, so too the Government must realise that an integral part of structural adjustment is the loosening of all forms of controls in society. That action in itself may well in the long term spell disaster for ZANU-PF Government, but it will undoubtedly benefit the nation. Until ZANU-PF as a Government is prepared to sacrifice its political survival on the altar of structural adjustment, the programme will not work. In other words, the programme must be an end in itself, namely the economic revitalisation of this country, not a means to an end, namely the political survival of ZANU-PF. Because ZANU-PF appears to view it as a means to an end I fear that they themselves are part of the problem, not part of answer to our present woes.

Speech given to Open Forum at Bulawayo

The phrase Structural Adjustment is being bandied about so much these days that it seems that it has always been with us. Whilst it is in vogues phrase it is in fact a new one in Zimbabwe at least. The same does not apply to the rest of Africa where many countries implemented structural adjustment programmes years ago. On a recent business trip to Tanzania I learnt from Ghanaian colleagues that the structural adjustment programme was initiated in Ghana some ten years ago and it has not been the panacea everyone hoped it would be. The fact is that some 38 developing countries have in the past few years attempted structural adjustment programmes and the failure rate has been extremely high. Professor Tony Hawkins, a Professor of Business Studies at the University of Zimbabwe recently wrote that “the hard truth is that nowhere in Africa – with the exception of Mauritius – has structural adjustment worked”. In fact in a book published by an Ethiopian author, Fantu Cheru, called The Silent Revolution in Africa, a rather depressing picture emerges about the failures of structural adjustment programmes in Africa. The title of the book describes the silent revolution of lower paid people who have been forced into the informal sector of the economy (including corrupt activities) because they have not been able to survive in the formal sector. All of this does not bode well for Zimbabwe and it is important that we learn from the failures of the rest of Africa as we seek to implement structural adjustment.

But what exactly is structural adjustment? No one to my knowledge in Government has given a precise definition of the term, and I am sure that it means many different things to many different people. We seem to be moving away from a centrally controlled economy towards capitalism and a free market economy. We are seeing a drift from State ownership to African styled privatisation in which the key players are well connected men and women not too far from the seats of power. Government has not actually admitted yet that structural adjustment actually denotes a shift from socialism to capitalism and a freemarket economy. Indeed Government, or rather the ruling party, recently stated that they still believe in Marxist-Leninism which seems to fly in the face of what is actually happening in the country. In my view the term structural adjustment in Zimbabwe is simply a euphemism; it is a convenient phrase to describe the “U” turn that Government is doing. It is just too embarrassing for Government to admit that it has formerly abandoned socialism to embrace this elitist tribally based capitalism.

The next question which needs to be asked as one shuffles through the minefield of political doublespeak is why has structural adjustment been introduced? As I have stated above the term and the policy is relatively new in Zimbabwe. As Jonathan Moyo pointed out in last week’s Financial Gazette ZANU PF ran its l990 election campaign on the ticket of socialism. Its manifesto did not make any mention, as far as I am aware, of structural adjustment and trade liberalisation. I believe that structural adjustment can however be traced back to the l990 elections. Despite all Government’s bluster after the elections that it was a landslide victory etc the fact is that in their terms they took a hammering. The facts of the election are that there were some 4,6 million people registered to vote, less than half the people eligible to vote went to the polls, and Government was forced to add one day to the voting and throw the voting open to anyone who could prove identity in place of residence. Furthermore of the votes cast there were l38 865 spoilt ballot papers and 396 l08 votes for opposition parties. When you add the spoilt ballot papers to the votes for opposition parties and the two million or so people who did not vote at all it is clear that it was Pyrrhic victory.

Added to this is the fact that Zimbabwe’s post independence economic performance has been unimpressive. Per capita incomes today are only fractionally higher than in l980. Unemployment has risen fivefold. Inflation currently exceeds 20%, the balance of payments deficit is closer to 6% of gross domestic product, and the budget deficit l0% of gross domestic product. Foreign capital inflows have been negligible and in l989, investment at less than ll% of gross domestic product was at its lowest level since World War Two.

Given the slide in its popularity and the relatively disastrous state that the economy is in Government has realised that it had to do something urgently and it has latched onto structural adjustment as its saviour. The adoption of the policy of South Africa does not appear to be the result of deeply felt ideological convictions or a change of political heart on the part of Government. It is more an act of expediency and this is an important fact to grasp. The $64 000 question is whether structural adjustment can in fact save Zimbabwe and therefore ZANU PF’s skin.

Recently there has been much talk about the pros and cons of structural adjustment and trade liberalisation. It is a programme that one either loves or hates and there have been strong views expressed both for and against the programme. I hold no brief regarding structural adjustment as such. All I know is that the Zimbabwean economy desperately needs reform. As Professor Hawkins states “Zimbabwe has been a victim of its politicians. For l0 years they managed to achieve a “worst of both worlds” syndrome. The Marxist-Leninist political rhetoric, the threats – promises – to establish a one-party state, to acquire property, and to achieve “socialist transformation” have done untold damage to the investment climate and civil society in Zimbabwe”. Something needs to be done. My concern however as we embark on this new road is that Government, business and to a lesser extent some economists seem to have ignored one of the basic ingredients which will mean the difference between success and failure of the economic reform programme.

In this regard I believe that we can all learn a lot from Clem Sunter’s book “The World and South Africa in the l990’s”. Although Sunter concentrates on South Africa the book is equally applicable to Zimbabwe’s economic future. Sunter points out that when one opens up any economy that process will only work if one can create an environment in which people are willing to work hard. It is such a simple statement and yet it is so profound. A country is not made successful by its laws or its mineral resources or its government. Ultimately a country will only be a success if an environment is created in which people feel like working hard. I believe that as we take a sober look at Zimbabwe in l99l that ingredient is missing. I have never known the morale of common people to be so low as it is at present. Evidence of this is to be found in the recent Municipal elections and the general apathy in the country. Unless Government and ZANU PF in particular strive to create an environment which people are willing to work hard and strives to improve the morale of the country I believe that structural adjustment is doomed to failure.

Sunter believes that there are four conditions for people to be willing to work hard which are:

l. small government;
2. a sound family system;
3. low taxation; and
4. lack of corruption.

This evening I would like to consider two of these conditions:
small government, lack of corruption, and what I would term respect for human rights and democracy. None of these topics deal with economic issues as such. None of them contain formulas how interest rates should be increased or dropped or which products should be put on the open general import licence. However all three topics I believe are essential to the success of our economic reform programme.

Small Government

If structural adjustment is to work we need to have small government not just in terms of size but also in terms of attitude. What do I mean? Peter Pithart, the Prime Minister of the Czech lands in Czechoslovakia recently wrote an article in a magazine called Oxford Today called “Building the State”. The article emphasises the need to reconstruct civil society in Czechoslovakia. He states ” In recent years our political society has been, to put it mildly, overbuilt; it has expanded and occupied the space of the civil society, with consequences which can be described by one adjective only: totalitarian”. Pithart argues that there needs to be a balance in any country between what he terms state society and civil society. If civil society is destroyed or overcome people become limp and the economy suffers. I believe that the same thing has happened in Zimbabwe. The Government and the party has been overbuilt in Zimbabwe. I should stress that I am not just taking about the increase in the size of the public service. I am talking about the fact that ZANU PF has tried to make support for it synonymous with loyalty to Zimbabwe. I am talking about the fact that Government’s tentacles have reached into all sectors of our society so that we now have a plethora of parastatals and Government seeks to control everything from sport to how business should operate. Dangerously the result has been apathy and low morale among our people.

Government now seems to think that it can address this problem by cutting the civil service by 25%. Whilst I believe that this is necessary it is only part of the answer. Let me give you an example of what I am driving at. Clem Sunter, the South African author referred to above, spoke to the Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry and questioned what their role vis a vis industry was. They said “We act like a football team coach. We agree on tactics, provide the right environment and make sure that the pitch is in excellent condition. We don’t own the stadium, but we keep it in good shape and those guys out there – they win the matches. They are the champions. We don’t command them, we help them.” Their deeds match their words: Japan has fewer state employees than any other member of the top economies in the world. Government acts in a support role and is the servant of the people not the other way round. The same applies in other economic success stories around the world. In Switzerland, Germany and the United States, the Government simply provides the most favourable environment for business to operate in, and does not seek to unduly dictate to businessmen. Contrast this with Zimbabwe where bureaucrats have so clipped management’s wings that the demoralised private sector risks loosing all initiative, drive and entrepreneurial flair, where we have the plethora of Ministries and Ministers who seem to do nothing other than earn a salary where organisations like the State Trading Corporation have been set up to compete with business, if public funds were invested in ventures that created no new jobs, added no extra value and generated no new capital investment and where ownership and control were given precedence over economic efficiency. Government is overbuilt to the detriment of the business community and the working people as a whole.

Are there any signs that Government intends creating a small government in size and attitude or is even aware that it is part of the problem? I regret that all Government seems to be concentrating on at present is reducing the size of the civil service. The budget is evidence of this and the following examples are pertinent:
(a) There is no indication in the budget that Government has any intention of cutting down the size of the Cabinet. The salaries, wages and allowances paid to the Vice Presidents and the administration of the office of the President and Cabinet rose to $4 780 000,00 an increase of l4,35%.
(b) The bill for salaries, wages and allowances in the Ministry of Political Affairs has increased by 27,58% to
$26 8l0 000,00.
(c) Included in the vote for Public Construction and National Housing are new works of $4 000 000,00 for renovations to State House in Harare and the construction of a Vice President’s residence costing $3 000 000,00. Added to this are buildings for the CIO being built at Zimbabwe House and State House costing $l,6 million.

The point is that if we are going to create an environment in which people are willing to work hard, Government and the ruling party has to lead by example. It is no good talking about belt tightening when $7 million is going to be spent on plusher residences for the President and the Vice President. There is no point in expecting commitment from people when the Civil Service is being cut back by 25% and yet the cabinet is not being cut back by 25%. Why should common people in Zimbabwe be committed to working hard and tightening their belts if they are not being led by example. It is vital to the people’s morale that Government reduces the size of the cabinet immediately.

It is also vital that the morale of the business sector be improved as well. For all the talk of privatisation of parastatals there are still alarming signs that Government still wants to invest in the economy. For example in yesterday’s Business Chronicle there was an advertisement placed by the Zimbabwe State Trading Corporation seeking to employ a branch manager and an accounting assistant for the Bulawayo Branch. The duties and responsibilities of the branch manager include co-ordinating the corporation’s import and export activities in Matabeleland and the Midlands. Clearly Government’s intention is to continue to compete with business and is not prepared to simply act in a support roll.

If structural adjustment is going to work Government must reduce the size of Government and change its attitude towards civil society by pulling back. Why is this necessary? Firstly it makes good economic sense. By cutting back on the number of ministries and cabinet ministers, Government investments and Government in civil society, the budget deficit will be reduced. That means that less revenue has to be collected which means that income tax and other taxes can be reduced thus putting more money into the hands of consumers thus fuelling the domestic economy. Secondly the morale of the people must be lifted as they will think that we are all in this together and that the common people are not the only ones who are being asked to tighten their belts for the good of the country.

Corruption

The second condition necessary to create an environment in which people are willing to work hard is the destruction of corruption in our society. Common sense dictates that where corruption is rampant in society it gives rise to considerable disillusionment amongst the workers and common people. Corruption is present in every society and economy in the world and Sunter simply makes the point that only an open political system minimises corruption in any country. Wherever there are controls almost inevitably corruption will flourish. Whenever Government has its hand in everything almost inevitably corruption will prosper. Wherever there is control of the media corruption booms as control of the media inhibits investigative reporting which is necessary to expose corruption.

From the evidence before me as a lawyer I believe that corruption within Government and Zimbabwean society is rife and that the Willowvale Scandal pales into insignificance compared to the level of corruption now. Weekly I hear of corrupt acts by politicians and big business all of which are well substantiated. In fact I have been trying to work out what comrade means these days – does it mean Communists Only Made Rich After Diddling Economy? We should not be surprised that this is taking place in our society. The statement of Lord Action that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is borne out by what is happening in Zimbabwe. The degree of control that Government exercises in Zimbabwe society fuels corruption. The fact that Government effectively controls the ZBC, The Herald, The Chronicle, and if Geoff Nyarota is to be believed, is trying to control the Financial Gazette means that corruption can never be fully exposed in our society. Furthermore the controls in the economy, especially as regards the distribution of foreign exchange, exacerbates the problem. Where people have absolute control over, for example, the distribution of foreign exchange, and no fear of being exposed for exercising that control improperly, corruption will inevitably flourish.

If corruption continues to flourish I have no doubt that the morale of common honest people in Zimbabwe will be further affected. If the morale of common people and the business community is badly affected that will inevitably affect the success of the structural adjustment programme.

Are there any signs that Government is doing anything to tackle the problem of corruption? Regrettably there are no signs that Government has any intention of loosening control of the media, which is the first step in combating corruption. If anything control of the ZBC has been tightened and The Herald and to a lesser extent, The Chronicle, are still Government mouth pieces. The dismissal of Geoff Nyarota and the subsequent resignation of Dr Enock Dumbutshena from the Fingaz Board are disturbing signs that all is not well at the Fingaz. It is amazing how people in this country express their views silently but clearly. When Geoff Nyarota was editor of The Chronicle you couldn’t lay your hands on one. It is now easy to get hold of The Chronicle. When Geoff Nyarota was editor of the Financial Gazette you couldn’t lay your hands on one. I was in Kingstons just this week and there were piles of last week’s Financial Gazettes lying unsold. Obviously the people have passed judgment on the Financial Gazette. Some may be encouraged by the announcement that a new Sunday paper, reportedly backed by Lonrho, is about to be published. I am not convinced that such a paper will lead to investigative reporting if it is backed by a multinational as it will inevitably have to abide by the whims of its master. Evidence of this is given in the British Observer newspaper, which recently ran an article exposing President Banda of Malawi. Pressure was brought to bear on Lonrho and the Observer published two retractions – so much for the freedom of Lonrho controlled press.

I firmly believe that if Government is going to deal with corruption the following needs to be done:
(a) the Mass Media Trust needs to be sold off to the people and the party should relinquish its control over the board;
(b) the ZBC Board should be changed so that it is distanced from the Ministry of Information and becomes a completely separate, independent and impartial body.
(c) Government needs to seriously consider introducing legislation designed to combat corruption. Time does not permit today for me to give examples of what can be done but consideration should be given to setting up a commission of enquiry into corruption which should be chaired by a Supreme Court Judge. Only then will the common people realise that Government is serious about exposing corruption and therefore tackling it. If Government does not adopt these measures corruption will undoubtedly flourish and the morale of the people will be badly undermined – this will impact our structural adjustment.

Democracy and Human Rights

Earlier on this year I wrote an article which was published in the Financial Gazette in which I argued that structural adjustment, trade liberalisation and the economy generally will, in the long term, stand or fall on the degree of genuine democracy brought to Zimbabwe. I am reinforced in this view by an article published in the Financial Gazette last week entitled “Democracy could pull Africa out of Poverty”. In the article a Mr Gerrishon Ikiara, a Kenyan Economics Professor at the University of Nairobi was quoted as saying “a much more free political system is essential if African economies are to move forward. “Economists say that the pro-democracy wave sweeping across Africa from Mali to Madagascar may at last trigger economic liberation and they point out that decades of mismanagement by military dictators and one party autocrats have stifled enterprise and investment in countries south of the Sahara. It is trite that countries with the strongest economies in the world are those with the greatest amount of freedom and democracy. No amount of economic tinkering with structural adjustment programmes will work unless people are free to say what they please, think what they please and to elect the best people for the job.

Is Government and ZANU PF committed to democracy and human rights observance in Zimbabwe? It is a critical question which must be answered as we tread the path of structural adjustment. In my paper written in May l99l I came to the conclusion that despite the lifting of the State of Emergency and the September l990 decision of ZANU PF Central Committee that it would not legislate a one party state, the Government is still not committed to democracy in the true sense of the word. I am reinforced in this view by events which have taken place since May and in particular the Budget. To give a few examples:

l. The Student Academic Community

The University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act l990 was passed at the beginning of this year giving Government absolute control over the University. Minister Karimanzira promised to meet with students but when he met with them he simply dug his heels in. The Act has not been changed and despite calls from various quarters (including The Chronicle recently) Government shows no intention of changing the Act. This has led to the resignation by Professor Kamba and the fears I expressed in May are starting to become a reality. Any expanding economy relies on strong Universities which in turn are producing innovative thinkers. In May I predicted that Government’s attempt to control the Universities would lead to a further brain drain and this is happening now. Not only has Professor Kamba resigned but there was a recent report in the press of the fact that levels of professional staff at the University are dangerously low and that people are resigning left, right and centre. This brain drain will have an extremely negative impact on the Zimbabwe economy and Government needs to repeal the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act immediately.

2. The Court System
The Constitution Amendment Act ll of l990 has badly undermined the independence of the judiciary in this country. In particular the provision which excludes the right of recourse to the Courts by sellers who feel they have been treated unfairly following the compulsory acquisition of their land not only undermines the Courts but will prevent the large injection of foreign capital we so badly need. As Professor Hawkins has said “The message broadcast to investors at home and abroad is that, under certain conditions, property might be expropriated. This is hardly the message foreign investors want to hear”. Government has shown no inclination to change the Act although it has delayed the publication of the Land Acquisition Bill which may contain some provisions protecting people.

3. Opposition Political Parties

Despite the fact that Government has stated that it will not legislate a one party state there are still alarming signs that Government at the very least still intends introducing a de facto one party state. There are the obvious examples of this intention given in the fact that the media still slavishly follows the party line. But the most damming evidence is given in the Budget itself as evidenced as follows:
(l) Ministry of Political Affairs
Much has been said about the fact that the Ministry of Political Affairs vote was reduced by $l4,7 million in the new budget. The fact remains however that the reduction was effected by reducing the costs of national service and as I have already indicated the actual salaries for people in the Ministry of Political Affairs went up by 27% and the overall budget of the Ministry of Political Affairs (aside from national service) increased from 29,4 million to 33,l million, an increase of just under l3%. If Zimbabwe is committed to a multi party democracy why is some 33 million of taxpayers’ money going to one political party?
(2) The CIO

An interesting provision contained in the vote for the Office of the President and the cabinet is a grant for “special services” of 70 million. The budget estimates state that part of the expenditure on this item will not be subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The provision is the vote for the Central Intelligence Organisation. To give you some idea of how this has grown the CIO was first given a vote in l97l/l972 by the Smith Government of $825 000,00. In the Public Construction and National Housing Budget we note that the CIO is constructing buildings in the coming year amounting to $2,36 million. The CIO’s job is primarily to gain information on Government’s opponents. Whilst I concede that the CIO also gathers intelligence on enemies of the state (which I have no quarrel with) its most visible role in Zimbabwe is to report on political renegades. If Government is truly committed to multi party democracy, freedom of association and expression one questions why the CIO budget is so large and has been increased given the fact that the State of Emergency has fallen away, we are formally committed to multi party democracy and that the general political climate in Southern Africa had improved.
(3) Defence Spending

Dr Chidzero in his Budget speech stated, and I quote, “The defence vote remains as the second largest under current expenditure allocations at $l,l45 million, a nominal increase of l0% over the l990/l99l outturn. The increase on this vote has been due mainly to contractual obligations. The vote would have otherwise remained stagnant in nominal terms.” With respect to the senior minister this does not show the whole picture. Firstly the Ministry of Public Construction and National Housing has been granted a vote of 552 million of which over a third has been allocated to the Ministry of Defence in the sum of $l77 million. In the year l99l/l992 the Ministry of Defence has increased its spending on building by just under l6%. Included in building programmes is $6 million being spent on the Harare KGVI Officer’s Mess, $40 million being spent on Five brigade battlefields and $6,3 million being spent on Darwendale Tunnels. To get this vote in perspective one needs to point out that the entire budget for the Ministry of Health for the same period is $28,7 million and the Social Fund to cushion the impact of structural adjustment is at present only $20 million. The actual increase therefor in overall defence budget is ll,l% and the total expenditure is $l,322 billion. This increase needs to be seen in the light of the improved political environment in Southern Africa and the fact that whilst Mozambique is still in turmoil our obligations are now only to guard the Beira and Limpopo corridors. If our external enemies aren’t as threatening as before why are we still spending so much on defence and most of that at home? Is this because Government believes it necessary to keep the army “on sides” in case they lose the wider support of the people? I am not saying that this is the position as I am not well enough informed to make a judgement. However it does alarm me that the defence vote still accounts for over l0% of our entire expenditure and repayments, and that a vast amount of money is being spent on establishing army barracks, officer’s messes and the like within Zimbabwe, entirely divorced from operations in Mozambique.
4. Ratification of International Human Rights Instruments

A further indication that Government is not absolutely committed to democracy and the promotion of human rights in Zimbabwe is given by its appalling record to date regarding the ratification or signature of international human rights instruments. In fact it is ironical that with CHOGM coming up shortly, Zimbabwe has ratified the least number of international human rights instruments within the Commonwealth aside from Malaysia and Brunei. The Zimbabwean Government, ll years after Independence, has still not ratified the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, the international covenant on civil and political rights, the convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, the ILO convention number 87 on freedom of association and protection of the right to organise, and the ILO convention number 98 concerning the application of the right to organise and bargain collectively. Whilst the ratification of the abovementioned documents do not in themselves indicate that Governments are committed to democracy it is puzzling why our Government has not seen fit to ratify these instruments. Once again it raises the question as to whether or not Government is committed to democracy and the promotion of human rights.

Why is respect for democracy and human rights important to the success of the structural adjustment programme? It goes back to Sunter’s comment that opening up the economy will only work if one can create an environment in which people are willing to work hard. Such an environment is not created if, firstly Government are not accountable for their actions and, secondly, if people do not feel they are free, their commitment to the country and innovation is stifled. If Zimbabwe is to compete in the world economy it needs to be efficient and innovative. Democracy is a vital ingredient for both efficiency and innovative thinking. If people cannot express their views and change their leadership the inevitable result is that corrupt and inefficient leaders will be allowed to remain in power which ultimately will rot the entire Zimbabwean economy. If people feel stifled in their private lives then the chances are that our most brilliant people will either leave the country or become so demoralised that they lose their vision.

Conclusion

From all that I have said above it seems to me as if Government is not intent on opening up Zimbabwe society and is not intent in bringing about a balance between state and civil society. As I said it seems committed to an African style privatisation in which the key players are well connected men and women not too far from the seats of power. If I am correct in this assumption it means that either Government thinks it can successfully turn the economy round in this manner or it is holding on for dear life. In this regard we need to learn from the experience of China and the Soviet Union. Regarding China I recently read an article called “Of Marx, Mice and Men”. The article provided a reminder that China was the first communist country in modern times to tread the capitalist road. As far back as the late l970’s Deng Xiaoping visited Japan and assured his hosts that China was open for business. China tried to do a Japan. When challenged about the incompatibility of communism and the strategy of progress – by – exporting, he said, “it doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice”. Japanese businessmen studied Deng’s proposals and Japan was soon in the grip of a China boom. By l988 it looked like a thundering success. For the first six months of l988 China’s economy grew at an annual rate of l2% well ahead of the population growth. By the third quarter of l988 the growth in the Chinese gross national product hit l7%, equal to the best results ever achieved in the days of Japan’s and South Korea’s expose of growth. The rest is history. The opening up of Chinese society was simply a facade which was uncovered in June l989 with the violent suppression of legitimate student protest. By the third quarter of l989 China’s economic growth was down to .8% well under the population increase. There is a lesson to be learned for Zimbabwe. Likewise in the Soviet Union Gorbachev’s attempts to tread the fine line between reforms and his communist conservative bed fellows has failed. In Zimbabwe we still call our Ministers Comrades and we have a red star on our flag. It seems as if ZANU PF, like Deng Xiaoping believes that it doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice. I believe that this is foolhardy. It does matter what type of cat we are. If we are an undemocratic cat toying with economic reform we will fail. We need a cat which has truly abandoned its discredited ideology in word and deed, and which is committed to small government (in size and attitude), combating corruption and the promotion of true democracy.

Legal Aid and Human Rights Group: Session 4 Paper Presented by Mr David Coltart, Legal Resources Foundation, Zimbabwe

Empowering People, Civil Associations and Democratic Development in Sub-Saharan Africa
12 – 16 August 1991, International Conference Centre, Arusha, Tanzania

INTRODUCTION: Brief History of Legal Aid and Human Rights Groups in Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe was colonised 100 years ago and for the bulk of this time has had no legal aid or human rights groups to speak of. Indeed the only credible human rights group prior to Independence in l980 was the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace which was set up in l972. It however was (and still is) primarily human rights group and until the establishment of the Legal Resources Foundation (LRF) in l984 there was not a single legal aid NGO in the country. Whilst Zimbabwe boasts a well-organised private legal profession and an outstanding judiciary only a minute privileged group of Zimbabwe’s population can afford to engage lawyers of their choice. The rest of the population have either to go without legal assistance or have had to rely on extremely limited State legal aid. It is not the purpose of this paper to study what legal aid is provided in Zimbabwe outside of NGO’s. Suffice it to say that this type of legal aid is, in practice, limited to people facing capital charges and to certain civil cases such as divorce actions. The vast majority of people would go unrepresented were it not for the work of NGO’s such as the LRF.

LEGAL RESOURCES FOUNDATION

The fundamental purpose of this conference is to encourage the formation of non-Governmental voluntary organisations capable of assuming responsibility for economic and social advances which NGO’s in turn become important pillars of the democratic system. The purpose of this session is to focus on specific obstacles faced by organisations and how these obstacles have been or should be overcome. I would like to concentrate on the organisation I represent, the Legal Resources Foundation of Zimbabwe, which was set up in l984 in an attempt to improve the accessibility of legal remedies to poor and otherwise disadvantaged people in Zimbabwe.

The LRF is a non-profit welfare organisation which is run by a board of trustees, including the former Chief Justice of Zimbabwe, a Supreme Court Judge and several leading lawyers, academics and sociologists. The LRF has adopted a multi-pronged approach which seeks simultaneously to make the maximum possible use of those legal resources which are available in Zimbabwe, to improve the quality and the reach of the available legal services, and to improve public awareness and rights to which individuals are entitled and the means to obtain those rights. It has three main programmes:

l. the paralegal programme;
2. the education programme;
3. the publications programme.

l. The paralegal Programme
Prior to the establishment of the paralegal programme nearly all legal services available in Zimbabwe were confined to urban areas and, as indicated above, even those were restricted to people who could afford the services of private lawyers. The paralegal programme seeks to redress this problem through a four-tiered approach:

(a) Advice Volunteers
The LRF trains Advice Volunteers who live in poor and/or rural communities. Their job is to educate people regarding their rights using pamphlets produced by the LRF and to refer people with legal problems (with legal remedies available) to the second tier of the programme, the local advice centre.

(b) Advice Centres
The Foundation is in the process of setting up a network of advice centres in poor and/or rural areas of Zimbabwe. Advice Centres are manned by fulltime employees of the LRF known as paralegals, each of whom on commencement of employment undergoes an intensive four-week training course and is supplied with a paralegal manual, which simplifies the entire body of Zimbabwean law. The paralegal’s job is to liaise with advice volunteers in his or her district, to give advice, to consult, to refer consultants to local agencies which can assist and, where local agencies cannot assist, to refer prospective litigants to the third tier of the programme, namely the nearest Legal Projects Centre. As at the end of July l99l the LRF has set up four advice centres in remote rural areas and seven advice centres in urban areas.

(c) The Legal Projects Centres

The main operational arms of the LRF are the legal projects centres. As at the end of July l99l the LRF has set up four projects centres in Harare, Bulawayo, Masvingo and Gweru. The Bulawayo and Harare Projects Centres are the two main centres and the others are simply satellite project centres. The main project centres have full time lawyers, administrative personnel and full time sociologists. They also have extensive law libraries. The satellite project centres have full time administrators and part time back-up of a board comprising lawyers in private practice. The projects centres’ main functions are to provide back-up to the other three tiers of the programme including training and monitoring of advice volunteers and paralegals and research and litigation of public interest and test cases.

(d) Public Interest/Test Cases
The fourth tier of the programme is the public interest/test case programme which I should stress is very much in its infancy in Zimbabwe. The LRF has done a limited amount of public interest case litigation thus far using lawyers employed in the project centres. Because of human and financial constraints it is impossible for the LRF to implement a legal aid programme nationwide and for every indigent person. Accordingly only those cases which are perceived to be of widespread benefit to many people are taken on by the Foundation. In other words only cases which set a new precedent expanding or promoting human rights observance in Zimbabwe or cases, which, for example, establish liability against a Defendant on behalf of a great number of litigants, are taken on. We recognise that the programme is but a drop in the ocean and our intention is that each drop should cause a tidal wave!

To give you some idea of the number and type of cases we handle I will refer you to the attached statistics from the region where I come from, namely Matabeleland North:

2. Education Programme

The education programme is conducted by our full time lawyers located at the Bulawayo and Harare Legal Projects Centres. From a human rights perspective the most interesting programme is our law enforcement agency programme. We conduct week-long seminar programmes for police officers and intelligence officers on the law relating to bail, search and seizure, confessions, detention and arrest from a human rights perspective. The programme is unique in the world and has resulted in a marked improvement in human rights observance as far as the police and intelligence organisations in Zimbabwe are concerned. The education programme also conducts workshops and seminars for magistrates, school children, prosecutors, defence counsel and co-operatives. The LRF has also co-operated with the Commonwealth Human Rights Unit in conducting seminars on human rights for civil servants in Zimbabwe. Various ad hoc programmes are organised and, by way of an example, we are presently working on an alternative sentencing seminar programme in a bid to seek ways of reducing our prison population and to finding alternative forms of punishment to whipping of juveniles.

3. Publications Programme
The LRF has set up a completely separate publications unit in Harare. With the assistance of a network of lawyers in private practice and legal academics the publications unit is now the only publisher of law reports, legal text books, legal pamphlets, indices to legislation and the like in Zimbabwe. The publications unit also now produces a quarterly magazine called Legal Forum which is principally designed to address human rights issues in Zimbabwe.

OBSTACLES FACED

l. In-experience
The process of developing the multi-pronged programmes of the LRF has been hindered by the dearth of any detailed information about similar schemes in other parts of the world and specifically in Africa. The paralegal programme especially has been pioneering work and to be frank several mistakes have been made in the implementation of the programme simply because of our inexperience. To combat this obstacle the LRF must observe the following other organisations:

(a) Need for contact with other similar organisations prior to the implementation of any programme.
Prior to the establishment of any human rights or legal aid organisation it is imperative that those setting up the organisation visit and spend time with similar organisations in other countries to gain practical experience and vision. This conference is useful in that it provides the opportunity to meet the representatives of similar organisations. However this in itself is not enough; ideally people should visit and spend considerable time with other organisations.

(b) Pilot schemes

The fundamental problem with setting up NGO’s of this nature is that often they are what I would describe as top heavy organisations. All the vision comes from urban based academics and professionals who have little knowledge of the needs and problems of the oppressed or suffering people. It is absolutely vital that a pilot scheme be established prior to the expansion of any legal aid network. The pilot scheme is useful in identifying the mechanics of the operation, the needs of the underprivileged people and the attitude of Government.

(c) Evaluation
Prior to the expansion of any legal aid scheme it is imperative that any pilot scheme be subject to evaluation by third parties who are completely objective and yet who are also cognisant of the needs and issues faced in the pilot scheme area. Our experience in the LRF is that sometimes one cannot see the wood for the trees and it has taken third parties to identify problems and suggest solutions to them.

2. Resistance from Government
Although I should stress that we in the LRF have been fortunate in that by and large we have enjoyed considerable co-operation from Government, given the experience of other human rights organisations in Africa, resistance from Governments might be the single biggest obstacle any fledgling organisation will face. It is useful to note that the LRF was set up at the height of grave human rights abuses in Zimbabwe and yet it has flourished. The LRF’s success in this regard is due to the following:

(a) Establishing a track record
The temptation is to set up an organisation and thereafter plunge into highly controversial human rights issues right from the very beginning. The experience of Africa certainly shows that many such organisations have been closed down by Government almost immediately. The LRF has deliberately spent many years in building up the organisation without taking on highly controversial issues which threaten the power base of Government. For example we have concentrated on poor law, the needs of the rural community, women’s rights, disabled people’s rights and generally making legal services more accessible. The LRF has not to date addressed issues such as the concept of multi-party democracy although it is now in a position to do so. We can now say without fear of contradiction that the LRF has become an important pillar of the democratic system within Zimbabwe but this would not have occurred had we rushed in. I should stress that it is now our intention to take on more controversial cases through our test case programme.

(b) Discussion with Government Officials

The LRF has always made it a point to explain our objectives to all manner of Government officials from Ministers down to local district administrators. Before the LRF was set up we made quite sure that Government fully understood its objectives. Likewise before we go into any new areas we make sure that the local heads of administration, police, and intelligence, together with chiefs, headmen and others are fully briefed regarding what we intend to do in their areas. Our experience is that this usually dissipates suspicion and has often resulted in us receiving amazing co-operation.

(c) Develop International Contacts
We recognise that even if one adopts a patient approach and advises Government of one’s objectives the time will come when one takes on a particular issue which is ultra sensitive and thus incurs the wrath of Government. Because of this it is absolutely vital to develop closer links with other local and international human rights organisations. We actively network with a wide variety of organisations and try to develop personal contacts with people in those organisations. Whilst the LRF is certainly not immune from any attack from Government we are aware that were we to suffer any attack we now have a large number of friends from throughout the world who would use their influence to bring pressure to bear on our Government.

3. Resistance from the Legal Profession
A potential obstacle is resistance from the legal profession. Lawyers generally jealously guard their position in society and are deeply suspicious of any organisation which has the potential to take business away from the profession. Whilst the LRF generally receives support from the legal profession, opposition has been felt from some quarters. To counter this LRF liaises closely with the Law Society of Zimbabwe prior to implementing any new programmes. Indeed our relationship has now blossomed so much so that we receive considerable moral support from the Law Society, which has lobbied on our behalf to change certain legislation which has restricted our operations.

4. Hijacking by Political Organisations

If a legal aid or human rights group is to become an important pillar of the democratic system in any country it is important that it remains fiercely independent of any political party. It should be obvious that if a human rights group is hijacked by any political group or party its agenda thereafter will be set by the political party and not by the wider interests of society. Furthermore it is likely that the organisation will loose its legal emphasis. To counter this potential obstacle the following needs to be done:

(a) Ensure as far as possible that the Board of Trustees or leaders of the organisation are either non-political or represent a wide range of democratic political opinion within the country.

(b) Respect the rule of law. The moment any legal aid or human rights organisation gets involved in any unlawful conduct or with any organisations committed to acting unlawfully (and I must stress that by this I exclude any organisations which are legitimately striving to bring about multi-party democracy and universal franchise even though those objectives may be deemed “unlawful” by certain Governments) they leave themselves open to being shut down.

4. Lack of Direction
Many organisations start out with wonderful objectives but after a few years find themselves either totally off course or swamped with too much work; often what results is that the organisation looses all credibility with people it attempts to serve and with donor agencies. The LRF’s experience has been that, because it is the only organisation of its type in Zimbabwe, it is continually flooded with various applications to do programmes within the general scope of its objectives and it is constantly in danger of being swamped. To overcome this problem the following need to be implemented:

(a) Focus on principal objectives. From the very outset it is important to clearly identify exactly what the organisation intends to do. Inevitably there will be subsidiary aims and objectives but the principal objective must always be borne in mind.

(b) Constant Review. It is necessary, at least on an annual basis, to review the operations of the organisation in light of the principal initial objectives. If the principal objective is being undermined because of the ancillary operations of the organisation then those ancillary operations should be cut down ruthlessly. Likewise before any new programmes are undertaken they need to be considered in the light of the principal objective. Often it will be very difficult to refuse to take on a new programme because the need seems so great, but the temptation must be resisted! A further problem in this regard is that donor agencies generally give money for specific projects. If those projects are not implemented as effectively as they should have or, worse still, if the money is used for some other programmes, it is unlikely that further funding will be made available.

5. Lack of Funding
I have deliberately placed the discussion of this obstacle towards the end. It is a common obstacle faced by legal aid and human rights groups and many would say that it is their main obstacle. Our experience in the LRF is that the lack of funding should not be the principal obstacle any organisation faces and if organisations deal with the obstacles mentioned above and the points following then usually adequate funding should be forthcoming from international donor agencies. Of graver concern to the LRF is long term funding for the organisation as most donor organisations are not prepared to fund indefinitely. These obstacles should be overcome as follows:

(a) Funding is not usually forthcoming unless considerable initiative is first shown by the fledgling indigenous organisation. Unless a local group of people with integrity and drive are gathered together to support the setting up of an organisation, funding will be difficult to find. Often these people will have to sacrifice their own time and money to set up a small organisation. To give a practical example in Bulawayo, the city where I come from, there was no legal aid organisation when I arrived there in l983. In conjunction with the Bulawayo Legal Practitioner’s Association I set up a small legal aid clinic with no funding whatsoever. The premises were let to us rent free by a local organisation, and local lawyers contributed their time and stationery gratis. The legal aid clinic in Bulawayo struggled along until l986 when an application was put in to a donor agency to transform it into a project centre of the Legal Resources Foundation. Because we had a track record funding was not hard to come by. Likewise the LRF itself started with a small group of committed people who put a lot of their personal time and effort into the organisation before it was set up.

(b) Start small and establish a track record. Most donor organisations are not interested if one comes with huge initial funding requests for hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is necessary to obtain core funding for a relatively small unambitious project. Once that project has been successfully completed, and the organisation has proved itself to be competent and accountable, funding is usually forthcoming for the wider vision.

(c) There must be a plan for long term self-sufficiency

Unless the organisation’s projects are by their very nature short term and finite donor organisations are reluctant to commit themselves to any organisation whose projects are not self-sustainable in the long term. This statement may appear to defeat the very object of legal aid organisations, which by their very nature cannot hope to generate sufficient funds to support themselves in the long term. The latter is of course correct but it does not mean that any non-Governmental organisation cannot become self-sufficient in future. Usually this will require some form of Government involvement and this should be planned for. In our last financial year l990 to l99l the LRF expanded its paralegal programme to half the provinces in Zimbabwe and our total budget for all our projects (including the education and publication programmes) was some one and a half million Zimbabwe dollars. In terms of our next five-year plan we intend extending our operations to all eight provinces of Zimbabwe and we anticipate that the paralegal programme in isolation will be able to operate country-wide on a budget of less than two million dollars per annum. Whilst this may appear to be a large amount of money, in the context of overall Government spending it is a drop in the ocean. Our plan of action is that once we have set up a nationwide paralegal programme which works we will seek grant funding from Government whilst retaining our independence. We believe that Government will give us a sympathetic hearing once we have proved ourselves. Likewise donor agencies are prepared to fund an organisation such as the LRF in the medium term having been advised of our long term funding plan.

6. Keeping Staff
A major obstacle faced by all legal aid and human rights groups is that they are usually blighted by a high turnover of staff. Even if one has fairly adequate funding from donor organisations it is impossible to pay the same salaries as those offered in the commercial world. Furthermore because legal aid and human rights groups are fundamentally committed to upholding the law it goes without saying that unlawful tax perks are out. To compound the problem the very nature of the work means that it is often highly pressurised and demanding. This obstacle can be avoided or at the very least minimised as follows:

(a) Recruitment of staff. It is better to have a small group of highly motivated staff than it is to have the full compliment of staff who are not fully committed to the organisation. It is obviously very difficult to assess who will be committed in the long term to the organisation but this consideration should predominate any selection procedure.

(b) International exposure. Legal aid and human rights groups can never hope to pay commercial salaries but the advantage they can offer is that of international exposure. As indicated above, because of the pioneering nature of this type of work in Africa it is imperative that employees should be given the opportunity to see at first hand similar work being done in other countries. It is also imperative that such employees be given the opportunity to develop personal contacts with colleagues in other organisations both internally and internationally so as to develop a personal support base and vision for the future.

7. Conclusion
I have concentrated on the principal obstacles faced by the LRF which I think will be of general application. There are other obstacles such as those faced in setting up the administrative structure of any organisation which would require a separate paper. It needs to be said however that unless the administration of any legal aid or human rights organisation is run efficiently and in an accountable manner the overall objectives of legal aid and human rights promotion will be thwarted.

DAVID COLTART

What the Businessman Can Do Towards the Success of the Structural Adjustment Programme

By David Coltart

Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators in Zimbabwe

2^nd July 1991

I have been asked to give a short talk this afternoon on what the businessman can do towards the success of the Structural Adjustment Programme. Lawyers, as you probably know, love the sound of their own voices and asking one of us to give a short talk is a bit like asking an undertaker to be more lively. I will do my best, however, and will focus on the Structural Adjustment Programme essentially from a human rights perspective. There are all sorts of factors which will contribute to the success or failure of the Structural Adjustment Programme and most of the tips on how to succeed are best left to people like yourselves and economists.

One thing we are all no doubt agreed upon is that it is critical that the structural adjustment programme works. I heard recently that some 38 developing countries have in the past few years attempted Structural Adjustment Programmes and I was distressed to hear that the failure rate was extremely high. In fact I was told that some 36 of these countries were as badly off as ever. The only success story is Mauritius and the only other country is Zimbabwe which has yet to fully implement the programme.

Before we look at some of the reasons for success and failure, the fundamental question that needs to be asked is “what exactly is structural adjustment?” No one to my knowledge in Government has given a precise definition of structural adjustment. As far as I can tell it is simply a euphemism; it is a convenient phrase to describe the “U” turn Government is doing from socialism to capitalism and a free market economy. In spite of all the rhetoric we have heard recently about the fact that the majority of ZANU PF still believe in Marxist-Leninism the fact remains that, in my view at least, structural adjustment is just a convenient phrase. It would be far too embarrassing for Government to admit that it was formally abandoning socialism to embrace capitalism.

What can we learn from other developing countries which have embraced a free-market economy? I was recently reading an article in one of the December 1989 issues of the British magazine The Spectator entitled “Of Marx, Mice and Men”. The article provided a reminder that China was the first communist country in modern times to tread the capitalist road. As far back as the late 1970s Deng Xiaoping visited Japan and assured his hosts that China was open for business. China, in short, tried to do a Japan. When challenged about the incompatibility of communism and the strategy of progress-by-exporting, he said: “it doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long it catches mice”. Japanese businessmen studied Deng’s proposals and Japan was soon in the grip of a China boom. By 1988 it looked like a thundering success. For the first six months of 1988 the growth in the Chinese gross national product hit 17% – equal to the best results ever achieved in the days of Japan’s and South Korea’s explosive growth. The rest is history. The opening up of Chinese society was simply a facade which was uncovered in June 1989 with the violent suppression of legitimate student protest. By the third quarter of 1989 China’s economic growth was down to 0.8%, well under the population increase. The Chinese experience simply shows that it is extremely difficult to introduce primitive capitalism into any society which is used to fierce Government control and suppression. I would not for a moment compare Zimbabwean society to Chinese society, we are undoubtedly far more democratic and Government could never be described as communistic. However, it is important to learn from the Chinese experience. The strategy of progress-by-export will not work in a restricted environment.

I have looked at a negative example of what not to do. It is important also to consider the positive, and in this regard I believe that Clem Sunter’s book “The World and South Africa in the 1990s” should be prescribed reading for every proponent of trade liberalisation and structural adjustment. Although Sunter concentrates on South Africa, the book is equally applicable to Zimbabwe’s economic future. In one section Sunter points out that opening up the economy will only work if one can create an environment in which people are willing to work hard. He believes that there are four conditions for people to be willing to work hard, which are:

1. Small Government;
2. Sound family system;
3. Low taxation; and
4. Lack of corruption.

As I am neither a tax expert not a sociologist, I do not propose to look at what would be sound family system or a low taxation system in Zimbabwe. However, I do believe that it is within my expertise to consider small Government and lack of corruption.

Small Government

Sunter spoke to the Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry and questioned what their role vis-a-vis industry was. They said, “We act like a football team coach. We offer tactics, provide the right environment and make sure that the pitch is in excellent condition. We don’t own the stadium but we keep it in good shape and those guys out there – they win the matches. They are the champions. We don’t command them, we help them.” Their deeds match their words: Japan has fewer state employees than any other member of the top economies in the world, less than half the number in the United States, West Germany and Britain. Furthermore, the Government acts in a support role. Who of you knows the name of the Japanese President? They are the servants of the people, not the other way round, and that is key.

Lack of Corruption

The reasons why lack of corruption to a successful work ethic is essential are obvious. Sunter simply makes the point that only an open system minimises corruption in a country. Wherever there are controls almost inevitably corruption will flourish. Whenever Government has its hand in everything almost inevitably corruption will prosper. Wherever there is control of the media corruption will flourish as control of the media inhibits investigative reporting which is necessary to expose corruption.

If I could summarise what I have said above it would be that there are three pointers to the success or failure of structural adjustment, which are:

1. That the transition to capitalism and a free market economy must not be half-baked or half-hearted. Unless the transition is accompanied by fundamental political change the future is bleak.
2. One of the keys to success is that there must be small Government.
3. And finally, another key to success is lack of corruption.

Looking at Zimbabwe in the light of these three pointers I would make the following comments.

Half-Baked Transition

In a recent paper which I delivered to a seminar organised by Peat Marwick I argued that I believed that it was Government’s intention to introduce economic liberalisation and structural adjustment in a vacuum. Evidence of this is given in the clamping down of fundamental human rights, academic freedom and opposition political parties. Furthermore, Government, or should I say the Party, only seems to have a head commitment to structural adjustment, not a heart commitment. This is evidenced in recent statements hankering back to Marxist-Leninism, and the fact that Government continues to hold onto icons of socialism. We are all still called Comrades when that went out of date with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Government still justifies a Ministry of Political Affairs which is devoted to one political party in a “multi-party democracy”. Until Government abandons these icons and wholeheartedly shows its commitment to structural adjustment I fear that structural adjustment will fail.

Small Government

Government has spoken much about reducing the number of its civil service employees. Whilst this is obviously welcome it will not in itself ensure that structural adjustment works. What is more important is that Government changes its attitude about itself. Government needs to realise that it has to be the servant of the people not the people’s master. The statement of Minister Mahachi as reported in the Sunday News is an example of a Government which is not committed to changing its attitude. Until Government realises that small government does not just mean trimming its size but also relinquishing much of its power, the success of structural adjustment will be inhibited.

Lack of Corruption

I believe that corruption is rampant in society and has given rise to considerable disillusionment amongst the workers and common people in Zimbabwe. The degree of control that Government exercises in Zimbabwean society fuels corruption. The fact that Government effectively controls the ZBC, The Herald and The Chronicle and, if Geoff Nyarota is to be believed, is trying to control the Financial Gazette, means that corruption can never be fully exposed in our society. Furthermore, all the controls in the economy, especially as regards the distribution of foreign exchange, exacerbate the problem. Where people have absolute control and no fear of being exposed for exercising that control improperly, corruption inevitably flourishes. It is thus fundamental to the success of the Structural Adjustment Programme that Government should relinquish its control over the media.

What can the Business Community Do?

If businessmen want to contribute towards the success of the Structural Adjustment Programme, the first thing they have to do is to change their attitude. My criticism of the business community generally is that it has an ostrich mentality. It strikes me that business generally sticks its head in the sand and hopes that trade liberalisation and structural adjustment will work without them doing much about it. Worse still is the fact that the business community still panders blindly to Government primarily out of the fear of losing business. Whilst I understand short-term considerations of needing to obtain foreign currency, I believe it is incredibly short-sighted to remain passive.

Looking at things positively then, what can businesses do? In this regard I would like to look at the three pointers mentioned above give some suggestions.

Half Baked Capitalism

The business community needs to make a bold public stand that if trade liberalisation and structural adjustment are not accompanied by political reform the economy is doomed in the long-term. Government needs to be told in no uncertain terms that its action in undermining the universities, the courts and opposition political parties will result in the failure of the economic reform programme. Government continually needs to be wholeheartedly committed to transforming the entire Zimbabwean economy and society to make it democratic. Business needs to support publicly University academics, the judiciary, the legal profession and credible human rights organisations, all of whom are endeavouring to ensure that Zimbabwe becomes truly democratic.

Small Government

Business needs to encourage Government to become small. It needs to be pointed out to Government that trimming the civil service in itself is not the answer. Business should not encourage the notion that the Party is the master of society. In this regard I am particularly critical of joint business ventures with ZANU PF and acts such as donating to the ZANU PF Building Fund. These actions undermine the concept of multi-party democracy and tend to reinforce the Party’s attitude that it is the master of Zimbabwean society not its servant. Likewise, pandering to individual politicians contributes to the notion, in their minds at least, that they are more important than mere coaches providing the right environment for industry to flourish.

Corruption

I feel strongly that unless business encourages Government to deal with corruption and assists Government in combating corruption, the success of the structural adjustment programme will be severely hampered. In this regard business can do two vital things to combat corruption: First, business must realise that the end to corruption starts with business. The time has come for businesses in Zimbabwe to decide jointly that they are not going to tolerate any form of corruption or extortion. Whilst I am fully aware of the difficulties in adopting this stance, business needs to be assisting in exposing corruption wherever it occurs. Secondly, we need to encourage Government to realise that the best weapon to combat corruption is an open system where there is a free flow of information. Business needs to support those publications which are endeavouring to expose corruption.

In conclusion, you might be sitting back and asking “is this all necessary?” Do we really have to jeopardise our position and be more forceful? If you are asking that question I would like to conclude by telling you a story about my Roman Law professor. In my second year at university, I did a course called Roman Law which was designed to weed out some 60% of our law class. In the first term we were given several assignments and one of my fellow students had the gall to ask whether the assignments were compulsory. Our professor, who happened to be German, answered as follows: “No, they are not compulsory, but neither is breathing compulsory. If you do not breathe you die. If you do not do my assignments you fail”. The same applies to you. It is not compulsory that you as businessmen make a stand on these issues. If anything it probably makes a lot of sense in the short term to keep quiet. However, I believe that unless the business community takes action structural adjustment and trade liberalisation are doomed to failure.

ZIMBABWE’S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
Presentation arranged by K P M G Peat Marwick : Bulawayo

INTRODUCTION
I have entitled my talk today “Economic Liberalisation: Political Protectionism”. My thesis is that the success of structural adjustment, trade liberalisation and the economy generally will, in the long term, stand or fall on the degree of genuine democracy brought to Zimbabwe. It is trite that economies have only been successful where they have operated in an environment of genuine democracy. As we consider Zimbabwe’s economic outlook I believe that it is imperative that we consider whether Government is committed to political liberalisation as well as economic liberalisation. If Government is not committed to this then I believe that structural adjustment and trade liberalisation will not work in the long term.

How do we assess Government’s intentions regarding political liberalisation? Looking back on the last l3 months or so there is a bewildering array of new legislation and policies introduced by Government. The last year has seen the publication of Government’s plans for trade liberalisation and structural adjustment and a general loosening of controls of the economy, the lifting of the State of Emergency, the September l990 decision of the ZANU PF Central Committee that it would not legislate a one-party state but instead would “organise and mobilise the people” to support the idea, the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act, the National Council for Higher Education Act, the Constitutional Amendments and the Ministry of Political Affairs Vote. I use the word bewildering because some of the policies are progressive and yet some are retrogressive.

It appears as if Government is loosening up. Certainly as far as the economy is concerned the loosening of controls on the economy and the abandoning of socialism mark a “U” turn. Likewise the lifting of the State of Emergency and the decision not to legislate a one party state at first glance appears as if Government is interested in political liberalisation and democracy. The question has to be asked though in view of the retrogressive steps: ” what is Government’s real agenda?”.

2. Why all the changes?

Another question which needs to be asked is why has there been such a barrage of changes to policy and legislation in such a short space of time? There are the obvious answers: that the economy was stagnating, that South Africa is just about to come on to the open market and that the winds of political change sweeping through Eastern Europe and Africa have had an effect. Whilst I believe that these factors have contributed to the changes I believe that one should not ignore the fact that the result of the l990 General Election has had a major impact on Government. It is pertinent to note that all of the changes I mentioned earlier have happened since the March l990 election.

3. Elections

For all Government’s bluster after the l990 elections, that it was a landslide victory etc, the fact is that in their terms they took a hammering. Minister Zvobgo, shortly before the election, boasted to the BBC that ZANU PF would win every single seat, many opposition candidates would lose their deposits and that the people of Zimbabwe would overwhelmingly show that ZANU PF was the only political force. Minister Zvobgo was made to eat his words. The facts of the elections are that there were some 4,6 million people registered to vote, less than half the people eligible to vote went to the polls, Government was forced to add one day to the voting and throw the voting open to anyone who prove identity and place of residence. Furthermore of the votes cast there were l38 865 spoilt ballot papers and 396 l08 for opposition parties. When you add these spoilt ballot papers to the votes for opposition parties and the 2 million or so people who did not vote at all it is clear that it was a pyrrhic victory. Of great concern to ZANU PF must be the fact that the opposition got a tremendous amount of support in urban areas and that young people generally voted against Government.

The point I wish to make is that ZANU PF knew after the l990 elections that its political fortunes were sliding and that it could well be in for a lot of trouble in the next general election. I believe that it is important to consider all the changes to legislation and Government policies in that light. I believe that what Government has in effect done is decided on twin policies namely, firstly, the abandonment of socialism in a bid to boost the economy, create jobs and thus satisfy the aspirations of the young unemployed and, secondly, to isolate political opposition (in the wider sense of the phrase) without losing too many friends in the process amongst the donor community and western governments. If indeed this is Government’s policy I believe that the long term future of the economy is bleak as I do not believe that economic liberalisation and political protectionism are mutually compatible. But is there any truth in my theory that it is Government’s intention to embark upon a policy of political protectionism?

4. Opposition

What is the political opposition in Zimbabwe (using the wider sense of that phrase) as far as ZANU PF is concerned? I believe that it perceives three threats to its political powerbase, namely the student and intellectual community, the judiciary and opposition political parties. Whites and the business community generally I do not think are perceived as a threat by Government. I propose to look at these three groupings of political opposition and analyse what Government’s policy has been towards them since the March l990 elections.

l. Students/Academic Community
You will have read in the papers this past week about the boycott of classes by University of Zimbabwe students. The various clashes between Government and the student community have been well documented since the students first protested against corruption in September l989. Since that time the relationship between Government and University of Zimbabwe students has deteriorated steadily.

However towards the end of last year Government rushed through Parliament the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act, l990. The responsible Minister, The Honourable David Karimanzira, Minister of State for Higher Education stated in Parliament on the 25th October l990, “we are not eroding at all the autonomy of the University.” The effect of the legislation however has been to give the Minister (and therefore the President and Government) personal control of 65% of the University Council for which the quorum is 50%. University representation in the 43 seat Council now totals l3 compared to the 26 direct Ministerial appointments. The effect of this legislation is that if for example the Vice Chancellor refused to say take the “Ministers advice” on suspending staff from duty or prohibiting students from attending lectures or debarring anyone from part of the campus, a new Council directly under control of the Minister could terminate the Vice Chancellor’s contract (or any other member for that matter) and replace him with a Presidential appointee, who would be wise (concerning his own interests) to do what the Government wants.

Closely following on the heels of the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Act, l990, was the National Council of Higher Education Act which establishes a Council with the large majority of Ministerial appointees charged with, amongst other things, regulating “common student admission procedures”, “maintaining appropriate standards in regard to teachers”, and “to revoke the governing charters of Universities”. The academic community certainly believe that through this Act the “State intends to deprive the University of Zimbabwe of all independent control over who it admits, what and how teachers examine, and the standards of attainment to be applied”. I point out that the measures contravene directly the World University Services l988 Lima Declaration on Academic Freedom and the autonomy of the institutions of higher education.

Despite their statements that they are not eroding the autonomy of the University Government’s intention is quite clear. The student and academic community’s outspokenness has been an embarrassment and a very grave threat to their political survival. Both Acts are simply designed to control the University and the student community in an effort to suppress freedom of thought. Of great concern is that the students’ original grievances, such as the concern about corruption, are by and large valid and demand attention.

2. The Judiciary
The Constitutional Amendment Act passed at the end of last year has attracted a lot of attention and you are all no doubt fully aware of its provisions. Sadly however I believe that both the business community and to a lesser extent the international community have concentrated on the amendment to section l6 of the constitution that is the changes regarding the compulsory acquisition of land.

The business and farming community have not shown any concern about the changes to section l5 of the Constitution, that is the provisions relating to whipping and hanging. In doing so I believe that many Zimbabweans have totally overlooked or ignored the deeper intention of the Act.

I would like to discuss four aspects of the Amendment Act, namely the amendment to section l5 allowing for the whipping of juveniles, the amendment to section l5 declaring that hanging is a constitutional form of punishment, the amendment to section l6 denying the courts the right to review the price offered following compulsory acquisition of land and the provision which reaffirms the independence of the judiciary. Many of us in the human rights and legal fraternity battled at first to understand why Government was introducing the changes. The fundamental change to section l6, that is giving Government greater powers to acquire land, was not puzzling. It has always been on Government’s agenda and there are obvious political and moral reasons for wanting to redistribute land. The rest of the changes however are, at first glance, deeply puzzling and I will show you why:

(a) The Whipping Provision
The amendment to section l5 declaring that whipping of juveniles is not inhuman punishment effectively reversed a Supreme Court decision The State v A Juvenile S64 which was handed down in l989. This decision followed an l987 Supreme Court decision (Ncube, Tshuma and Ndlovu v The State) which had declared that whipping of adults was both inhuman and degrading. Immediately after the l989 decision the Government repealed the provisions contained in the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act which allowed for whipping as a punishment. When the President opened the Judicial Colloquium held by the Commonwealth Secretariat in Harare on the l9th April l989, he stated “I am proud to report … that our judiciary has not failed” (in the difficult task of interpreting constitutional guarantees of fundamental rights and freedoms). He referred to the Ncube, Tshuma and Ndlovu case and quoted that the punishment of whipping was “in its very nature both inhuman and degrading”. He went on to say that the decision rectified and changed a situation that had obtained in our system of justice for many years. It was therefore very difficult at first to understand why Government had suddenly reversed its thinking on the subject. Government offered the lame excuse that there were no alternatives to whipping and yet it knew that the Law Development Commission had done considerable work on the subject and was actively looking at various alternatives.

(b) Hanging Provision
The amendment to section l5 declaring that hanging is a constitutional form of punishment effectively forestalled a decision by the Supreme Court being made on a test case which was to be heard in November l990 regarding the constitutionality of hanging. It goes without saying that the Supreme Court had not made up its mind on the matter as the case was still to be argued.

What was puzzling about the amendment was that the President himself is publicly on record as having stated that he is against the death penalty. Furthermore with the prospect of peaceful change in South Africa, the end of South Africa’s policy of destabilisation and the sealing the Unity Accord there were few political arguments for the retention of hanging. Even if the Supreme Court had ruled that hanging was a cruel and inhuman punishment that decision would not have signalled the end of the death penalty as Government could have resorted to the electrical chair or other means to effect the death sentence. It is not even as if the retention of the death penalty was high on the political agenda. It simply is not an issue amongst the Zimbabwean public in the same way it is in the United States of America and Government could have allowed the provision to go through either way without suffering politically for it. On the face of it then the decision to forestall the Supreme Court hearing of the case was baffling.

(c) Review of Compulsory Acquisition of Land
One of the amendments to the section l6 as you know removed the right of the courts to review whether any payment made following the compulsory acquisition of land was fair. The former Chief Justice had this to say about the amendment in December l990: “(It) flies in the face of all accepted norms of modern society and law. It effectively takes Zimbabwe back to the last century”.

Why did Government change this aspect of the Constitution? The President is on record of saying that he is not prepared to have the Courts delay the acquisition of land. Mr Mangwende when questioned on the subject at a recent farmers’ meeting replied by saying he could not understand why farmers wanted the provision as they had never used it in the past. His statement however begs the question: If it has never been used in the past then why has Government got any cause to worry about it being used in the future?

Likewise given the fact that Government has taken years and years to settle people on land already acquired by it, one wonders why Government is suddenly so anxious not to have the matter delayed for a few months to enable the courts to review the fairness of any decision. Even more puzzling is the fact that our courts have been entirely reasonable as far as Government is concerned in the past regarding the determination of fair compensation and there is nothing to suggest that the courts would be anything but reasonable and fair in their determinations in future. Indeed the retention of review would not in any way set back or jeopardise Government’s plans to compulsorily acquire land. The political issue that Government had to address was the principle of redistributing land equitably not the mechanics of how it could be done equitably. I would suggest that people in rural areas would not object at all if the courts were to have a say in reviewing Government’s decisions. This decision by Government was accordingly puzzling.

(d) Reaffirmation of Court’s Independence
The final aspect of the Constitution Amendment Bill that needs a look at is the silly clause which reaffirms the Court’s independence. This clause I believe should be viewed in the same light as Minister Karimanzira’s statement that the University of Zimbabwe Act “will not erode at all the autonomy of the University”. As I will point out just now the very effect of the abovementioned three changes is to reduce the court’s independence and power and this clause must simply be seen as a rather crude attempt to disguise the actual purpose of the constitutional amendments.

There are further disturbing policies which directly affect the courts. The conditions of service of our High Court and Supreme Court Judges are, relatively speaking, and require urgent attention. As a result a Judge (Mr Justice Sansole) resigned last year. Furthermore as a result I believe that Government has found it difficult to attract people of suitable calibre to the bench. The courts themselves are obviously not a priority as far as Government is concerned. It is interesting to note that whilst Government is prepared to spend $25 million in sprucing up Victoria Falls for one week and it cannot spend a few thousand dollars to give the High Court of Bulawayo a badly needed coat of paint. Next time you pass the High Court have a look, you will see that the shutters are falling off their hinges and that it is badly in need of a coat of paint and general renovation. I am also aware that our Supreme Court Judges have not until now had a single word processor amongst them. Indeed they have had to approach the Germans and Americans to supply this necessary equipment which, I am pleased to report is now being supplied. The point is however that Government itself does not see our Judges and the courts themselves as a high priority.

I would therefore suggest that one needs to see through the Constitution Amendment Act and to see the amendments to section l5 and section l6 (insofar as the latter refers to the court’s power to review) are simply designed to reduce the power of the Supreme Court, to diminish the respect in which it is held and to diminish the respect for the Bill of Rights. The budgetary policies have had a general effect of undermining the courts. The only way to understand the puzzle created by amendments is to realise that Government purpose is to undermine a source of political opposition and thus strengthen its own position. The Supreme Court of Zimbabwe has a proud history of the last few years of being fiercely independent. It has been praised internationally because it has not kowtowed to Government. It is no secret that Government has resented many of the decisions handed down by the Supreme Court as those decisions have effectively restrained Government from acting in the way it wanted to.

3. OPPOSITION PARTIES
The third source of political opposition is the obvious one, opposition political parties. As I have already indicated in September last year the l60 member ZANU PF Central Committee decided that the Government would not legislate a one party state but instead would “organise and mobilise the people” to support the idea. Many people have interpreted this decision as a decision to take the one party state ideal off Government’s agenda but I believe that that is wrong.

In last year’s budget the Ministry of Political Affairs was allocated $50 million. To get this vote in perspective one needs to compare it to the budget allocated to the whole of the National Parks which was $27 million. Whilst $20 million of the $50 million is allocated to National Service I certainly haven’t heard anything further regarding National Service and it will be interesting to see in July how that money has been spent. It will also be interesting to see whether the Ministry of Political Affairs gets an increase in the coming budget. In the July budget last year Government stated that it was committed to reducing the number of civil servants. However it is a well known fact that all ZANU PF functionaries are now in effect civil servants and paid by the Salary Service Bureau. I also believe all the new vehicles purchased by ZANU PF were also paid for by the Ministry of Political Affairs although on this I stand to be corrected. The Ministry of Political Affairs is now located in the ZANU PF Headquarters and when Senior Minister Mutasa defended his vote in Parliament he confirmed that the money was only for ZANU PF. This policy has not changed since the September decision of the Central Committee and continues, in my opinion, to be a clear violation of section 23 of the Constitution (which outlaws discrimination) and section 2l of the Constitution (which outlaws the hindering of citizens’ rights to free political association).

It is also common knowledge that opposition parties (such as they are) are still harassed and find it very difficult to operate in Zimbabwe. Government’s control of the media is just as tight as it has ever been.

The point I wish to make is that despite the September decision I believe that Government’s agenda has not changed. It simply recognised that it was not opportune to introduce a one party state and that it would have to be satisfied with doing everything in its power to maintain a de facto one party state.

4. WHY ALL THE CONTROLS?
From the above I believe that it is clear that Government has actively embarked on a policy of political protectionism since the March l990 elections. It has tried to disguise its policy. As indicated above it has tried to state that it is not eroding the autonomy of the University. It has cleverly used an emotive issue (the redistribution of land) to undermine the Supreme Court and despite its public disavowal of its intention to legislate a one party state it has done everything in its power to keep that objective fully on track. But why all these controls? Why is Government almost paranoiac about destroying any potential opposition to it? There is the obvious answer that no Government wants to be voted out of power. That of course is true but I believe that there is another more compelling reason and that is that Government cannot actually afford to lose power now. The statement of Lord Acton that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is already a reality in Zimbabwe. From the evidence before me as a lawyer I believe I can say with confidence that corruption within Government is rife and that the Willowvale Scandal pales into insignificance compared to the level of corruption now. It is important to remember that the original confrontation with students started when they appealed to the President to deal with corruption. Government cannot afford to have students who can motivate and articulate concerns. Government cannot afford to have a powerful court that will expose and punish corruption at every turn. But most important individuals in Government cannot afford the possibility of losing power and the resultant commissions of enquiry which will expose their corruption. The reason I have introduced the topic of corruption at this stage in my thesis is simply to state that as long as corruption abounds within Government I do not believe that there is any prospect of Government changing its policy of political protectionism.

5. ECONOMIC LIBRALISATION AND POLITICAL PROTECTIONISM ARE NOT MUTUALLY COMPATIBLE
It goes without saying that trade liberalisation and structural adjustment cannot work in a vacuum. The experience of the world is that genuine democracies have the strongest economies. Economic liberalisation will not work in Zimbabwe unless Government abandons its policy of political protectionism. I need to stress that I am not saying that economic liberalisation will not work in Zimbabwe. I am simply saying that unless Government is encouraged to bring about genuine democracy in Zimbabwe and liberalise the political environment the long-term economic outlook for Zimbabwe will be bleak. If we just consider some aspects of Zimbabwean society that I have mentioned above you will see what I mean.

(a) Students/University
Any expanding economy relies on strong universities which in turn are producing innovative thinkers. Government’s attempt to control universities will inevitably lead to a further brain drain, not just of university academics but of bright newly qualified students who will be attracted elsewhere. Assuming that South Africa comes on line in a few years there will be the further threat of a tremendous brain drain given the unskilled, uneducated black populations and needs of that country. Government and the business community needs to be doing everything in its power to retain our academics and graduates at this time as there will be a myriad of attractions in South Africa shortly.

(b) Court System
The Supreme Court has been one of the main attractions of Zimbabwe as far as the western political community is concerned. Zimbabwe is respected at present as having a strong independent judiciary and this in turn has created the image that Zimbabwe is a democratic state and therefore a good place to do business in. Any undermining of the judiciary will inevitably affect not only the internal economy but also the confidence of future investors.

(c) Free flow of Information
Government’s desire to retain control and not to allow any other political party or think group to come to the fore inevitably stems the free flow of information in the country. Government’s continued control of the media will continue to have a negative impact on our economy. It goes without saying that the free flow of information is vital to a healthy economy. Related to this is the spectre of corruption continuing. Without the free flow of information even if controls in the economy are relaxed corruption will continue to flourish. Corruption can only be stifled if there is a free flow of information, through ongoing investigative reporting which exposes corruption. I believe that corruption is an epidemic which if allowed to continue will undermine the entire economy and it is therefore imperative, if trade liberalisation is to work, that it be brought under control.

6. WHAT CAN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY DO?
I believe that one of the dangers facing Zimbabwe is that the business and commercial sector generally has not fully grasped that economic liberalisation and political protectionism cannot work together. No doubt there are many who have grasped the reality of the situation and take a cynical short term view of things. Primarily because of all the controls in the economy today business has been forced to collaborate in corrupt and extortionate acts. In order to survive most businesses in Zimbabwe have had to collaborate in corrupt practices. Indeed many businesses have not just survived while collaborating in the practices but have actually prospered and because of this may think that economic liberalisation can prosper in an environment of political protectionism.

I believe that this is a very short term view. The history of Africa and other developing countries shows that undemocratic Governments are inevitably followed by increased corruption, increased inflation and eventual economic decline. The only people who flourish are the Government Ministers, the externally based shareholders of multi-nationals and the privileged few Chief Executives of locally based companies who have managed to illegally obtain foreign currency. Because of this I believe that if we are genuinely interested in a future in Zimbabwe and a sound economic outlook we need to take a serious long term view and consider what we as business people can do to ensure that economic liberalisation is accompanied by political liberalisation. With this in mind I would conclude with the following suggestions:

(a) Without businesses’ collaboration in corrupt practices corruption cannot flourish. I believe that the time has come for businesses in Zimbabwe to decide jointly that they are not going to tolerate any form of corruption or extortion. I recognise that it will be difficult for business to implement any such policies but I believe that it is absolutely vital to the future of Zimbabwe’s economy. I need not go into detail as you no doubt are all aware of the problems you face in this regard in your own businesses.

(b) The business community needs to realise that its silence on human rights issues and collaboration with one political party will ultimately undermine investment confidence even though these policies may be prudent in the short term. Traditionally the business and commercial sector in this country has kept quiet as far as all sorts of human rights abuses are concerned. This problem has been compounded by the fact that business has collaborated with ZANU PF on a number of business ventures. Whilst I hold no brief for any other political parties I believe that the business community undermines true democracy by supporting a sole political party. I believe that joint business ventures with ZANU PF and acts such as donating to the ZANU PF Building Fund not only undermines the concept of multi-party democracy but is also flawed business practice in the long-term. The question needs to be asked: “What will happen to my business if ZANU PF loses power in five years time given my collaboration with that party?”

(c) The business community needs to make a bold and public stand that if trade liberalisation and structural adjustment are not accompanied by political reform the economy is doomed. Government needs to be told in no uncertain terms that its actions in undermining the Universities, the courts and opposition political parties will not be tolerated by business. Business furthermore needs to publicly support university academics, the judiciary, the legal profession and credible human rights organisations all of whom are taking a strong stand on the issue.

I believe that unless these points are seriously considered by the business community a bright economic future in Zimbabwe will at the least be severely retarded if not reversed completely.

DAVID COLTART
6TH MAY l99l