PIRF April 2005 report

To understand this, it is instructive to note that the South African Observer Mission (SAOM) for the March 2002 Presidential election made a set of recommendations for the improvement of the electoral process after the March 2002 Presidential elections. Among other things, SAOM recommended the involvement of civil society in voter education, the constitution of a single independent electoral body to run elections and, the creation of an independent legislative regulatory body to ensure that each candidate or political party contesting the elections be allowed access to the state media, both print and electronic1. Most of these recommendations, which also included the need to recruit and train electoral staff in a transparent manner, were captured in the SADC Principles.

 

However, none of these conditions were met in any significant way. If at all there were constraints placed on civil society’s ability to provide voter education and elections were run by a myriad of constitutional, statutory and ministerial bodies whose staff was not recruited in an open and transparent manner. In addition there was no independent regulatory body to monitor and enforce equal access to the media amongst contesting parties. In fact the government flatly denied opposition parties access to the state-controlled print media stating that this section of the media was under no legal obligation to give fair access.

 

It was therefore dumbfounding that the South African Parliamentary Observer Mission for the March 31 2005 elections “unanimously agreed that the elections were credible, legitimate, free and fair and conformed to the SADC election guidelines”. (The Zimbabwe Independent, 8/04). The African Union observer mission and the SADC observer followed suit. The African Union (AU) concluded; “at the point of the ballot, the elections were held in a peaceful manner and the polling arrangements made it possible for the voters to freely choose their preferred candidates by casting a secret ballot”. (The Daily Mirror, (4/04)). This position derives from a rather erroneous view that an election is a day’s event hence it evades the implication of events prior to the election and how the electoral management system could have impacted on the election outcome.

On its part, the SADC Election Observer Mission noted concerns about electoral irregularities during the pre-election period but still concluded that the elections were “well-managed, credible and transparent” and that the mission believed the voters “were able to express their franchise, peacefully, freely and unhindered”. (The Chronicle, 2/04).

 

The findings, particularly those of SOAM and the SADC observer mission demonstrate that election observation in Zimbabwe exhibits a serious lack of memory and continuity. Perhaps it is time to set up strict enforceable minimum yardsticks for free and fair elections or else allow election observation remain the superficial ritual that it is. The Zimbabwean government, or any other government for that matter, cannot be compelled to open up democratic space and allow for the free will of the people to be unequivocally reflected in the outcomes of such elections if election observers ignore such glaring irregularities.

q There was a significant decrease in information rights violations in the period under review compared to the March 2005. This could be attributed to the reduced political activity after the March 31 general elections. However, it is important to note that in the aftermath of the elections there an upsurge of politically motivated violence most of which implicated ZANU PF supporters engaged in post-election violence against the MDC supporters.

q Police involvement in the violation the public’s right to freedom of expression, in particular the related rights to freedom of association and assembly has been a pervasive feature of PIRF reports. The police were once again the highest perpetrators of rights violations in the period under review. Ideally the police should safeguard the enjoyment of these rights.

 

q The aftermath of the general elections witnessed new patterns in perpetrators and victims of information rights violations. While the police remained the highest perpetrator, journalists emerged as the highest victims breaking from the trend from reports just before and during the elections in March, which featured the MDC as the highest victim. Civic organizations were the second highest target while the MDC was third. However, this did not change the general trend revealing that opponents of the ruling party and government are targets of such violations.

q The operation environment for media practitioners remained hostile. Government actions in the period under focus demonstrated intolerance to media freedom as shown by the arrest and deportation of foreign correspondents. The arraignment of two local journalists on charges under both AIPPA and POSA also served as a reminder that the two pieces of legislation continue to pose a serious a threat to freedom of expression.

q The use of Section 16 of POSA to arrest individuals for insulting the President also demonstrated just how low standards of freedom of speech have deteriorated. As shown in this report, state agents and ZANU PF supporters eavesdrop on private conversations and arrest individuals for passing what they believe to be insulting comments on the President. Such arrests cause fear in the populace that hinders the free exchange of honest opinion and commentary on their surroundings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The period under review witnessed a huge decrease in the number of reported information rights violations to 17 compared to the 55 reported in March. Predictably the police emerged as the highest perpetrators with 14 (82%) out of the 17 violations. ZANU PF, the Media and Information Commission (MIC) and the CIO were implicated once (6%) each. Fig 1 and 2 below illustrate the trends for April.

 

 

 

Significantly there was a slight change in trends in terms of victims of rights violations compared to previous reports. In the period under review journalists were the highest target with six (35%) followed by civil society organizations with five (29%). In the 14 violations implicating the police, four were perpetrated against civic groups; five against journalists; three against the MDC and two against individuals whose identity was not given.

 

Ordinary people were identified as victims in two (12%) incidents both of which involved charges of undermining the authority of the President. One of them was charged with shouting “unprintable” words insulting the President while the other was charged for being found in possession of books “belittling” the head of state.

 

ZANU PF, the Media and Information Commission (MIC) and the CIO were implicated once (6%) each. The CIO were implicated in the disruption of a ZCTU meeting held in Bulawayo while ZANU PF was guilty of harassing an MDC polling agent in the March 31 general elections. Notably, the period under review also witnessed a decrease in violations perpetrated by political parties. ZANU PF was the only political party implicated in violating information rights.

 

The period under focus remained hostile for the media. All information rights violations restricting the operations of media houses and journalists reported and recorded below emanated from the coverage of the general elections. For example;

 

On April 1: The Herald reported that on March 31 police arrested two British journalists for practicing journalism without accreditation in violation of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). According to the paperthe two were taking pictures of voters but failed to produce accreditation cards on request. The Herald quoted Information and Publicity permanent secretary, George Charamba as having said, “We did not accredit them. … Their presence in the country is an act of defiance and an act of lawlessness. … All that goes to show that the British media borrow its attitude and politics from the British government.”

On April 1: the Zimbabwe Independent reported that freelance journalist and former Cable News Network (CNN) correspondent Charlayne Hunter-Gault was detained for four hours after being arrested at a polling station. The Independent did not specify why she had been arrested or whether she was accredited to cover the elections. There was also no police comment.

 

On April 1: the Zimbabwe Independent reported that police temporarily detained two (unnamed) French journalists covering a WOZA prayer meeting at Africa Unity Square in Harare and questioned but did not detain another five journalists who were covering the same meeting. The Independent quoted fellow foreign correspondents as saying most of those detained were accredited to cover the election.

On April 2: The Chronicle reported that a Swedish journalist accredited to cover the parliamentary elections, Fredrick Anders Sperling was deported for allegedly trying to “stage manage an incident aimed at tarnishing the government” in violation of an unspecified section of AIPPA. According to the Chronicle, Sperling teamed up with a former Norton farmer, a Mr. Whaley, who lost his farm under the land reform programme and started to interview his former farm workers. The Chronicle quoted Media and Information Commission chairman, Dr. Tafataona Mahoso as having confirmed the incident adding that Sperling had been accredited to cover the parliamentary elections. There was however no police comment on the matter.

 

On April 20: The Mail Guardian (SA) reported that on April 19 police questioned Davison Maruziva, editor of The Standard over an article published in the paper on April 10 alleging a scandal over ballot boxes and papers from the March general elections. The Mail and Guardian (SA) of April 21 followed up on the issue and reported that Maruziva was charged with publishing false information. The Standard of April 24 that also reported on the incident revealed that Maruziva had been charged under both POSA and AIPPA.

On April 21: The Mail Guardian (SA) reported that police summoned and charged, Saviours Kwinika, a journalist from The Standard with publishing false information in an article alleging a scandal over ballot boxes and papers from the March 31 general elections. The Mail and Guardian quoted Kwinika’s lawyer, Linda Cook as having said, "[Kwinika] had been charged under sections of the Public Order and Security Act and Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act relating to making false statements prejudicial to the state and publishing falsehoods.” Cook added that Kwinika had “denied the charges but […] admitted there were inaccuracies in the story”. The paper quoted police as having dismissed the story as false and demanded a retraction.

 

The public has a right to information about the conduct of elections and other information that it is in the public interest to know. The media has a duty to provide such information and when they are not allowed to exercise this role the public are the poorer for it as they have limited choices because of limited information.

 

There was a general decrease in violations on the right to free expression, association and assembly in April compared to the previous month. This could be attributable to the fact that after the elections on March 31, there was less political activity.

 

On April 2: the Chronicle quoted police spokesperson Wayne Bvudzijena as having said the police arrested 265 women from the Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) for an “illegal demonstration” at the Africa Unity Square in Harare on March 31. SW Radio Africa also reported on the incident on April 1 but placed the number of those arrested at over 400. The radio station added that reported the WOZA activists had convened to hold an all-night vigil to pray for an accurate and transparent counting of ballots after the general election. SW Radio Africa quoted some of the women in detention who said the police had assaulted them adding that about half of them were released on April 1 after being forced to pay fines. Three of them were admitted at the Avenues Clinic with back injuries. There was no police comment or confirmation from the clinic.

 

On April 5: The Daily Mirror reported that on April 4 police in Harare arrested four MDC youths who were part of a group of about 26 demonstrators distributing fliers inscribed “Reject Fraud”. The Herald issueof the same day also reported on the matter. Both The Herald and The Daily Mirror quoted police spokesperson Wayne Bvudzijena who confirmed the incident and the arrests2 saying the youths had been arrested for engaging in an illegal demonstration. The Herald also quoted MDC spokesperson Paul Themba Nyathi who professed ignorance over the matter.

On April 6: The Herald reported that on April 5 an MDC activist Artwell Murungweni appeared in court facing charges of denigrating President Mugabe by using what the paper described as “unprintable words” about the President losing the 2005 parliamentary election. He was charged with breaching an unspecified section of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA). According to the paperMurungweni was apprehended and handed over to the police by ZANU PF supporters who were angered by the utterances.

 

On April 7:SW Radio Africa reported that on April 7 MDC MP for Kuwadzana, Nelson Chamisa was arrested and detained on allegations that he incited public violence at Harvest House that resulted in demonstrations that took place in Harare on April 4 (referred above). SW Radio Africa quoted Chamisa’s lawyer, Alex Muchadehama who confirmed the arrest. The Daily Mirrorof April 8 alsoreported on the issue and quoted police spokesperson Wayne Bvudzijena as having confirmed the arrest saying the police were still investigating. Reuters, which also reported on the same matter on its April 8 report, quoted MDC spokesperson Paul Themba Nyathi denying reports that MDC was behind the protests.

 

On April 8: The Daily Mirror reported that a self-exiled woman, Vulisiwe Sibindi was arrested at Beitbrigde border post on allegations of possessing subversive material and was charged under POSA. The Mirror quoted her lawyer, Job Sibanda as having said police said Sibindi was found in possession of six books “belittling the head of state” which led to her arrest3.

 

On April 23: The Herald reported that on April 18 Clifford Ruhukwa was arrested for insulting the President using “unprintable and abusive words” in Chitungwiza. News24 (SA) of April 23 also covered the story and reported that Ruhukwa was arrested and taken to Chitungwiza Police Station and charged with “denigrating the president” which a criminal offence under POSA.

 

On April 29: the Zimbabwe Independent reported that on April 24 a senior secret intelligence officer led a group 50 youths and assaulted three senior Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) officials at a hotel in Bulawayo where they were holding a general council meeting and ordered them out of the venue. The independent weekly quoted ZCTU president Lovemore Matombo as having confirmed the incident adding that the youths had been bused from Harare. There was no police confirmation of the report.

On April 30: Zim Online (SA) reported that on April 27 police in Mutare arrested fiveZimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) leaders who were holding a planning meeting for the May Day celebrations on charges of holding a meeting without police permission. The online news service quoted ZCTU information officer, Mlamuleli Sibanda as saying the trade unionists were still in police custody on April 29. Sibanda added that the arrests were unjustified because trade unions like the ZCTU were exempt from applying for police clearance to hold meetings under Public Order and Security Act (POSA).

 

On May 1: The Standard reported that on April 18 suspected ZANU PF supporters looted goods worth millions of dollars belonging to Sam Komala who was an MDC polling agent in the March 31 Parliamentary elections. The MDC spokesperson Paul Themba Nyathi confirmed the incident. There was no indication that the paper sought police comment.

 

On May 1: The Standard reported that on April 27 police arrested six Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) officials at Hellenics Sports Club in Mutare for holding a May Day preparatory meeting without police clearance. The weekly quoted ZCTU general council member Helarious Ruyi as having confirmed the incident. The Standard also quoted the ZCTU officials’ lawyer Innocent Gonese as having said the detentions were illegal since ZCTU, as a labour body, did not require police clearance to hold its meetings. There was no police comment.

 

On May 1: The Standard reported that on April 27 police in Harare briefly detained four Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) workers while they were preparing to march in commemoration of World Day for Safety and Health at work. The paper quoted ZCTU spokesperson Mlamulei Sibanda as saying the four were about to march from Harare City Centre to the National Social Security Authority (NSSA) House along Sam Nujoma Street but were forced to abandon the march. There was no evidence that the paper sought police comment on the matter.

 

The reduced incidents of information rights violations were understandably linked with the reduced political activity after the elections. However, the violations listed above demonstrated that government was still using state instruments like the police to deny individuals and interest groups their right to freedom of expression.

Another notable feature was the arrest of individuals for denigrating the President. For example, Artwell Murungweni was arrested on allegations of denigrating the President. Another person, Vulisizwe Sibindi was arrested for being found in possession of subversive material “belittling the head of state”. As noted in the February PIRF report, there has been a growing trend in this form of violation demonstrating government paranoia that has manifested itself through this quest to control even discrete conversations between individuals in private places.

These actions by government are in violation of the public’s constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of expression and the related rights to freedom of assembly and association.

 

 

The Zimbabwe Independent, (April 8 2005) report that on February 22 2005, Simon Bull, the lawyer representing former Standard staffers editor Mark Chavunduka and senior reporter Ray Choto “wrote to their families informing them that they had struck an out-of-court settlement with the Civil Division of the Attorney-General’s office” serves as a reminder of government’s bad record on freedom of expression. The report revealed that government agreed to pay more than Z$20 million in damages and interest to Choto and Chavunduka arising from claims of unlawful arrest and torture4 by state agents after the publication of a story alleging a coup plot in the paper’s January 10-16 1999 issue.

 

At the time the two were charged under the now repealed Section 50(2)(a) of the notorious Law and Order Maintenance Act (LOMA) for “publishing false news likely to cause fear, alarm and despondency”. The state concession to pay for damages in respect of the torture charges demonstrates that government has not broken away from its culture of demonizing and criminalising journalists particularly those in the private media. This culture has continued even after the repeal of LOMA and its replacement by the Public Order and Security Act and the enactment of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).

 

Meanwhile the acquittal two Sunday Telegraph journalists, Toby Harnden and Julian Simmonds, on charges under AIPPA of practising journalism without accreditation for which they spent almost 14 days in jail provided more evidence that the authorities continue to use repressive media laws to deprive individuals of their freedom on spurious allegations. According to The Herald of April 15 magistrate Never Diza discharged the two journalists saying the State had failed to "establish a case against the two".

The arrests of The Standard's editor, Davison Maruziva and a reporter for the same paper, Savious Kwinika (captured in this report) also serve to reinforce government’s contempt for freedom of the media and the constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression.

 

---