The strike by medical doctors and nurses in Zimbabwe is crippling the public health sector, at a time when the poor cannot afford high fees that private hospitals charge. Monica Ngwere, an asthmatic patient from Shurugwi in central Zimbabwe, was last week turned away from Parirenyatwa Referral Hospital in the capital, Harare.

To mark International Human Rights Day (10 December) and in solidarity with our sisters and brothers from Zimbabwe, CIVICUS together with Amnesty International has launched a petition campaign to protest the systematic violation of fundamental rights in Zimbabwe, and in particular, the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, association and assembly. This petition will be submitted to the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Heads of State and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Geneva.

The Civil Society Watch team of CIVICUS invites you to take action by signing the petition below, listing your name and country of origin.

As a sign of your commitment to this campaign, please forward it to as many people as possible. The campaign ends on 16 December 2003. If you receive this email by that date or if you are number 500 on the list, please send it back to [email][email protected]

Do not miss this opportunity, it will make a difference and you will be part of it.

PUT AN END TO REPRESSION IN ZIMBABWE

We would like to express our serious concern about the continued violations of civil liberties in Zimbabwe, particularly against the freedom of opinion and expression, association and assembly. The systematic and grave attacks on civil society organisations caused by government policy have been escalating since the parliamentary and presidential elections held in 2000 and 2002. The government has introduced restrictive legislation, outlawing dissent and placing fundamental rights under siege. All opposition and criticism have been blanketed as criminal and a threat to the state. The legislation has clamped down on any activities that might promote pluralist views, closing spaces for development and severely impacting civil society. As a result, many organisations have either closed down or are treading cautiously.

We call upon the United Nations (UN) and the governments of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) to address the government of Zimbabwe to immediately cease all intimidation, arbitrary arrests and torture of members of the civil society and to immediately repeal and/or amend progressively all unjust and repressive laws which contravenes international and national law and which are incompatible with principles and provisions enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and other international human rights instruments; in particular the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), the Broadcasting Services Act (BSA), the Private Voluntary Organisations Act (PVO), the Miscellaneous Offences Act, and other pieces of restrictive legislation.

A summit of the 54-nation Commonwealth of nations - representing nearly one-third of the world's six billion people - ended in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, with western nations blaming Zimbabwe for its own growing international isolation. But President Robert Mugabe divided the Commonwealth as much from the outside as from within, as members bickered over Mr Mugabe's quitting the gentlemen's club. Zimbabwe was suspended from the Commonwealth last year after an election widely seen as flawed. Mr Mugabe had earlier threatened to leave the organisation if the country was not "treated as an equal".

It requires a great deal of political clarity to sort the issues on Zimbabwe and a short message cannot do it in depth. Nevertheless I think it is important to make some clarifications on the question of race and criticism of President Mugabe.

1. It is not proper or correct to allege/imply that [all] black Mugabe critics are in effect supporters of white supremacy.

2. I for example could never be accused of being such a person. I do not need to go into detail but suffice to say that all my life, I have fought and will continue to fight against all manifestations of racism.

3. I have also lived under [and suffered the consequences of the repression of] another undemocratic African government that did not have a land controversy at hand to blur the issues. I have had the unfortunate benefit of seeing journalist colleagues disappear, be jailed, tortured, killed and hounded in to exile in many countries. None of them were supporters of white supremacy. [Ironically, ‘western’ interests supported some of such dictators such as Mobutu of Zaire especially during the cold war]

4. Yes there is an overwhelming need for land reform and redistribution not just in Zimbabwe but also across southern Africa. In truth it should have been done - not in the last two years - but long ago. It can also be done in a civil way without inciting lynch mobs to murder people.

5. The issues in Zimbabwe are not just about minority whites owning the most land and blacks not having access to land. It is also about democracy and human rights, which are universal concepts. Black people are dying of AIDS and Famine in Zimbabwe.

6. Yes there is a reasonable element of racism in the support for anti-Mugabe forces by some white people and western interests. Such interests are clearly identifiable and there is no need to mix them up with those that don’t share their interests. [Descendants of colonial settlers for instance would be happy to hang on to their land under any circumstances and would never have spoken up for human rights of Africans were they not under attack themselves.]

7. While it is true that white people that have not suffered the consequences of slavery, colonialism, apartheid or racism do not appreciate the extent to which race may colour their perception of issues and how this in turn colours how their actions and policies are perceived by Africans. The truth is that not all white people are racists. Some have even fought and died for the anti-apartheid, anti-colonial struggles and the civil rights movement etc.

8. Mugabe need not have waited till he faced growing political opposition to sort the land problem. He could have done it when there was little or no opposition anytime in the previous 20 years. While it is true that some interests will rather ruin Zimbabwe than see land reform, the truth is that Mugabe’s policies are also undermining the Zimbabwean economy.

9. It may seem attractive to some people to imply that because white colonial settlers murdered millions of Africans and violently seized land, the same should be done to them. However although ‘revenge’ may give immense satisfaction, this simply reduces the perpetrators to the same bestial mentality that generated colonial murder and exploitation. [There will never be enough space here to discuss the place of revenge and vengeance in the human psyche and society, if it is appropriate or not, to what extent is it reasonable and so forth.] More importantly if land reform is the objective, it can be done without mayhem. Prior to the last elections Zanu-PF had enough political strength to ensure land reform in a constitutional manner. It is not impossible to do so even now.

10. Finally and to reiterate: It is possible to campaign for democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa without being a supporter of white supremacy. Note also that:
(1) If you fight the beneficiaries of undemocratic policies by undemocratic means, you loose your legitimacy and moral authority especially if you play on a legitimate cause to selfishly hang on to power and the fall out is that thousands of innocent people suffer the consequences. (2) To campaign for democracy, free expression and other rights in Zimbabwe is not an endorsement of the MDC or its policies.

The fallouts of slavery, colonialism, apartheid and more sophisticated modern day exploitation of Africa can only be solved by more democracy and more human rights, not less. Some racists that were never and never will be democrats will exploit circumstances to hang on to their land. However in the long run, a genuinely democratic Zimbabwe will not accept minority control of majority land, but will address the problem in a non-violent and democratic manner.

Black people around the world are undermined by the black critics of Mugabe. The black critics are supporting white supremacist beliefs that black people:
i. should be denied rights and economic benefits enjoyed by white people;
ii. should support white leadership because of their inferiority.

In general, the Zimbabwean issue is about whether black people can limit the selfish interference of Western elites in their own countries. In particular, it is about black people restoring ownership of their land from white beneficiaries of colonialism. This is a southern African problem because in the region the descendants of colonisers own most of the best land.

Black people should not judge Mugabe's black critics on the basis of their opposition to his violence and 'dictatorship'. The real issue is their relationship to the white supremacist campaign to remove a leader who is in opposition to it. The critics are dangerous because they refuse to openly oppose white supremacy.

Mugabe's violence is not the issue. Violence was needed to remove colonialism in Zimbabwe. No doubt, there were human rights abuses during the struggle. Yet, a key objective was black land ownership. Violence is a natural outcome of white farmers refusing to give up land their descendants stole through violence. The MDC has no problem with violence. But, in no way would British people accept most of their land being owned by non-whites.

Democracy is not the issue. Reporting on the 2002 Presidential elections, the Tanzanian Observer Mission concluded: "The results of the election are the wishes of the people of Zimbabwe." A similar conclusion was reached by missions from Mozambique, Russia, the former OAU, China, Zambia, Malawi, the December 12th Movement from the US, Iran, and Japan. The two missions most quoted in the West were from a Commonwealth group, dominated by white nations, and from opposition MPs in southern Africa, which was funded by the anti-Mugabe European Union. Mugabe's black critics use them as the basis of their 'Mugabe stole the elections' claim.

What is the issue? A massive, covert and overt regime change campaign by white elites. Is it because they love human rights and democracy? This group is lead by Zimbabwean white farmers, white South Africans, right-wing Western politicians and business leaders. This group has the support or acquiescence of white liberals. Some white liberals are fooled. Yet, the politics of the leaders are white supremacist. They share the politics of people who actively opposed the Zimbabwean national struggle.

A network of organisations are leading this campaign. It includes: Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, the Westminster Democracy Foundation, the European Union's Africa Working Group, the London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs, and the US State Department. There are also, of course, Western governments. Their methods are:
- the creation of and financial support of opposition groups
- use of money to turn civil groups into oppositional groups
- use of violence to destablise Zimbabwe and provoke the Government
- crippling the Zimbabwean economy
- a media campaign
- threatening black countries with the withdrawal of financial support.

On 4 August 2002, The Sunday Mail in Harare reported: "…the British government had funded the opposition party to the tune of nearly Zim$10m in the run-up to the parliamentary elections. The opposition party has also confirmed this." The report reveals that the MDC receives financial backing from Germany, Holland, Denmark and the US.

In other words, Western elites have created and funded opposition groups and have sought to undermine the economy to produce more support from Zimbabweans. These elites are engaging in foreign activity that would be unacceptable in their own countries.

The strategy of the black critics is to blind people to any other issue other than Mugabe's human rights abuses. Yet, these are abuses they deliberately provoke. The most charitable view of them is that they are suffering so much from those abuses that they are blind to or do not consider the white supremacist agenda of their allies. But this makes them dangerous fools.
It could be that they are aware of the white supremacy of their allies and have struck a faustian deal them to get rid of someone who is far worse. But if Mugabe were that bad there would be former members of the War Veterans fighting alongside former members of the Rhodesian army to get rid of the 'brutal dictator'.

It could be that their actual alliance is with white liberals. But clearly white supremacists are using white liberals as a respectable front for their colonial ambitions. The black critics still ought to be deliberately distancing themselves from the white supremacists. Yet, none of this is a satisfactory explanation. The reality is that the leaders of the black critics are paid hands of racists. It is the continuing silence of the so-called opposition that proves their complicity in white supremacy.

The announcement by Zimbabwean government officials that they would pull the country out of the Commonwealth following their continued suspension raised the stakes dramatically, ironically on the eve of International Human Rights Day on December 10. This has serious implications for the organisations capacity to promote human rights in Africa and amongst non-African countries.

If the commonwealth takes no further action, it would appear all a country has to do to side step its authority is to withdraw from it. If however it decides to take further steps against the Zimbabwean government as provided for in its Harare principles, it risks widening the split in the organisation and triggering a spiralling crisis. It is significant that the 14 member Southern African Development Community (SADC) issued a statement on the 10th of December expressing its "displeasure and deep concern with the dismissive, intolerant and rigid attitude displayed by some (Commonwealth) members." The organisation called for “engagement” and “not isolation” saying, isolation “will do nothing to assist the people of Zimbabwe overcome their difficulties".

In this respect, a strong complicating factor is the apparent double standards exhibited by some ‘western’ governments. The idea for instance that any government could float the idea of relaxing sanctions on, or even ending the suspension of Pakistan while simultaneously calling for stiffer penalties against Zimbabwe at the Commonwealth may yet rank in history alongside the worlds biggest foreign policy blunders. Some Asian countries especially India, which is a traditional opponent of Pakistan, would also have watched this closely. Alluding to this David Ellery, writing in the letters pages of the UK Guardian of December 9 2003, stated, “Mugabe is missing a trick. All he has to do is offer to send a token force to Iraq and Blair and Bush will be praising him as a bulwark of democracy and human rights.”

This double standards and what is seen by some African governments as covert support by some ‘western’ governments for opposition interests opposed to land reform has not only strengthened Mugabe’s resolve, it has mobilised his party behind him as well as those African governments that share a similar colonial past.

However, it is important to remember that the central problem as regards Zimbabwe is not the resolution of the problems in the Commonwealth. The central problem is the resolution of the crisis in Zimbabwe. The contradictions in the Commonwealth have long existed and Zimbabwe has only brought them to the fore again.

To many around the world [including within the Commonwealth], the crisis has several sides to it. To some the question is “are you for land reform or not?” To others the question is “are you for democracy and human rights or not?”

These questions have been shaped by the perceptions that to be strongly for land reform suggests uncritical support for the Mugabe government and its policies and that to be strongly for human rights and democracy suggests an uncritical alliance with ‘white farmers’, ‘former colonial masters’ or the opposition as currently represented by the MDC.

This conundrum confirms that as is sometimes the case, the perception is as important as the reality. In this case, key factors behind these perceptions are race and political convenience.

Conflicts that are complicated by race and ideology are often tricky waters to navigate. It is necessary therefore to be courageous and unambiguous in standing by principles that will facilitate consistency. In the case of Zimbabwe, it is time for courage.
It is therefore possible in Zimbabwe and elsewhere, to stand:
- For democracy;
- For the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, association, assembly, and political participation;
- Media freedom;
- And simultaneously recognise the urgent need for land reform and redistribution to correct the injustices of colonialism based on racist oppression, discrimination and exploitation.

It is also principled to stand for correction of colonial injustices and simultaneously demand that the need for land reform and redistribution should not and cannot be used as an excuse or cover to sanction violence and murder. Land reform can and must be carried out but only on a constitutional and equitable basis. This should have been the position of the Commonwealth; this should be the position of the African Union and of the SADC.

It is important to sort out the Zimbabwean crisis now on the basis of clear and unambiguous democratic principles not just for Zimbabwe, but also because the land problem may rear its head in South Africa sooner than many think. If it manifests in South Africa on the same basis as it has in Zimbabwe then the legacy of apartheid, the unresolved issues around race, the economic divide, the sharper role of ideology in the liberation struggle and the size of the country and economy – all will combine to make it far worse than it could ever be in Zimbabwe.

Africans and democratic minded African leaders and governments must not allow perceived ‘western’ double standards to distort their views on democracy. It is possible for President Mugabe to be a former liberation fighter, to have been once democratically elected and to now pursue undemocratic policies. Violence is not necessary to ensure land reform in Zimbabwe. It is also not justified by the fact that colonial settlers used violence and murder to illegitimately seize land from Africans. Had it been determined to do so before it started facing political problems, the Mugabe government could have enforced land reform in a constitutional, legitimate and equitable way at any time in the last two decades.

For this reason African rights campaigners must be steadfast on the question of rights and democracy in Zimbabwe and appreciate the fact that support for democratic principles in Zimbabwe is not the same as endorsing the policies of “western interests”, or any opposition parties or organisations. International rights campaigners and non-African governments must also be clear and unequivocal that in addition to campaigning for democratic principles that they stand for land reform and redistribution as a step towards correcting the injustices of Zimbabwe’s colonial past. If not, they risk becoming part of the problem instead of contributing to the solution.

Given the opportunity, the people of Zimbabwe will make the right choices and these choices will in the long run be consistent with democratic principles, human rights and correcting the injustices of the colonial past on a constitutional, just and equitable basis.

*Sankore is a member of the Pambazuka Editorial Board and is Coordinator of CREDO for Freedom of Expression and Associated Rights, which works on rights issues in Africa. CREDO can be contacted via Pambazuka News or via [email][email protected]

* See the Letters and Comments section of Pambazuka News for letters and debate on Zimbabwe.

The Zimbabwe government is planning to introduce new measures to police all broadcast and Internet based information circulation in a bid to control the flow of information in the country, The Daily Mirror reported on 9 December 2003. The paper says that this move, if successfully completed means that the government will be able to monitor individual information, messages and letters leading to the arrest of all those involved in circulating information that the government says undermines the sovereignty of the country.

The governments of Rwanda and Zimbabwe and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) signed a tripartite agreement on Tuesday on the voluntary repatriation of an estimated 350 Rwandan refugees in Zimbabwe. Signing the agreement in the Rwandan capital, Kigali, the parties pledged to support the repatriation that is scheduled to begin in mid-2004. They assigned each other roles and responsibilities to ensure the success of the process.

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) on Tuesday voiced its concern over the Commonwealth's decision to maintain Zimbabwe's suspension, the South African news agency SAPA reported.
Related Link:
* Mugabe on the war path
http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=21464

The recent ZANU PF annual people’s conference in sleepy Masvingo town turned out to be a mere talk shop as had been widely expected, with ruling party officials ducking critical issues that have made Zimbabwe the focal point in the world. Apart from taking the regrettable step of hurriedly withdrawing Zimbabwe’s membership from the grouping of former British colonies - the Commonwealth - the lavish conference was void of substance despite the gloomy socio-economic situation that demands urgent action. With President Mugabe publicly declaring he was there to stay and his key ZANU PF stalwarts lacking new ideas on how to deal with pressing issues, the indaba degenerated into a sloganeering and war dance showcase.

The Zimbabwe government's human rights record is worsening and lawyers are struggling to cope with a growing caseload of rights abuses, a local lawyers' group said at a protest march by about 70 lawyers and law students to mark International Human Rights Day. Nokuthula Moyo, the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights chairperson, said dozens of her colleagues had over the past year defended people arrested during political protests against President Robert Mugabe's government. Moyo said some lawyers had been harassed or assaulted by police while performing their duties. "In the worsening human rights climate, tremendous demands have been made on human rights lawyers," she said. Meanwhile, in a week during which Zimbabwe pulled out of the Commonwealth following its continued suspension from the organisation, Movement for Democratic Change leader Morgan Tsvangirai, in his end of year message to the people of Zimbabwe, warned of rolling mass action in 2004. Read the full message and further MDC statements on the economic and food situation in the country by clicking on URL below.

Beatrice Mtetwa, a fearless Zimbabwean lawyer who has defended those arrested by President Robert Mugabe's government was named Human Rights Lawyer of the Year this week. Judges at the Human Rights Awards in London paid tribute to her courage in fighting for human rights and press freedom in a dangerous country.

More than 1 000 Zimbabwean readers of the Daily News and its sister weekly, Daily News on Sunday, will next week petition the High Court under the Class Action Act to order the reopening of the two newspapers shut down by the government two months ago. At least 1 017 people from various parts of the country had by Tuesday this week appended their signatures to the petition that is being handled by human rights advocacy group, the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR).

On 30 November 2003, Bright Chibvuri, an editor for "The Worker" newspaper, was kidnapped by alleged Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) youths and state security agents in Kadoma, approximately 292 kilometres from the capital, Harare. The incident occurred while Chibvuri was covering a parliamentary by-election.

Since the closure of The Daily News, the government-controlled media have clearly demonstrated their capacity to omit and distort important news, and in the case of The Herald this week to deliberately publish falsehoods that misinform its readers, points out the Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe. While the world's news agencies reported on Tuesday November 25th that Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo had declared that Zimbabwe would not be invited to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Abuja, The Herald (26/11) stated that "Obasanjo reiterated yesterday that he was still to invite President Mugabe."

A task force has been established to assist the rapidly increasing number of street children in Zimbabwe's capital, Harare. Among the organisations involved in the task force are UNICEF, the Harare city council, the department of social services, Zimbabwe Republic Police, and various NGOs.

The demonstration was brutally put down. Police lashed out, their blows temporarily paralysing slower protesters who couldn't escape the random thrashing. Women were amongst those badly beaten during the demonstration, held in Zimbabwe's second-largest city Bulawayo, last Wednesday. Some were mid-afternoon shoppers who'd been scuttling between stores, searching for scarce commodities like bread to take home to their families. Several were unaware of the protest until it was too late, and they were caught on the wrong side of the police cordon.

Africans must become more active in campaigning for HIV/AIDS treatment initiatives in their communities. This was the key message emerging at a special discussion forum with Zackie Achmat, co-chair of the Treatment Action campaign, in Harare, Zimbabwe on Thursday, December 4, 2003. SAfAIDS (Southern Africa HIV/AIDS Information Dissemination Service) and HIVOS hosted the forum. The meeting was intended to be an opportunity for Zimbabweans to learn more about South Africa’s experiences in the treatment campaign and explore practicable solutions for the Zimbabwean situation.

Taking care of a person with HIV is not as an easy task. Yet, many people choose to travel the road alone because they fear stigmatisation from their families and communities. Too often, AIDS is wrongly viewed as a shameful condition. This perception can lead even the most dedicated caregivers to remain silent or to shun family members to avoid discrimination. Many Zimbabweans continue to suffer in silence without having help and support from those around them.

Laws that infringe freedom of expression have not been repealed but have become more repressive, violent commercial farm invasions continue and the government consistently undermines the rule of law, said a Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition statement issued shortly before the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Abuja, Nigeria. The URL below links to the full statement, to URL's to further stories regarding Zimbabwe, to a Political Violence Report for October from the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum and to a statement from the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights.