I have heard rumours of Members of Parliament who visit their constituencies only to campaign during elections. They are never seen, or heard of again. These are the same parliamentarians who last year refused to take vehicles from local company Willowvale Motor Industries – which could have used the boost in sales – and instead opted to import vehicles from various sources; no doubt duty free. This little exercise carried out in the name of ‘allowing our MPs to fulfil their duties’- one of which I presume is regularly visiting the people they represent – cost the taxpayer US6million.

At present 80% of our population is rural earning less than US$100 per month, well below the poverty datum line. It is this 80% of our population that was used to justify buying ‘all terrain’ vehicles for MPs. Meanwhile, the International Red Cross estimates that approximately a third of Zimbabwe’s population is in need of food aid.

With the Constitutional hullabaloo that is engulfing the nation our honourable parliamentarians are carrying out consultations with the people. Both Houses with a combined membership of 276 have adjourned to do their civic duty until mid June. Parliamentarians are being paid US$300 per day in addition to their regular government salaries and privileges.

Lets say that these consultations began after Easter. And let’s be generous and give our parliamentarians the weekends off. That would mean that they should be in consultations with us, ‘the people’, for approximately fifty-four days.

Now multiply 276 honourable members of parliament by 54 days living on 300 dollars a day . . .

Call me crazy, but that seems to be a hefty price to pay for the privilege of having my Member of Parliament give me what I hope will be a ‘non partisan’ explanation of constitutional issues. Even if taxpayers aren’t the ones to foot the bill for the consultations, surely the parliamentarians themselves should question their right to demand so much money. But I suppose that would suggest that our politicians are actually in politics to make a tangible change in Zimbabweans lives. Plainly speaking, they’re in politics because politics in Zimbabwe is a business. It has nothing to do with the electorate. Having an electorate simply legitimises the presence of white-collar criminals in parliament and government.

Unhu or ubuntu has become popular even informing the philosophy and values behind a free open source operating system. Sadly there are very few people who live this philosophy on a daily basis.

In a recent interview with Professor Mandivamba Rukuni. He described what motivated him to write his book Being Afrikan:

I realised, after having been highly educated and being in the development field, that not much of what I’ve achieved has really made a difference to the people that I serve. Most of the people in my extended family are still poor. I realised that it was a false progress, I’m a professor, but it’s only good for me. I realised that there’s no developed or advanced society in the world that achieved that status by abandoning their history, abandoning their culture and then borrowing somebody else’s as a basis for development.

He went to say that African culture is built on three pillars, the first of which is Ubuntu, or in Shona Unhu.

The philosophy of unhu or ubuntu is described in Shona by the saying munhu munhu nevanhu; or in Zulu umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu. The literal English translation is ‘A person is a person with other people’ or ‘I am because we are’.

In his book Hunhuism or Ubuntuism, co-authored with his wife Dr Tommie Marie Samkange, Zimbabwean historian and author Stanlake J.W. Samkange, highlighted the three maxims of unhu / ubuntu, namely:

1.    To be human is to affirm one’s humanity by recognizing the humanity of others and establishing respectful human relations with them.
2.    If and when one is faced with a decisive choice between wealth and the preservation of the life of another human being, then one should opt for the preservation of life
3.    The king owed his status, including all the powers associated with it, to the will of the people under him

Archbishop Desmond Tutu described unhu or ubuntu as:

A person with Ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished, when others are tortured or oppressed. Ubuntu speaks particularly about the fact that you can’t exist as a human being in isolation. It speaks about our interconnectedness. You can’t be human all by yourself, and when you have this quality – Ubuntu – you are known for your generosity. We think of ourselves far too frequently as just individuals, separated from one another, whereas you are connected and what you do affects the whole world. When you do well, it spreads out; it is for the whole of humanity.

ZimRights Director, Mr. Okay Machisa was arrested yesterday, Tuesday 23 March 2010 at Gallery Delta. He was in the process of finalising arrangements for the launch of an art exhibition entitled ‘/Reflections’/. Following the intervention by Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights Mr. Okay Machisa was released from Harare Central Police Station.

At a press conference today, Irene Petras, Director of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, described the conditions for Mr. Machisa’s arrest and the holding of the photographs in the following press statement:

The Officer Commanding Harare Central District, *Chief Superintendent G Gwangava,* advised that he had ‘/not approved’/ the launch and gave Mr. Machisa seven days to provide ‘/letters of consent from individuals and organisations’/ appearing in the photographs, failing which he threatened to prefer unspecified criminal charges against Mr. Machisa.

It is ZLHR’s considered legal opinion that the seizure and retention of the photographs by the police is unlawful and unjustifiable, as are the threats of criminal prosecution and the attempts to prevent the invitation-only launch from proceeding.

Such actions are solely calculated to instil fear and paralysis within civil society and to prevent free assembly, association and expression around national events and processes. For too long, civil society has been excluded by political parties and state institutions and actors from participating – as is its fundamental right – in issues around governance, national healing and reconciliation, and other matters which are in the national interest.

For this reason, ZLHR has been instructed by ZimRights to file – and has indeed filed – an Urgent Chamber Application demanding the immediate return of the photographs. The application also challenges the unjustifiable attempt to prevent the launch from taking place today, and the threats to prefer criminal charges, which, in our considered legal opinion, have no basis in law.

Mr. MacDonald Lewanika, co-ordinator for Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition expressed civic society’s concern regarding the unlawful arrest and harassment of civic activists by state security agents. These actions have escalated in the last few months. Other ZimRights officials as well as Mr. Machisa have received threats via cell phone and email. In addition, the Secretary General of the General Agriculture and plantation Workers Union of Zimbabwe has also recently experienced harassment and intimidation from state agents. Mr Lewanika stressed that this behaviour was unwarranted and unjustifiable. Crisis In Zimbabwe Coalition is working to bring these matters to the attention of the mediators in the dialogue process around Zimbabwe’s political agreement, including President of South Africa Jacob Zuma. When asked about engaging the Ministers of Home Affairs in this issue he said:

“I think that the question of local remedies in Zimbabwe in situations like this, and this kind of behaviour by the police shows that as a place where you can run to [for protection] they are not an option. This idea of even engaging the Co-Ministers of Home Affairs Mr. Giles Mutsekwa and his counterpart Mr. Kembo Mohadi, is something that even while we do it, we think that that is no way for a country to operate. You can’t ask for ministerial intervention every time that something happens. It shows us that the problems we are trying to deal with are more fundamental than what we are looking at. Which is why this is important. The exhibition itself sought to raise the issues around the conduct of the police services. The police need to conduct themselves in a manner that ensures that such actions [intervention by high ranking members of government] are not necessary.”

ZHLR is currently waiting to hear from the Judge President, and has asked for the photos to be returned. The launch, which Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai is expected to attend, will go on as planned.

A week ago Carl J Ncube announced to a press conference that he would be spending a week living on First Street in Harare to raise public awareness about how piracy affects the local music industry. The public response as compared to the online response was disappointing.

“I didn’t expect people in Zimbabwe not to respond to something as simple as moral support. All we’re asking them to do is sign and say that they appreciate Zimbabwean music. That even though they can’t afford to buy it, and they’re burning it, all we needed was just moral support, to say thank you, I’m burning your music, but thank you, I appreciate it.”

Very little has been made in the local press of Carl’s Street Campaign. According to Carl, junior entertainment reporters have submitted their stories about his campaign to The Herald’s editors. However they (the editors) did not feel that Carl’s Campaign, and by extension the welfare of local artists, was newsworthy.

As the country’s most widely read daily newspaper, I think The Herald has failed in its mandate to inform the public about our various entertainment artists and industries. I have seen columns and editorials indicting Roki and other artists for riding on combis, and lowering their status with fans. But, as the state media, they do nothing to promote local artists save for selling advertising space. Why was there no coverage for M’afriq’s last album, or even a profile of Stunner and the success that he has made of his career? And what about the underground music scene and fledgling artists who are yet to be discovered by the public?

I know the articles much like the one covering Carl’s campaign are written, but what use are they if they are not published? The Herald’s entertainment editors seem to only be interested in the type of journalism that destroys typified by the vitriolic and unsubstantiated article carried by The Herald last year about former Big Brother housemate Munyaradzi Chidzonga. The entertainment department of that paper should partially shoulder the blame for the state of our local music and entertainment industries.

It’s no wonder then that Sam Mtukudzi’s last performance was to an estimated gathering of 20 people and it is only now, in having passed away that he becomes newsworthy. Ironically, public sentiment about young artists can be summed up in what Carl was told on the street:

“People are saying its better if they just die, it’s better if they get broke, and we don’t need them. They’d prefer to buy and listen to Little Wayne.”

Even as the son of the virtually deified Oliver Mtukudzi, Sam only had a handful of articles published about him in The Herald since his career began with the release of his first album Rumwe Rimwe in 2007. Compare this to the media coverage received by Jamaican artist Sizzla, who was in Zimbabwe briefly for the President’s Birthday. He was featured in The Herald everyday for a week, and had a full double page spread on the weekend. As Carl rightly pointed out, we have become a nation that supports other people’s music industries.

“It really upsets me to see artists quitting their jobs. We know Zimbabwean artists have gone into industries like porn and prostitution. They’ve gone and changed careers, and at this rate, we won’t have any music. What we [as Zimbabweans] continue to do though is to build [other people's] industries. So people like Sizzla get paid forty thousand to perform in Zimbabwe, he goes back to Jamaica, he builds up ten studios and brings up fifty more artists, then those fifty artists start growing and then what do we do? We invite them again and give them another forty thousand. We’re the biggest donors to international industries.”

Carl will be on First Street for another 24 hours. I’m afraid his campaign has done more to reveal the negative and negligent attitudes of the State media and in turn the public, than what it was originally intended to do. That is, give our beleaguered and beggared artists the encouragement that they need.

Didymus Zengenene’s blog post titled is Lobola still valid in the era of equality? made me think. I consider myself a feminist, yet I want my future husband to pay roora to my family. Yes, that’s right, my family as a whole. The understanding of what roora or lobola is, and what it means has, through time and loose translation been lost to a generation that now considers English meaning of a shona or ndebele tradition to be Gospel. But what happens when that tradition’s real meaning is lost in translation? We get feminists, neo liberals and the like clamouring for the banishment of that tradition, using big words like equality and gender imbalance. Don’t get it twisted, I’m all for gender equality. But I also believe that culture is an important factor in personal identity.

Translated into English roora, means bride price. Of course then, on the surface, this tradition would appear to be a man buying a woman. I don’t deny that there are those who pervert that perception of this tradition to enrich themselves by selling off their underage daughters. Neither do I deny that there are men and women who believe that by having roora paid for her a woman must be completely submissive to her husband or suffer the consequences, violent or not. But these are the ill-advised actions of people, not the intent of the tradition. They reflect more on the characters of the individuals involved than on the culture they profess to practice.

The act of paying roora shouldn’t be looked at in isolation. It is part of a complex and formal process of negotiation that results in a mutual agreement of the bride price. Roora is not meant to extract ridiculous sums of money from the would be groom. In fact for true traditionalists, the exchange of money, which is foreign to our culture, is taboo. Roora is a tradition that is rooted in building a sense of community, both within the families that are marrying, and between them. A man cannot marry alone, the cattle he pays to his bride’s father are those cattle given to his family by his brothers in law. The ceremony itself cannot happen with out a number of members of the extended family being present, tete’s (the bride’s father’s sisters), Sekuru’s (the bride’s mother’s brothers), varoora (sisters in law to the bride) and hanzvadzi (brothers and sisters) included. Far from being transactional, this tradition is meant to establish and reinforce a relationship between the two marrying families to strengthen the new union. It is impossible for a good parent to place a monetary value on a child, so why should it be looked at in monetary terms alone?

In answer to Didymus’ question, as a card-carrying feminist who wouldn’t suffer the indignity of being dictated to by a man simply because he is one, yes I think it still is. I think the tradition of roora, as it was intended, is very important. In a time when divorce rates climb every day and our sense of culture and community is being lost through cultural alienation, migration and other factors I think it is more important now than ever.

The issue of sexual orientation is one that affects everyone. It cuts across all human barriers such as race, religion, gender and socio-economic standing. The right to live one’s sexual orientation; freedom from discrimination, harassment and stigmatisation as a result of this are therefore rights and issues of concern for everyone.

In various discussions with friends, I have found sexual orientation to be an emotional and contentious issue. What I think people fail to realise is that while the majority of the human population is heterosexual, that does not make heterosexuality ‘normal’. Thus making homosexuality abnormal. I have found that many people regard homosexuality as a choice,  or something one does to get attention. This is evidenced by the many misconceptions surrounding homosexuality such as people being gay because they have not met the right man or woman; being seduced into being gay and that gay people were sexually abused as children. A look to our closest genetic relations in nature, Bonobos (a species of Chimpanzees), will show that even when survival is the key drive, they do still display homosexual behaviour. Moreover, the Human Genome Project gave rise to evidence of a gay gene. Meaning that homosexuality is not a choice.