Media is now the new battlefield for the two main political parties in the country who are trying to sell their views to the people on the new constitution. By just reading an opinion article in the press with regards to the new constitution one can easily tell which party the author belongs to. State media has roped in the services of some of Zimbabwe’s finest spin-doctors to write damning articles about the new constitution process. One prominent columnist who featured in the one of the state’s weekly bulletins went on to label the Constitution Select Committee (COPAC) as a ‘mafia’ and writing in support the other columnist also added venom to the onslaught by describing the first draft of the constitution published by COPAC a ‘regime change tool’. They are using the issue of “homosexuals rights” as a match winner for their campaign. A whole page full of nothing but anti-West sentiments is dedicated to the prominent and regular columnists who are now working full time to discredit COPAC.

What should be a people driven constitution like what Professor Lovemore Madhuku always called for is now turning into a party driven constitution. The views of the people are now slowly being disregarded and thrown out the window. Not to be outdone the opposition parties have taken their views to the private media and their battle is in support of the constitution drafting process lead by the COPAC team and hoping for reforms to some of the laws in the current constitution. Advocating for the early rejection of the COPAC process is like what some stakeholders and columnists are already doing clearly shows that the end result will be a negotiated constitution with some sections of it being borrowed from the Kariba draft and the current Lancaster House constitution.

If the predictions of the end results are correct why then did the three signatories to the Global Peace Agreement endorse COPAC and waste millions of donor funds on a document, which can be negotiated in the comfort of their offices. And if there is going to be a referendum as promised it will be used as benchmark in preparation for the promised elections just like what happened after the rejection of the 2000 draft constitution. Another government of national unity is the least that the people of Zimbabwe will expect after the next elections.

First it was the cars, followed by salary increments, then sitting allowances, now its demands for residential stands in leafy suburbs. What is most fascinating about these latest demands is the choice of area. Meaning MPs want residential stands in the areas like Borrowdale Brooke, Grey Stone Park but not Budiriro or Mufakose. Most of these legislators never owned a residential stand even in the high-density suburbs where the Povo live and where the bulk of the greedy lawmakers came from. Hiding under the disguise of the fact that the government owes them money in sitting allowances so they should be given the stands at a subsidized rate leaves one wondering if the law makers are holding the country hostage. Since they are the lawmakers they are just going to pass the resolutions and get the stands just like their previous demands at the expense of the taxpayer.

Such a clever and calculating move comes at a time when the nation is still gripped with fear of early elections meaning some of these MPs are now preparing for the future in the event that they lose the elections and get booted out of office.  Off the record some of these MPs have failed to attend Parliament sessions. Use your vote wisely in the next elections and don’t let your X cost you in the next five years.

I wrote to the Mayor of Harare last year about my concerns regarding the flagrant abuse of zoning regulations for businesses in suburban areas in Harare. No response. No big surprise. Everywhere you look there’s a creche, or a cafe, or a restaurant, or a clinic, or a security firm … it’s just not acceptable. I can only think that the authorities in the City of Harare are just plain incompetent, powerless or corrupt. Years ago people operating businesses from residential properties used to duck and dive to avoid The Law. But these days in Zimbabwe, the rule of law, along with any kind of rules and regulations, are flouted with impunity. Do the authorities in the City of Harare honestly think that it is fair and just for home owners to have the value of their property plummet, along with their quality of living, on the back of second hand car dealers et al getting to operate businesses illegally?

Here’s Mr Dube from Eastlea who shares similar concerns. In the meantime, Mr Mayor, please Wake Up, or get the hell out ….

Open Letter to the Mayor of Harare

We, the residents of Wheeler Avenue, Eastlea, Harare, wish to register our strong objection to the granting of consent for the setting up of car sales or any other type of business along this road.

Previous experience has shown that areas zoned for car sales businesses along Robert Mugabe Road/Glenara Avenue are de-greened in order to create parking space. We do not want this environmental damage to happen again in our area. Trees are central to our existence and we know why they are important. We value most of the great natural beauty and the charm of the treed area than the current piece-meal planning. Let us build the environment, instead of destroying it.

Whatever the merits of that decision may have been at the time, conditions have since changed so much since then that is no longer relevant. Already, there are a lot of car sales in the area; we do not see the need for more! The hard practical truth, in our opinion (although we are not experts in traffic engineering or town planning), is that the zoning for car sales ignores the absolute necessity of widening this access road to the city centre. To serve the material increase in population in Harare, Goromonzi and Ruwa as well as traffic from the entire route (Mutare-Harare), Robert Mugabe Road now requires extra road space equivalent to a six-way freeway with separate levels of crossing traffic to remove congestion. The current developments will cause Robert Mugabe Road to remain at its present abnormally low width. The blossoming car sales in our area engender traffic problems. Public and private vehicles are now using the roads on both sides of Robert Mugabe Road which is supposed to be an arterial transportation route, to avoid congestion at the Chiremba road traffic lights.

At least your good offices should have had the courtesy of asking residents if they had any objections to the zoning of our neighbourhood for car sales or any other business. This raises questions about the professional conduct of business and accountability at the Harare City Council offices. We call upon those with the requisite expertise on environmental governance to cause the city fathers to reverse irrational decisions that have a negative impact on the environment, let alone a residential area.

We hope this matter merits serious consideration.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Yours Sincerely

G. Dube
CHRA Member (Eastlea)

Hello to the Zimbabwe Republic Police (TRAFFIC Section) and the Greendale District Office.

There’s this speed trap on Coronation Road in Greendale. The speed limit is 60. There are a couple of very rusted speed limit signs on this road. None the less the limit is 60 and we shouldn’t speed.

BUT, take Kennedy Road and you wonder about the ZRP’s priorities. Kennedy is being used by Kombi drivers as a substitute for Arcturus Road. Why? Because of the potholes and traffic lights and traffic on Arcturus. These three things serve to slow Kombi’s down which is what they don’t want.

So they use Kennedy which is a 2.5km stretch of road that has one non-working traffic light (that’s meant to help school kids from Courtney Selous Junior to cross the road), no speed limit signs, and mostly not potholes.

A ZRP speed trap is most definitely needed on Kennedy where kids walk and cycle to school. Its a suburban road that should need be used as a main thoroughfare.

A Stop sign, not a Give Way sign is most definitely needed at the intersection of Alfred Road and Kennedy where Kombi’s don’t give way (nevermind the ridiculous permanent 6 – on average – policemen and women who fine people for not stopping outside OG’s in Mount Pleasant).

Do the ZRP really want to make a difference in communities, to make them safer, and more hospitable? Or do they just want to position themselves for the easy work and personal benefits?

From yesterday’s editorial in the Zimbabwean:

Zimbabweans are renowned for choosing to skirt hurdles instead of removing them. But this need not be so. Faced with the injustices perpetrated by public service institutions like Zesa and municipalities, we need to organise ourselves into vibrant and uncompromising lobby groups that fight for our civil rights.

These groups, divorced from political affiliation-for there is no water or ZESA with a Zanu (PF) or MDC colour-should strive to confront the authorities.

Strange, I thought that was the purpose of the civic society organisations operating in Zimbabwe. The real issues, water, power, education, health and poverty seem to have been lost in the tug of war between MDC and ZANU PF. Where are the lobby groups who are in the so-called grassroots fighting these battles with our legislators? Instead we are all preoccupied with a constitution that may never see the light of day and elections that have already been stolen.

Clearly, we are not doing enough.

I got a bit depressed this morning when I read The Herald article COPAC in gay storm. For all the bombast of the headline, and the frenzy around keeping gay rights out of Zimbabwe’s new Constitution, there really isn’t much of a story – which just makes the intolerance of the article all the more apparent.

The article references the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, where a non-discrimination clause provides that “Everyone has the right not to be treated in an unfairly discriminatory manner on such grounds as their nationality, race, colour, tribe, place or circumstances of birth, ethnic or social origin, language, class, religious belief, political or other opinion, custom, culture, sex, gender, marital status, age, disability or economic, social or other status.” It latches particularly onto the phrase “circumstances of birth,” and then proceeds to report feedback from a number of lawyers and analysts who acknowledge that yes, hypothetically, this could be used to make an argument to the courts against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Of course, depending on where you fall on the nature versus nurture debate, I suppose one could also make the same argument using the protection of opinion, custom, culture, or other status. But does this mean we must remove the broad notion of tolerance from our Constitution – because some group we might not like might use it to their own benefit? Racism, sexism and xenophobia remain prejudices in some people’s minds – which is why the Constitution explicitly protects people regardless of race, sex and nationality.

Regardless of whether it is used to make an argument in favour of tolerance for homosexuality, including protection against discrimination regardless of circumstances of birth demonstrates the sort of broad tolerance a Constitution should provide. This means it doesn’t matter whether your parents were married when they had you, if you were born in prison, on an inauspicious day, as the child of rape or incest, malnourished, premature and in need of extraordinary medical support, exposed to narcotics in utero, as conjoined twins, as an intersex baby, or any of the other myriad ways in which you might be different from others. You still have the same rights everyone else does.

All human beings are equal. That why they’re called Human Rights. We all get them, regardless. But all human beings discriminate. That’s why fundamental rights and freedoms are including in Constitutions, and why we need protection against intolerance – our own and other people’s. Finding yourself trying to take out a part of a clause designed to promote tolerance? Is all the more reason to work for its inclusion.