Pushing to the front
When I went to CABS last week, throngs of uniformed police and army personnel were pushing at the doors of the bank to be allowed in to access their cash. It felt like they were trying to pull rank, or take advantage of their role as “security personnel” to get served first.
Downstairs from our office, there were rising waves of angry shouting as again, a large mass of soldiers and police officers tried to get preferential treatment at the Intermarket Bank – this despite the fact that apparently there is a dedicated branch for them in town, which is where they’re supposed to go.
This cash crisis is squeezing people in the police and armed forces just as tightly as the rest of us. Rather than viewing their uniforms as an opportunity to be self-sacrificing, let others go in front of them, or maintain order when there is cash available, they’re taking advantage of their power, and the fear many Zimbabweans have for their uniforms, in order to sort out their own needs for cash.
Having witnessed a similar problem in town, a subscriber wrote in with these thoughts:
In Harare yesterday I saw long lines outside a number of CABS branches (I don’t have an account with them thank goodness) and in all cases I saw that the army, police etc. were lined up separately. I presume this is because they are entitled to preferential service.
I believe this is in violation of International Law as enshrined in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments.
“Non-discrimination is one of the most accepted principles of international human rights. Everyone is entitled to enjoy human rights irrespective of their colour, race, gender, religion, ethnic, social or national origin, political or other opinion, property, poverty, disability, birth, lack of citizenship, sexual preference, or other status, for example, severe illness such as HIV / AIDS. Decisions on the conditions for promotion, the availability of products (I guess that also means one’s own money) or the allocation of supplier contracts should be taken without discrimination or regard to arbitrary preferences.”
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights calls on every individual and every organ of society to play its part in securing the observance of the rights set forth in the Declaration. Hence an organisation has a responsibility to safeguard human rights in its operations, as well as in its wider sphere of influence. Furthermore, under international law, there are some fundamental provisions that all are bound to observe. Breaches of these fundamental human rights entail liability under international law.
If CABS are made aware of the potential moral, criminal or other legal liability under International Law an organisation may be regarded as complicit in these abuses if it in some way authorises, tolerates or knowingly ignores the abuses committed by a connected organisation (in this case, such as CABS). In some cases, complicity may give rise to criminal or other legal liability. While the participation of the organisation may not directly cause abuse, complicity may consist of providing practical assistance or encouragement to actions that increase their extent. In other words, as I understand this, any individual or organisation dealing with CABS knowing they are committing these abuses will be tainted with the crime. In some cases, complicity may give rise to criminal or other legal liability under international law.
So if you can find out or start a campaign (workers whistle blowing) to find the details of internationally exposed connected organisations to the Reserve Bank (as with CABS) or any individual responsible for the abuses (e.g. going on a trip overseas) International Law can kick in. While case law is developing for complicity in international crimes, organisations in Europe and America are becoming so litigatious that I can imagine they will be very reluctant to be associated with the Reserve Bank or any responsible individual (as with CABS) if you shout loudly enough that they may be liable for complicity in international crimes.