STATEMENT BY THE MEDIA MONITORING PROJECT ZIMBABWE
ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN ZIMBABWE
on the Occasion of the 37th Session of the Banjul, The Gambia
27 April – 11 May 2005
Madame Chair, Honourable Commissioners and distinguished participants, on behalf of the Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe, I wish to update you on the current situation in Zimbabwe with regard to freedom of expression, speech and the media. Contrary to the recommendations of the Commission in its Fact Finding Mission Report, June 2002, no efforts have been made by the State to create a climate conducive to freedom of expression in Zimbabwe. This right remains heavily restricted with its exercise entirely at the Government’s discretion.
Government has amended existing repressive legislation concerning the right to freedom of expression and the right to information, the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, in a manner that only further restricts these rights and imposes custodial sentences on journalists who practice without accreditation. Two foreign journalists were on March 31 arrested and detained for thirteen days mainly for covering the Zimbabwean elections without MIC accreditation. They were subsequently acquitted by the court but deported by the authorities shortly afterwards.
The Media and Information Commission, which is subject to Government manipulation, remains perceptibly partisan and is not representative of the media fraternity in Zimbabwe. The MIC continues to harass the private media over petty administrative offences and stories that they carry while the government-controlled media is not subjected to similar treatment. As the Commission noted in its Fact-Finding Mission Report, “any legislation that requires registration of journalists, or any mechanism that regulates access to broadcast media by an authority that is not independent and accountable to the public, creates a system of control and political patronage.”
Closure of independent newspapers continues with the MIC closing The Weekly Times in February. This brings to four the number of independent newspapers closed since September 2003. In addition a De facto monopoly of broadcast media persists in the country despite the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe being in possession of several applications for broadcasting licences from prospective radio stations. This is contrary to Article 5 of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa that condemns “a State monopoly over broadcasting as being incompatible with the right to freedom of expression.”
Government continues to abuse the public media as a propaganda tool for the ruling party compromising the public’s ability to access information through this public resource. The Government has failed to protect the national public broadcaster “against political and economic interference.”
We are concerned that the continued arbitrary arrests, harassment and intimidation of journalists will force them to practice self-censorship. 7 journalists working for the government-controlled Chronicle newspaper were suspended from the paper in December 2004 following the publication by the paper of a story that covered intra-party factionalism within the ruling party.
Citizens that utter statements that may be construed as insulting the President or undermining his authority, even if they are not published in the press, are also liable to prosecution and may be fined or imprisoned under the Public Order and Security Act. Several such cases have occurred between December 2004 and April 2005.
The right to information, freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 9 of the Charter and espoused by the Declaration on Principles of Freedom of Expression in Africa remains severely curtailed in Zimbabwe through the use of repressive legislation and harassment and intimidation of journalists and media houses.
I thank you
28 April 2005
Harare

Agenda Item 7
Situation of Human Rights in Africa 37th Ordinary Session of the ACHPR
Statement by ZimRights

As ZimRights we thank the Commission for the opportunity to speak at this august gathering. We also thank the Commission for the report on the Fact Finding Mission to Zimbabwe of June 2002, which we have found to be invaluable in the campaign for the promotion and protection of human rights in Zimbabwe .We are acutely aware of the pressing need to enhance the work of the Commission in our own communities. As you are aware elections were recently conducted in Zimbabwe to select representatives of the people.

Of major concern to us is the relegation of fundamental principles into SADC guidelines of persuasive value, which have persuaded no one. We are concerned that the court challenges to the 2000 parliamentary elections before the judiciary have not been finalised. These have been overtaken by the March 2005 elections meaning that the candidates who won unfairly in the previous election have benefited from the same. Cases of torture and extra judicial killings from the 2000 election have not been resolved. The current elections could not be unequivocally declared as free and fair and are instead being referred to as a reflection the expression of the will of the people.

ZimRights believes that the people of Zimbabwe have been unable to freely participate in the Governance of their country against a backdrop of repressive laws such as Public Order and Security Act, Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, harassment and arrest of journalists, and closure of independent papers among others, which the Commission in its fact finding mission report of June 2002 established to be contrary to the principles and rights enshrined in the African Charter.

Human rights defenders are operating in an increasingly difficult environment where their actions are viewed as contrary to the interests of the state notwithstanding the Non Governmental Organisations Bill having not been signed. The Bill, designed to curtail the operations of human rights NGOS, still hangs ominously over the heads NGOs if it is referred back to parliament.
The existing legislation regulating the operation of Zimbabwean NGOs, the Private Voluntary Organisations Act, has been used to justify impromptu inspections and harassment of targeted NGO’s in recent weeks. Among the inspecting officers from the government including members of the Criminal Investigation Department who would have been appointed as inspectors of voluntary organisations. This only adds to the climate of fear and harassment of human rights defenders under which they are operating .

We therefore urge the commission to encourage the government to adopt the recommendations that are contained in the report of the Fact Finding mission, which if adopted and implemented in good faith, will go a long way in dealing with the human rights situation in Zimbabwe.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: 28 – 04 -2005 Arnold Tsunga (Director) Phone 263 11 209 468
E-mail: [email protected] [2]

ZLHR CONCERNED AT VIOLATION OF WORKERS’ RIGHTS

The Zimbabwe Lawyers For Human Rights (ZLHR) note with grave concern the unwarranted harassment, by the Zimbabwe Republic Police, of labour rights activists generally and more particularly on the eve of the May Day Celebrations . The harassment of workers movements is a clear and contemptuous violation of workers’ rights, which are enshrined in various international, regional and national human rights instruments. It must not be tolerated.

On the 27th of March 2005 Mandhla Sibanda of Bulawayo, a paralegal with the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions was arrested and detained by police details from Rhodesville Police Station in Harare. He was facing charges of theft for allegedly stealing from the hostels of a local training centre where he was attending a ZCTU Para-Legal Refresher Course. Mr Sibanda had actually lost some property as a result of the break-in that occurred at the centre and reported to the management. On his way back to Bulawayo he was told that the Police had recovered his property and he had to come and identify it. The police under the guise that he was going to identify his property picked him up. On arriving at the Police Station he was informed that he was under arrest and was subsequently detained overnight. The Police indicated that they would detain Mr Sibanda until they had conducted a search at a house were he had slept on the night of the crime. This is a clear case of abuse of process as the Police in this case effectively violated his right to personal liberty, ignored the presumption of innocence and detained him for the purposes of investigation Clearly this is incorrect pre-trial procedure and only goes to give merit to the numerous allegations of lack of professionalism and disrespect for citizens universal human rights and fundamental freedoms as enshrined in our Constitution and other human rights instruments

In Mutare five ZCTU officials who were attending a Preparatory May Day Celebrations meeting for organising how to hold the celebrations were picked up. The cause of their arrest, from information at hand, was that they had convened an ‘unlawful gathering without Police clearance’! With all due respect this was more like an office meeting of ZCTU officials planning on how the May Day celebrations would proceed. They were merely carrying out their mandate as given to the by the workers they represent. Commemoration of the day was in no way a security threat. The preparatory meetings were also not a threat to national security. This is clear when regard is had to the fact that the meetings were held countrywide so that the various towns and cities would commemorate the day together with their trade union representatives. The ZCTU officials were interrogated at length on what exactly they planned to do come 1 May. They were released after 1900hrs without any charge preferred against them. Their right to personal liberty, rights of freedom of association and assembly were effectively trampled upon without justifiable cause.

Today in Harare and at around 0900hrs a group of workers’ rights activists commemorating…and heading towards the Ministry of Labour offices to mark the day were picked up and detained for at least an hour for no apparent reason. They were later released on condition that they did not engage in a similar procession. It is this culture of placing such conditions, which are not reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, which ZLHR condemns in the strongest of terms. It is common cause that workers the world over mark and commemorate these days and they have the inalienable right to do so. The State has no right to effectively delete all these rights at whim, as has been the case in Zimbabwe recently.

Over and above this ZLHR has been watching the increasing dismay at the apparent structural and systematic attack, by the Government, on the leadership of the ZCTU through hired demonstrators. The government of the day must not interfere in the day to day running of the labour body. Doing so effectively amounts to government interference in the enjoyment of workers’ rights. Government’s duty is rather to fulfil, respect, promote and protect those rights it agreed to have accorded to workers through various pieces of legislation as well as is required by international human rights law norms and standards.

For these reasons ZHLR calls upon the Government of Zimbabwe to:

• Protect, promote, respect and fulfil workers’ rights;
• Desist from a culture of clamping down any form of exercise of these rights;
• Allow Zimbabwean workers freely assemble and associate among themselves to join like-minded workers of the world in commemorating workers’ Day without undue and unjustified hindrances come 1st May 2005;
• Desist, forthwith from meddling in the internal affairs of the autonomous Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions

27 April 2005

Mr. Germain Baricako
Secretary African Commission
On Human and Peoples Rights
48 Kairaba Avenue
Fajara
THE GAMBIA

RE: Communication under Article 55 of the African Charter, Request for Provisional Measures in terms of Rule 111

Complainants Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights on behalf of Roy Bennett and the Republic of Zimbabwe

Dear Sir

The above matter refers and our correspondence of the 3rd of February 2005 refers. We kindly request the Commission to attend to the request for provisional measures by the complainants in this matter. The requested provisional measures are as follows:

1. His immediate release from prison

It is the submission of the complainants that the continued incarceration of Roy Leslie Bennett, a former opposition Member of Parliament, on the orders of the (since dissolved) Parliament wherein the majority ruling party members voted for his imprisonment is a violation of Article 7(1) (a) of the African Charter. Roy did not appear before an independent competent and impartial tribunal where principles of natural justice were applied, he appeared before a parliamentary committee, which presented recommendations to Parliament. The majority of the house, consisting of the ruling party, then approved the recommendations. As a member of the opposition who has been subjected to constant state harassment, intimidation and violence against his person and family, Roy was at the mercy of the ruling party. The decision to incarcerate Roy was based on the majority vote in Parliament along party lines. The ruling party ZANU Pf voted for the imposition of a custodial sentence of an effective 12 months imprisonment with hard labour for contempt of Parliament for an assault on two sitting Members of Parliament. If he had been convicted by an ordinary criminal court of law a sentence of not more than a month or a fine of not more than US$25 or ZW$200 000 would have been imposed. Further the decision by the Parliament to imprison Roy Bennett was held by the courts not to be questionable or reviewable as it was in terms of parliamentary privileges, which give Parliament the powers to sit as a court and face no judicial scrutiny of their decisions. The fact that the Parliament of Zimbabwe has powers to deprive a citizen of his liberty without due process and to further oust the jurisdiction of courts to review or appeal against such a decision is obviously a contravention of the Charter.

The Commission in the case of the Constitutional Rights Project in respect of Akamu and Others vs. Nigeria 60/91 ruled that the prohibition of judicial review of the decisions of special tribunals and lack of judicial appeal for judgments of these tribunals violate the right of an appeal to competent national organs against acts violating fundamental rights as guaranteed by Article 7(1) (a) of the African Charter. The fact that Roy is in custody based on the decision by an incompetent and partial tribunal, which has obviously deprived him of his fundamental rights and liberties, warrants the Commission to recommend the immediate release of Roy.

Further he is incarcerated in appalling conditions of overcrowding, inadequate food and sanitary facilities, and the location is such that it is difficult for his lawyers and families to visit. He cannot pursue any legal action to restore his property and businesses as will be illustrated below.

The unlawful sentence and incarceration has the potential of barring Roy from participating in civic affairs as a citizen of Zimbabwe and in particular the right to be nominated and stand for Parliament. Even if it is to be argued that the Parliament of Zimbabwe has such wide unfettered powers to imprison an individual for contempt of Parliament, such powers if put to the test of compliance with the provisions of the Charter, will not stand as they are clearly inconsistent with Article 7 of the Charter in respect of the right to be tried and appeal by and to a competent, independent national tribunal as provided by the Charter.

2. Return of dispossessed equipment and vacation of invaded properties, compensation of equipment and properties that have been destroyed.

The right to protection of property is guaranteed under Article 14 of the Charter and it should not be encroached upon without due regard to the law. Charleswood Estate and Mawenje Lodges which are part of the property that is owned by Roy Bennett and Bennett Brothers (Pvt) Ltd, have been unlawfully occupied, invaded, and properties destroyed by state sponsored individuals and government-backed companies in contravention of several court orders. Even where private individuals were involved the State deliberately failed to protect the complainant. The High Court and the Magistrates’ Courts ordered that the invasion and occupation of the property, owned by Roy, was in contravention of the laws of the land and should cease forthwith. The orders are listed below:

A. 1st May 2001 High Court issued a provisional order barring State from acquiring Charleswood Estate
B. 16th of May 2001, a government notice of intention to acquire the estate was set aside by the High Court as the farm was protected by the Export Processing Zones Act. The High Court confirmed this decision on the 20th of January 2003.
C. 8th April 2003, an order was issued by the High Court by which the State and its functionaries particularly the police, army and Intelligence operatives who had participated in the invasions were interdicted from threatening, abusing, intimidating, harassing, assaulting the employees of the State. This order was again ignored.
D. 18th of November 2003 another order was issued by the Magistrates’ Court interdicting State officials and one army Sergeant Nasho from setting foot on the farm and directed the functionaries in unlawful occupation of the farm to vacate.
E. 25th of February 2004, another High Court order was issued giving Roy leave to remain and proceed with his farming on Charleswood Estate.

These courts orders were disobeyed and disregarded as the plundering on the properties continued unabated. The properties were and are protected in terms of the Export Processing Zones Act and the Zimbabwe Investment Centre Act, which outlaw any expropriation or compulsory acquisitions of properties, which are within the category of export processing zones. The properties were acquired through loans he had received from banks and one of the loans (by the Commercial Bank of Zimbabwe) was only paid off in January 2004. These facts are contrary to State representatives’ unfounded allegations that Roy acquired the properties through land grabbing and plundering during the colonial era or as an inheritance from his forefathers.
Cases of torture and extra judicial killings were conducted on his property; some of the acts of torture were conducted in full view of the public as a deterrent to those who resisted the process of land invasions. A photograph of one of the deceased a farm worker at Charleswood Estate is attached as Annexure 1. Photographic evidence of the effects of torturous assaults are attached as Annexure 2. The extra judicial killings were never investigated despite reports being made to the police. There is need for the government to urgently investigate these incidents of violence, torture and extra judicial killings as any further delays will render any criminal prosecutions close to impossible. Until this is done, the perpetrators and instigators of such violence and killings (some of whom are known within the communities) will continue to be left to roam the villages with impunity and be at liberty to commit further crimes.
Several of his properties were destroyed, cars were burnt, livestock were maimed and killed ruthlessly, his farm workers were forcibly ejected from the property and their belongings destroyed or razed to the ground as evidenced in Annexure 3 and 4. Many of the families, which had been forcibly ejected from Charleswood Estate, were forced to sleep in barns and market stalls as evidenced in Annexure 5.

The complainants pray that the Commission recommends the following provisional measures to the Government of Zimbabwe:

a) The immediate release of Roy Bennett from imprisonment
b) That all those unlawfully occupying Charleswood Estate and the other properties of Roy Bennett vacate them with immediate effect,
c) The return of the farm labourers into their dwellings,
d) The return of all the equipment which was unlawfully possessed,
e) The compensation for all the destroyed properties and all the killed livestock as per their value,
f) The investigation of the extra judicial killings, torture, rapes, destruction of property and other violations of rights of all affected people lawfully residing on the farms,
g) To respect, enforce, and obey all court orders,
h) To forthwith stop the political persecution of Roy Bennett and allow him to participate in the civic affairs of the nation without interference.

Yours faithfully

Arnold Tsunga
Director
Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights