Hardtalk interview available for viewing online

By David Coltart | Published October 20, 2006

'Zimbabwe after Mugabe': David Coltart interviewed by Stephen Sackur for BBC Hardtalk

I’ve had many emails saying that some people have been unable to find the Hardtalk interview on the BBC website or that you were unable to watch it online. I can confirm that it is now available for viewing online via the BBC at a page titled ‘Zimbabwe after Mugabe’. This is the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/6063888.stm.

In addition to that, I have added an audio file of the interview that is available for downloading by clicking on the link at the end of this post (to save it to your computer, right-click on the link and choose ‘save link as’). The audio file is in MP3 format and is 2.7MB in size. I appreciate that this is still a very large file for those who are trying to download via a dial-up connection. To make it easier for Zimbabweans, I plan to upload a transcript of the interview to the website as soon as possible. Please keep checking back.

If you know someone who would like to receive a copy of the interview transcript but does not have access to the internet, please ask them to send us an email requesting that we email the transcript to them as soon as it is available.

Hardtalk interview (MP3 audio file, 2.7MB)

Posted in Statements | 5 Comments

Interview on BBC Hardtalk to be aired Thursday, 12 October

By David Coltart | Published October 10, 2006

The BBC have apologized for the non-screening of the scheduled interview on 9 October 2006. Please be advised that the Hardtalk interview will now be screened on Thursday, 12 October 2006 at 5.30, 10.30, 16.30 and 20.30 Central African time. Please can viewers outside Zimbabwe doublecheck the times for their region by visiting the BBC Hardtalk webpage, which can be found at the link below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/default.stm

Hardtalk interviews can also be viewed online via the Hardtalk website (using the link).

Finally, if you miss the programme and would like to watch it, please do a keyword search for my name on the Hardtalk website and you should be ble to watch it there after 12th October as well.

Update: 12 October 2006
A breakdown of TV listings for BBC World is available here. Select 12 October, and your country from the time zone drop down menu – this will give you a full TV schedule for the day, including times for the Hardtalk programme.

Posted in Statements | 3 Comments

Representation of interest through civil society organisations in Sub-Saharan Africa – The Zimbabwean experience

By David Coltart | Published September 21, 2006

Systems of Representation and Democratic Practice in Sub-Saharan Africa

Speech given at Konrad Adenhauer Foundation Conference at Brussels 21/9/06

Representation of interest through civil society organisations in Sub-Saharan Africa

The Zimbabwean experience

Zimbabwe has some of the best developed, established and run civil society organisations in sub-Saharan Africa. Most of these organisations have been established since independence in 1980. Under white minority rule Rhodesia, as it then was, had very few civil organisations, and hardly any human rights organisations. Indeed the only human rights NGO of any significance were the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace (CCJP).

Accordingly whilst civil organisations have played a very positive role in developing Zimbabwe, the fact that most of them have been established post independence, largely through Western aid, has enabled the Zanu PF regime to accuse many civil organisations are being imperialistic tools whenever they criticise the regime of human rights abuses.

There are now a plethora of civil organisations ranging from human rights organisations such as the Legal Resources Foundation (LRF), the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), Zimbabwe lawyers for human rights and Zimrights, to developmental and humanitarian organisations such as the Organisation for Rural Association for Progress (ORAP) and the Matabeleland Aids Council. Government would never have been able to reach its developmental targets without the support of these civil organisations. For the first 20 years after independence government largely welcomed the establishment of civil organisations and recognised the complementary developmental role these organisations played. However since 2000 government has increasingly seen civil organisations as threats to its own hegemony.

To illustrate the role that civil organisations have played and how their relationship with government has changed in the last decade one should consider the establishment, development and work done by one civil organisation since independence. For this purpose I will use the LRF an organisation I have been involved with since its establishment in 1984.

Prior to the LRF’s establishment indigent people in Zimbabwe had very little access to legal services and the legal system in general. Aside from the CCJP there was no civil organisation which educated the general public about human and legal rights. The LRF was established to fill this gap. Between 1984 and 2000 the LRF established a network of legal advice centres throughout the country, especially in poor high-density suburbs in cities and in rural areas. It has trained hundreds of paralegals to run these advice centres. It also developed wide ranging education programmes to educate all sectors of society, including the police and the intelligence service, regarding human and legal rights. A publications unit was established which has produced legal texts ranging from detailed academic treatises to pamphlets designed to simplify the general law for the benefit of Zimbabweans. The publications unit has also, under contract from government, published the Zimbabwean law reports.

As you can imagine the government largely welcomed the role of the LRF as it is provided a service to Zimbabweans that the government had neither the means nor capacity to do. However that cordial relationship started to sour in the mid 1990s when the LRF started working with the CCJP to promote the interests of the victims of the disturbances which took place in the Matabeleland region during the 1980s, otherwise known as the Gukurahundi. Between 1982 and 1987 the Zanu PF regime deployed a North Korean trained army brigade, and known as the 5th Brigade, ostensibly to quell an uprising but in reality to further the Mugabe regime’s objective of establishing a one-party state. Some 20,000 people were massacred during this period. In the early 1990s legal advice centres were established in rural areas where these human rights violations had taken place. Many victims started coming forward with a variety of problems which arose directly from the abuses which had taken place in the 1980s.

In its attempt to respond to the issues arising from these human rights abuses the LRF together with the CCJP produced a human rights report in 1997 called “Breaking the silence-Building true peace”. The report documented the extent of the human rights abuses, the psychological consequences of the abuses and made recommendations to the government as to how the human rights abuses should be remedied. The report was deeply embarrassing to the Zanu PF regime which had successfully swept under the carpet the human rights abuses perpetrated during this period. The relationship between the government and the CCJP and the LRF immediately deteriorated and President Robert Mugabe went to the extent of accusing senior members of both organisations of being traitors and saboteurs. The relationship between government and the LRF has never been the same since, to such an extent that since 2000 some of the LRF’s projects which had very little human rights content, such as the advice Centre programme, have been threatened.

The experience of the LRF is shared by many civil organisations in Zimbabwe. That became especially so in the late 1990s when many civil organisations became the vanguard of the struggle to bring about a more democratic order in Zimbabwe. Formal opposition political parties in Zimbabwe, as elsewhere in the world, battled to source sufficient funds to work effectively and as a result much quasi political work was undertaken by civil organisations. For example the NCA spearheaded the demand for a new democratic Constitution and played a major role in opposing the government’s attempt to subvert the Constitutional reform process in early 2000. The government responded with hostility, so much so that by the late 1990s many civil organisations were under serious threat.

Many human rights activists and civil society leaders feared that the organisations they had painstakingly established over 20 years faced collapse. As a result many leaders of civil organisations decided that the only way to save those organisations was to challenge the very root of governmental power and as a result many of these leaders took on an increasingly political role and many went to the extent of joining the new political formation known as the MDC in September 1999. Whilst they made the MDC an effective opposition there were two negative side-effects: firstly, civil organisations were weakened by the loss of many of their leaders and, secondly, the government became even more convinced that there was a close and seamless relationship between these civil organisations and the MDC. That in turn led the government to intensify its attacks on civil organisations which culminated in the passage through Parliament of the NGO Bill in 2004. Although this Bill has never been signed into law it was designed to crush those civil organisations the government felt were too close to the political opposition.

The events of the last six years in Zimbabwe, including the collapse of the Zimbabwean economy, the estrangement of the Zanu PF regime from the West and the unrelenting attack on civil organisations have left many of them severely weakened. The Zanu PF regime continually makes threats against civil organisations. That situation has been compounded by the fact that many NGOs are starved of funds, partly as a result of governmental policies and partly because international donor organisations in many cases have withdrawn either wholly or in part from Zimbabwe. Many civil organisations have also been infiltrated by state operatives. Staff members of civil organisations have been at the receiving end of violence perpetrated by state agents or Zanu PF operatives. Others have been threatened, detained, assaulted and tortured.

Most civil organisations in Zimbabwe are still largely dependent on external, and in the majority of cases Western, donors. Whilst this has generally been a positive experience, the reliance on Western donors has also had its downside. As indicated above the Zanu PF regime has used the fact of Western support as evidence that these civil organisations have an imperialistic agenda. This in turn has allowed the Zanu PF regime to create the perception that many leaders of civil organisations are simply puppets of the West. Of course in the vast majority of organisations Western support has not determined these organisations’ agenda. On occasions donors have been overly prescriptive and sometimes even divisive, but that type of negative conduct has been rare.

One problem faced by civil organisations in Zimbabwe has been the undermining of some of their democratic policy objectives through being indirectly associated with Western governments that have implemented policies at variance with those democratic policy objectives. For example many Zimbabwean civil organisations have campaigned against detention without trial, denial of access to lawyers and torture. The breaches of these rights by Western forces in the Iraqi war and in the global war against terror have given the Zanu PF regime a powerful propaganda weapon to justify their own policies and actions. For this reason it has been important that Zimbabwean civil organisations demonstrate consistency and condemn breaches of fundamental human rights wherever they take place and by whomsoever responsible for these breaches. However in condemning such actions inevitably there is the danger that relationships between civil organisations and Western donor governments may be undermined. That however is a risk that Zimbabwean civil organisations must take if they are to be consistent and true to their founding principles and goals.

Miraculously most civil organisations have survived the onslaught of the last six years but many are now hanging by a fragile thread. It is incumbent upon Western governments and donor agencies to ensure that these civil organisations survive, many of which have been in existence for over two decades and many of which provide a beacon of hope to Zimbabweans and Africans in general. Sadly funding has been reduced in recent years and it is not certain whether some organisations will survive. Accordingly democratic governments have an obligation to do all in their power to ensure that these civil organisations in Zimbabwe do survive. This is important not just to ensure that they continue the struggle to bring about a new democratic order in Zimbabwe but also because many of these organisations will be vital components in building a new democratic Zimbabwean order in future. One of the tragedies of the last six years is that many government departments have all but collapsed and the very fabric of Zimbabwean society is under threat. Corruption is now rampant. Law-enforcement agencies now see the use of torture as the norm. Civil organisations will play a vital role in creating a new democratic order in Zimbabwe that not only delivers services but also establishes new standards of zero tolerance towards corruption and abuses of fundamental human rights.

There is one remaining frontier for Western donor organisations to consider in the context of assisting civil organisations which genuinely and effectively represent the interests of citizens in the countries they work in. Traditionally a distinction has been made between political organisations and civil organisations. But of course political organisations often have objectives which overlap with those of civil organisations. Through a combination of Western reluctance to fund foreign political parties and hostility displayed by many incumbent African political parties towards any form of foreign funding of opposition parties, many opposition parties throughout Africa have found themselves starved of resources. The fact remains however that in many countries the only effective civil organisations with representation country wide, in both urban and rural areas, are political parties rather than narrowly defined non partisan civil organisations. There is also an irony in that it was only through foreign funding that many of these incumbent political parties were able to defeat oppressive colonial regimes and come to power themselves. Many of these incumbent political parties used foreign funding not only to gain power but also to consolidate their power. And yet the same parties are themselves now at the forefront of opposing and criticising any attempts to fund democratic political opposition. Many of the same governments use the benefits of incumbency not only to maintain and consolidate their power but also to crush those striving to bring about a new democratic, transparent and accountable order.
In doing so many of these incumbent governments do all in their power to undermine legitimate non-partisan civil organisations. It is another irony that the future of these non-partisan civil organisations can only be guaranteed if new democratic orders are brought to the countries they operate in, and almost inevitably that will only happen if political opposition parties are enabled to flourish so that they can effectively contest for power.

Accordingly if Western governments are determined to ensure the growth and consolidation of civil organisations they cannot avoid the challenge of reviewing their current policies regarding the support of opposition political parties and movements in sub-Saharan Africa. In urging this only those political formations that are genuinely democratic and obviously committed to using non-violent means to attain power should be supported. Western governments need to establish objective criteria which will govern which political organisations will be assisted. These criteria should include the principle of not supporting ethnically based parties and supporting parties that have well-defined democratic ideologies, policies and principles. It is also important that a new contract or understanding be reached between the European Union and the African Union so that any support for political formations be done in a transparent and fair manner throughout Africa. Unless this happens there will always be the danger that Western support for political parties will be seen as some form of neocolonialism. However if this new proposed policy comes about as a result of dialogue and if it supports both incumbent ruling parties and opposition parties (subject of course to them objectively and ostensibly being committed to basic democratic standards) then it may well be implemented throughout Africa by consensus.

The connection between democracy and sustained long-term economic development is obvious. Accordingly long term economic development can only be assured if democracy can only be rooted throughout Africa. That in turn will only happen if all civil organisations which represent the interests of Africans, including political parties, are assisted in their establishment and development.

The Hon. David Coltart MP
Shadow Minister of Justice,
Zimbabwe

21st September 2006

Posted in Speeches | 1 Comment

Statement regarding the arrest and alleged assault of ZCTU and MDC members

By David Coltart | Published September 15, 2006

The MDC expresses its deep concern and outrage regarding the pre-emptive arrests of ZCTU members and our colleagues in the MDC, the alleged denial of access to them by lawyers and alleged assaults of them by state operatives this week.

Notwithstanding the provisions of POSA, the Zimbabwean Constitution is quite clear regarding the right that Zimbabweans have to demonstrate peaceably. The provisions of POSA used by the ZANU PF regime to arrest people exercising this fundamental constitutional right are fascist laws no different to those used by the white minority regime in terms of LOMA. They were bad laws then and are no different now. LOMA did not prevent the legitimate demands of the people from being realised and in the same way POSA will not succeed ultimately in denying the people their rights. The sooner the regime realises that these laws will not solve the Zimbabwean crisis the better. The regime is advised to repeal POSA and then sit down with all Zimbabweans to negotiate a solution to the calamitous situation afflicting our nation.

We are especially concerned about reports that state agents have denied access by lawyers to those detained and that several of those detained have been severely assaulted. These two breaches of rights usually go hand in hand – when lawyers can’t get in to see their clients law enforcement agencies the world over feel they have licence to torture. That is the very reason why the United States Supreme Court recently, and very correctly, ruled that the denial of access to lawyers in Guantanamo Bay offended the American Constitution. Sadly this practice is routine in Zimbabwe and has been for decades. It must stop immediately and those responsible for both the denial of access and torture must be identified, rooted out of whatever state agency they belong to and prosecuted.

A specific call is made on the Attorney General to investigate these reports of denial of access and torture. It is the Attorney General’s responsibility to ensure that Zimbabwe’s Constitution is obeyed by all, especially by state agents and the police in particular. We expect that he will call for an urgent investigation into these allegations and that he will vigorously prosecute those responsible for these outrages if the allegations are found to be correct.

In any democratic country if subordinates are found guilty of serious human rights allegations the Minister under whom they fall take responsibility and resign. This is not the first time that the police, CIO and youth brigade in Zimbabwe have been accused of torture – there have been persistent reports (many backed by irrefutable medical evidence) over the last few years of these agencies being engaged in acts of torture.
Article 2 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or degrading Treatment or Punishment states:
“Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction”.
It is clear to all reasonable people that the ZANU PF regime has failed to comply with this basic international obligation. In particular the Minister of Home Affairs, Minister Kembo Mohadi, has failed to prevent torture being used by the police. He is deeply aware of the issue because it has been raised on several occasions with him in Parliament. He should also be acutely empathetic because he himself suffered torture at the hands of this regime in the 1980s. In all the circumstances we call upon him to resign.

Finally we are cognisant that this regime has in the past simply denied that torture has been used and so is likely to do so again. With this in mind the ZANU PF regime is reminded that “torture is an international crime over which international law and the parties to the Torture Convention have given universal jurisdiction to all courts wherever the torture occurs”. We are keeping records of those responsible for these heinous acts and will use all the means at our disposal to bring the culprits to book.

Martin Luther King once said “Where evil men would seek to perpetuate an unjust status quo, good men must seek to bring into being a real order of justice”. That is precisely what we are doing and as sure as day follows night a real order of justice will be brought to Zimbabwe.

The Hon. David Coltart MP

Shadow Minister of Justice
Bulawayo
15th September 2006

Posted in Statements | 1 Comment

Letter to Bulawayo South Constituents September 2006

By David Coltart | Published September 14, 2006

Dear Friends,

When I last wrote to you in late May, explaining my views regarding the split in the MDC, I said I would write again regarding my general work as your MP, and this is now that letter.

Life in Zimbabwe continues to get harder for all her people except the ruling elite who continue to accumulate vast wealth on the backs of the very people they claim to represent. Since the March 2005 general election we have seen some of the worst human rights violations ever committed by this regime, especially the so called Operation Murambatsvina which destroyed the lives of so many poor Zimbabweans. Despite claiming that this was designed to improve the lives of people, 16 months after the operation the hard facts show that a tiny percentage of homes destroyed have been rebuilt by the regime and the vast majority of those who lost either their homes or source of income are in a pitiful state.

Furthermore despite the claims of the regime that there is an “economic turnaround” happening, it is clear to all thinking people that this is simply another lie. The recent so called “Operation Sunrise” action of the Reserve Bank Governor, with the approval of the regime, taking three zeroes off our currency, has not addressed one of the key economic problems, inflation. Indeed if anything this policy has fueled inflation. Aspects of the new policy show just how out of touch with reality this regime is – for example the decision to print new 1 cent notes is sheer lunacy because the cost of printing the notes is vastly more than what the notes are worth.

The divisions within the opposition have been most unfortunate and have greatly benefited the regime. But we must now move on and refocus on the root of the Zimbabwean crisis – namely tyrannical rule.

However the combination of misrule and the troubles within the opposition has given rise to feelings amongst Zimbabweans written about in Psalm 7:

“He who is pregnant with evil and conceives trouble gives rise to disillusionment.”

Many people in Zimbabwe are disillusioned and depressed and that is not surprising. It is in this context that the primary responsibility of leaders opposed to this regime is to provide the people of Zimbabwe with hope. Hope that this nightmare will end; hope that there are still leaders who are determined to do all in their power to bring an end to the suffering of Zimbabweans; hope that there will be a new dawn in which there is not simply a change of leadership but a positive change in the way Zimbabwe is run. In other words we have to do all we can to counter the disillusionment that so many feel.

Many of us in the opposition have been trying as hard as we can to be merchants of hope. It has been difficult because it is almost impossible to communicate effectively with our constituents in that we have very little access to the media and precious few resources to meet and generally to get our message out.

Accordingly this newsletter is primarily designed to give you some hope by explaining to you that I, along with many of my colleagues in the opposition, have continued to work tirelessly to achieve our common dream of a new democratic Zimbabwe.

Projects

As I explained in my Christmas 2005 letter to you I have been trying to raise funds to assist the most vulnerable people in Bulawayo South and I am pleased to report that many of the projects initiated some time ago are now bearing fruit.

Farming Project

A group of volunteers have worked hard this year to make the Bulawayo South Constituency Development Trust/Loving Hand Orphanage farming project a reality. Land has been cleared and a fence put up at the corner of Nketa Drive and (the very appropriately named!!) Guqula Road. A new borehole and water storage tank have been installed, a security hut constructed and electricity supplied to the site. As I write a new irrigation system is being installed. In the next few weeks the first crops will be planted. A stall will be built so that the produce of the farming project can be sold on site to Nketa residents. 10% of the proceeds will go to the Loving Hand Orphanage.

Land being ploughed in preparation for the planting of the first crop in August 2006

This project has been made possible through the generosity of two friends of mine who went to the same school I went to, Christian Brothers College, and through the hard work of volunteers from Nketa and other Bulawayo residents.

Cricket Nets

The Henry Olonga cricket nets which were opened last year are now being used daily. Two new cricket teams are now using them – the Jimbo and Rocky teams, shown here practicing at the Henry Olonga nets.

Members of the Jimbo and Rocky teams practicing at the Henry Olonga Nets, Nketa

I have sourced cricket equipment for use by the teams and recently the equipment was handed over to them. I am grateful for the generosity of the Sporting Chance organisation in Cape Town which donated the equipment.

Handing over cricket equipment 17 August 2006

I am delighted to report that I have recently secured funding for the construction of another cricket net in Emganwini and this should be built within the next few months. The same donor has promised to source more money so that further cricket nets can be constructed in Bulawayo South Constituency.

Aids Victims support centre

As you will recall from previous letters I have been working with the Emganwini community and the Toc H charity to secure funding for the construction of an Aids Victims Support Centre in Emganwini. Despite receiving assurances from two embassies that they would support the project a few years ago no funding has been forthcoming yet and we have been forced to look elsewhere for funding. In this regard I have now approached the European Union Ambassador who has said the EU will consider a funding proposal. I am also pleased to report that funding from a private donor has been secured for a portion of the project. In the interim the Toc H charity has raised sufficient resources to build the caretaker’s cottage on the site which was completed recently.

Relief Fund

Through the generosity of a private donor I have established a modest relief fund for the residents of Bulawayo South of which some Z$ 500 million (old currency) has been used to date, for example, to pay for school and university fees for bright children from greatly disadvantaged families. In the past year some 10 young people have been assisted in this way through the payment of their fees, clothing has been provided to Operation Murambatsvina victims and medical fees paid for destitute people.

Annual Soccer Tournament

On the 9th September we held the 2006 Bulawayo South Soccer Tournament at Nketa Hall football ground. After a very good day with some superb soccer being played Ward 25 edged out a combined Wards 5 & 6 team 2-1. For the first time we had a small netball tournament which I hope will expand next year to include teams from throughout the constituency.

Handing over the Bulawayo South Trophy on 9th September 2006 to the captain of the winning Ward 25 team

Aspen Ideas Festival

In July Professor Arthur Mutambara and I were invited by the Aspen Institute (an American think tank organisation) to speak at its Aspen Ideas Festival. We shared a panel with world renowned Ghanaian Professor of Economics George Ayittey and South African Jonathan Oppenheimer in discussing the state and future of Southern Africa. The Festival was also addressed by many prominent people such as President Bill Clinton, Alan Greenspan, Secretary Madeleine Albright and Secretary Colin Powell, some of whom we had meetings with to discuss the Zimbabwean crisis. Professor Mutambara was granted the honour of being one of just seven of the invited speakers to give closing remarks at the end of the 6 day Festival. This proved to be a wonderful opportunity to raise the plight of Zimbabweans before a powerful audience of highly influential leaders and thinkers from throughout the world. Professor Mutambara rose to the challenge and gave an inspiring and moving address.

MDC

As you are no doubt aware on the 15th June 2006 after a process of consultation I decided to join the Mutambara faction of the MDC. In the statement I made at the press conference announcing this decision I said: “I will continue to work within the Mutambara faction and with friends and colleagues in the faction of the MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai to unite the two factions. I remain absolutely convinced that the struggle for democracy will remain severely handicapped for so long as we are divided.” I have been true to my word and am working behind the scenes with colleagues on both sides of the divide in pursuit of this object.

I have recently been elected by the National Council to the position of Secretary for Legal Affairs and so have resumed my work in that regard.

General

I was elected by you to represent you in Parliament and to be a legislator. Regrettably the regime has undermined the institution of Parliament itself; it very rarely sits these days and when it does little productive work is done. However it is important that we do what we can to keep this institution alive as it will be a very important component in the rebuilding of a modern democratic state in future.

On the 9th September I had a very useful meeting with the residents of Ward 24 in Nketa in which we discussed the problems created by ZESA power cuts. As a result a letter has been written by me to the Minister of Energy setting out all the problems and suggesting ways of remedying them. I have no doubt that there are other similar problems being faced by you daily – if there are and you would like me to try to tackle them on your behalf please write to me or leave a note at my Constituency Office situated in the Housing Office in Nketa 6.

In closing let me remind you of the verses in Psalm 7 which follow the ones I included above:

“He who digs a hole and scoops it out falls into the pit he has made.
The trouble he causes recoils on himself; his violence comes down on his own head.”

History shows that dictatorships down through the ages are usually the authors of their own downfall and this dictatorship will be no different.

I have no doubt that the trouble that this regime has caused for ordinary peace loving Zimbabweans, who just want democracy and good governance, will rebound against itself. The very policies that the regime has implemented to prolong its stay in power (such as Operation Murambatsvina and changing the currency) are in fact speeding up its end.

However, until that happens we must rededicate ourselves to our founding ideals of democracy and non violence. We must remain united and determined to continue this struggle and not to yield to the regime. Through these means we will soon see a new, positive dawn arise in Zimbabwe.

Thank you for your ongoing support.

Yours sincerely,
The Hon. David Coltart MP

Posted in Letters | 2 Comments

Letter to friends

By David Coltart | Published August 17, 2006

Dear Friends,

I don’t know whether you have been following the recent discussion on SW Radio Africa involving Tendai and Welshman. The last transcript has just been published and this excerpt is important:

“Violet: And, finally, you know, some have asked why the visionaries and luminaries in the MDC are wasting time and breath and fulfilling Mugabe’s agenda by fighting each other. Now, does the old saying ‘there’s strength in unity’ still resonate with the MDC intelligentsia and pro-democracy movements in Zimbabwe Professor Ncube?

Professor Ncube: Of course it does, and there’s absolutely no doubt that a single MDC united will have a much better chance, a stronger chance of actually dislodging the regime than a divided MDC. As we said at the beginning, the only person who is laughing all the way to the bank in respect of all the things which are happening on the ground to us as the opposition movement, as the democratic movement in Zimbabwe, is Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF. So we are very, very alive to that.

Violet: Tendai Biti?

Tendai Biti: Well, I think as long as the vision remains alive and as long as all of us have hard looks to ourselves and in ourselves, I think time might heal us and I think that we should keep the flame alive. You know, I studied history; history is very funny; so many things have happened in history, so no one should write the democratic movement off. Far from it.”

Welshman has been so heavily vilified in the last year – he has been accused of being in league with Mbeki and Zanu PF. I have listened very carefully and studied all these allegations for a year and I have to say that I have not seen a shred of reliable evidence yet. On the contrary despite the errors of judgment on some issues that Welshman has made (as all of us have from time to time) I do not see someone who has been happy about the divisions in the opposition, or someone who engineered them as alleged. On the contrary I have personally witnessed someone who has been deeply distressed by what has happened and who desires unity – as evidenced by this excerpt. If I am wrong in this I am obviously a very poor judge of character and fact; and Welshman should be awarded an Oscar!

I think the time has come for us to reconsider who has actually been responsible for the divisions in the opposition. This time we must consider hard evidence and not mere unsubstantiated allegations. And if anyone has hard evidence of these allegations against Welshman could it please be produced so that we can assess it. If there is in fact no such evidence then we would all benefit from recognising who is in fact still committed to the vision of a new democratic non violent Zimbabwe and start working with them.

Congratulations to both Tendai and Welshman for their positive comments. Congratulations as well to Violet Gonda for this superb series. In my book all are patriots worthy of our praise and support.

Regards,

David

Posted in Letters | 8 Comments

Mugabe plans laws to silence critics

By David Coltart | Published July 31, 2006

Peta Thornycroft

Zimbabwe is poised to introduce draconian laws to silence its critics, both at home and abroad, who face 20 years in jail if they “publish or communicate a falsehood”.
Opposition members have condemned the measures as “the most fascist legislation this country has known”. The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Bill, went through its second parliamentary reading last week despite a multi-party report from the legal committee which described parts of it as “unconstitutional”.

It is the latest in a series of harsh security laws. Media legislation, the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, was toughened up earlier this month to provide a jail sentence of up to two years for journalists found practicing without accreditation.

David Coltart, legal secretary of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, said: “The section relating to crimes against the state in this bill embodies the most fascist legislation this country has known, far worse than the most draconian laws passed by the Smith regime. The sentence of up to 20 years amounts to a death sentence in Zimbabwe’s prisons.”

The latest law, which comes among a rush of new Bills, ahead of elections next March, makes it an offence to publish or communicate “to any other person a statement which is wholly or materially false with the intention of realising that there is a real risk of inciting or promoting public disorder or public violence or endangering public safety or, adversely affecting the defense and economic interests of Zimbabwe: or undermining public confidence in a law enforcement agency, the Prison Service or the Defense Forces of Zimbabwe; or interfering with, disrupting or interrupting any essential service,” that person “shall be guilty of publishing or communicating a false statement prejudicial to the State and liable to a fine up to or exceeding level 14 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 20 years or both.”
Critics have condemned the slack phrasing of the bill. “The question of what is a falsehood will depend on which judge hears the case,” said Beatrice Mtetwa, a human rights lawyer.

Mr Coltart said one clause in the new bill also makes it an offence for any citizen, either in Zimbabwe or outside the country to make an “abusive, indecent or obscene statement” about President Robert Mugabe, “even if it is a true statement”, he said.
One of the most outspoken critics of Zimbabwe’s political and humanitarian crisis, Archbishop Pius Ncube, head of the Roman Catholic Church in the second city, Bulawayo, said: “So they are going to stop us saying anything, even outside of Zimbabwe, even stop us writing a book?

“The truth must be told about the evil things they do. We cannot be quiet.” Patrick Chinamasa, the justice minister, who drafted most of the new laws, was unavailable for comment.

Posted in Parliamentary, Press reports | Leave a comment

Violence of the heart

By David Coltart | Published July 7, 2006

Zimbabwe Independent
Editor’s Memo

By Vincent Kahiya

A MARTIN Luther King commandment says “refrain from violence of the fist, tongue and heart”.

Most people can stop themselves from hitting others out of fear of arrest and can bite their tongue to refrain from saying something mean, but violence of the heart is challenging. Following this rule is imperative because things we think about, sooner or later, are going to come out in our actions.

Violent conduct in an individual comes from the heart. It controls the fist and the tongue. No wonder fists are raised menacingly when rulers proclaim “degrees in violence” or when they implore supporters “to strike fear in the heart of the white man”. The next time they stand up to preach peace, tolerance and co-existence the violent heart will still be beating.

In political parties violence is rarely regarded as a virtue. It is quickly denied and condemned even when it is at the heart of a party’s activities. But as long as violence has an imprint in the heart of the party no amount of cover-up and denial can hide its ugly face. Sooner or later it will come out in actions such as physical assaults, verbal attacks and other subtle threats.

The assault on Harare North MP Trudy Stevenson this week by youths allegedly aligned to the Tsvangirai-led MDC provides useful insight into intra-party violence and useful lessons of what happens when violence of the heart is not dealt with expressly.

Tsvangirai’s camp has denied culpability in the assault on the feisty but small and frail woman. Stevenson’s camp has fingered Tsvangirai’s supporters for the violence.

Tsvangirai’s secretary-general Tendai Biti in a statement denounced the assault on Stevenson. He said his faction did not support violence and wished Trudy a speedy recovery.

Also this week, Linos Mushonga, who was also at the receiving end in the attack, was on the Voice of America denouncing the Tsvangirai faction for the violence that left him with two broken fingers.

Remember this Mutambara quote at the beginning of the year: “How do we talk about a regime which is criminal and violent when you yourself are carrying out violent acts and violating your own party rules? We won’t be qualified to fight Mugabe if we are little Mugabes.”

This of course has been denied. It would be stretching honesty to breaking point for any party to confess violence and own up. It is not surprising therefore when Biti’s statement fingered Zanu PF for the violence. He said the “barbaric act of attacking political opponents has always been synonymous with Zanu PF and not the MDC”.

In another statement announcing the formation of a commission to investigate the violence he laid the blame on the CIO for being “at the centre of manufacturing evidence and issues in a bid to implicate the opposition…these old-fashioned divide-and-rule tactics will not fool us”.

But isn’t it that leaders of the two factions have fooled themselves into believing that the opposition movement would be stronger as a divided entity. Biti’s conspiracy theory of CIO involvement cannot be dismissed completely but the intelligence service will always find it easy to stage-manage a war between two already-fighting parties. And what better way to use violence to divide a party that split partly because of unresolved intra-party violence.

t is encouraging to note that a commission of enquiry has been formed to probe the assault on Stevenson and her colleagues. This is how past incidents of violent clashes should have been handled but they were not. Evidence was suppressed.

Recent revelations in this paper by Bulawayo South MP David Coltart on the failure of party leaders to mete out punishment to those accused of trying to murder party director for security, Peter Guhu, in September 2004 at Harvest House and the rehiring of youths accused of violence should be sobering to Tsvangirai’s henchmen who have told us that the party does not condone violence.

The probe should not just be fashioned to flush out the culprits but to put in place systems that send a clear message that violence will not be tolerated. That includes publicising results of probes and ensuring that senior party officials are not seen in the company of the criminal elements.

This observation by Coltart is important: “Young men often have a predisposition towards violence; that happens the world over and Zimbabwe is no different. What controls that predisposition is the manner in which it is handled by leaders. If it is not dealt with, a culture of impunity develops and violence perpetuates itself.”

It stays in the heart.

Posted in Articles | Leave a comment

Letter to the Editor, Zimdaily

By David Coltart | Published June 28, 2006

Editor,
Zimdaily.
28th June 2006

Dear Sir,

The article you published by Tsungai Mhaka on Monday the 26th June 2006 is in some respects false and you are invited to correct the falsehoods and publicly apologise for them. Whilst I take issue with most of what has been written as it is largely comment I respect the right of Mr Mhaka to publish his views. However the sentences highlighted in the following paragraph are patently false and must be corrected:

“Notwithstanding the fact that the Tsvangirai side of the MDC has more academics and professionals than the Mutambara faction perhaps their pro-people, pro-poor agenda may not quite have resonated with the likes of Coltart. This is the same Coltart you remember who during the course of debate on the 17th constitutional amendment attempted to introduce a clause prohibiting the office of the Presidency of Zimbabwe being occupied by anyone who is not a university graduate. I understand the MDC National Council, whose decisions we are now made to believe are so sacred was never consulted before this proposed amendment was suggested.”

The facts are as follows:

1. A first draft of proposed constitutional amendments was produced by independent lawyers to reflect the views expressed by the people of Zimbabwe during the Constitutional Commission’s work. They were tasked with redrafting the Constitutional Commission constitution so that it reflected what the people wanted, as disclosed to commissioners during their “outreach” programme in 2000. The people’s views were detailed in the Commission’s report but, as you know, many of them were ignored in the draft constitution which the Commission ultimately produced. One of the most widespread and strongly-held views was that there should not be an executive President: the executive arm of government should be under the control of a Prime Minister, while the President should have only ceremonial duties — smiling at people, patting children on the head, greeting foreign dignitaries, and so on. At the same time, and rather inconsistently, the people felt that the President should have a university degree. See volume 1 of the Commission’s report, page 561. So when these lawyers redrafted the Commission’s constitution they gave the President minimal powers, just enough to ensure the continuation of government from one administration to the next. They also put in the provision requiring the President to have a university degree. They recognised that it was not entirely logical to impose academic qualifications on a person whose only real function was to be nice to people, but the qualifications were not completely incompatible with the post and putting them in would not make the constitution unworkable — and anyway it was what the people said they wanted. Hence that provision was put in.

2. Sheila Jarvis, a board member of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, was already working with others on Constitutional proposals in the lead up to Amendment 17. Arnold Tsunga, the Director of ZLHR, and Sheila will confirm that they produced a very detailed package based on the original “What the people want” document – produced in the course of the Constitutional Commission’s work but ignored by it. ZLHR produced this package for Parliamentarians based on that document. The lawyers’ work in redrafting was therefore not their own – it was based on the “What the people want document” and as far as I understand was part of the ZLHR initiative to stir debate on the issue and to seek some common ground between the NCA draft and the Constitutional Commission’s rejected draft. To that extent the constitutional proposal document produced was not an MDC document per se but something that broadly agreed with the MDC’s general constitutional principles but, more to the point, was part of a wider initiative by civil society and lawyers interested in the Constitutional debate to provoke debate.

3. When I received the first draft from the civic society lawyers it was on a computer disk. I gave electronic copies to Tendai Biti and Welshman Ncube for them to have a look at a week before Amendment 17 was due to be debated. We agreed that in principle it would be a good idea for us to table the amendments to stimulate debate, knowing that there was no chance of Zanu PF ever accepting the amendments. The same has been done since 2000 – we have consistently tabled amendments to legislation. The most notable example was when I tabled substantial amendments to the Electoral Amendment Bill in 2004 – what was tabled was in fact an entirely new Electoral Act. Of course it was not accepted by Zanu PF but it stimulated a lot of debate and put Zanu PF on the back foot. So whilst it is correct to say that the amendments were not taken to the MDC National Council that has never been done in the past with other MDC amendments and there is no MDC constitutional requirement to do so. The day before the Parliamentary debate the issue was discussed in the MDC caucus meeting and it was agreed that we should go ahead, table and debate the amendments. The amendments AS TABLED IN PARLIAMENT (SEE BELOW), i.e. not the first draft given to us, reflected the MDC’s broad constitutional principles as devised by the Legal Committee which I chaired and which were accepted at the MDC National Conference held in Harare in December 2003.

4. When I read the computer version of the document I saw it had the clause referred to above, namely the requirement that the President have a university degree. As that conformed to neither the MDC policy nor my own personal views I took that clause OUT. The paper version of the amendments tabled in Parliament and handed to each MP clearly has that clause taken OUT by me on MY OWN INITIATIVE. So I did not ever “attempt to introduce a clause prohibiting the office of the Presidency of Zimbabwe being occupied by anyone who is not a university graduate” as Mr. Mhaka alleges. That is patently false.

5. Furthermore, and in any event, the original offending clause, as clearly demonstrated above, referred to a NON EXECUTIVE PRESIDENT, not an executive President. So it would never have affected Morgan Tsvangirai. Ironically had it not been taken out the person it would most likely have affected within the MDC would have been Vice President Gibson Sibanda! But in any event it was taken out by me as it clearly did not represent MDC policy.

From the above you will see that what has been written by Mr Mhaka, and published by you, is patently false. I expect the correct facts to be published and a full apology to be made. This e mail has been copied to Tendai Biti who I have no doubt will confirm the veracity of what I have written.

There is one further point regarding the article which I believe cannot go unanswered and I expect the right of reply from you if not a correction and apology. The offending clause is as follows:

“The issue of violence has only arisen as a back up excuse after realization that the arguments in favour of participation in the Senate would not wash. The alleged violence against senior party officials happened in December 2004 so the question could be asked of Coltart; why did you not resign then?? ”

Mr. Mhaka has clearly read the various articles I have written on the subject of violence recently and disingenuously he has deliberately chosen to mislead your readers by failing to mention pertinent facts mentioned in those articles. From the moment I became aware that violence had raised its ugly head within the MDC in September 2004 I began to speak out within the organisation, facts clearly set out in my articles. I expressed concern about the division in the National Executive held in Harare on the 18th December 2004. I raised further concern at the National Council meeting held on the 25th June 2005. Believing that I was not being listened to I tabled a written statement (attached hereto) at the National Executive meeting held on the 15th July 2005. Ironically that statement was tabled on my behalf by my successor as Legal Secretary Innocent Gonese (to whom this letter is also copied). He subscribed fully to the sentiments contained in that statement – that is why I asked him to table it. In other words long before the Senate even became a constitutional reality the issue of violence within the MDC was a major concern to me. I did not resign because I still hoped that I could work within the MDC to remedy the situation. For the same reason I did not join either faction after the 12th October 2005 debacle and put proposals forward to Morgan Tsvangirai in November and December 2005 to address the problem, which regrettably were rejected by the Tsvangirai faction in January 2006. It was only when I realised that my efforts were futile that I joined the faction most likely in my view to tackle this scourge. I have never of course resigned from the MDC.

Kindly give this letter the same prominence you gave to Mr. Mhaka’s article.

Yours sincerely,

David Coltart

Posted in Press reports, Statements | 1 Comment

Statement of David Coltart regarding his political future

By David Coltart | Published June 15, 2006

I am very proud to have been a founder member of the MDC and to have been part of the courageous struggle of the MDC during the last seven years to bring an end to tyranny in Zimbabwe. In particular I was proud to be part of a united organisation that transcended the tribal, ethnic, racial and gender divisions which have plagued Zimbabwe for so long. Accordingly from the moment I became aware of the very serious divisions which emerged within the MDC in late 2004 I have been convinced that I should do all in my power to keep the party united and focused on defeating tyranny.

I believe that the split in the MDC we have observed in the last seven months has been a betrayal of the struggle for democracy and a betrayal of the massive sacrifices made by so many Zimbabweans. Because of that, although I had very strong views as to who and what was to blame for these divisions, I believed that I should do everything possible, within my own limited power, to try to reconcile the opposing factions and failing that to mediate an amicable divorce between the two factions. As is now public knowledge, those efforts came to an end when the faction led by Morgan Tsvangirai declined my offer to mediate in early May.

Since then I have consulted widely within my constituency and elsewhere. I have held several public and private meetings to consult with and listen to people. I have spoken to a wide variety of old friends, supporters and people I trust regarding what I should do. For reasons I have already explained in other public documents I cannot join the faction of the MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai. That has left me with three remaining options, namely: to resign from politics altogether and to go back to civil society, to become an independent or to join the faction led by Arthur Mutambara.

An overwhelming majority of the people I consulted were not in favour of me leaving politics. Indeed only one person felt I should do so. A small number of people were in favour of me becoming an independent. However I am convinced that that is simply not feasible for both constitutional and practical reasons. Indeed given the direct and indirect attacks on me by members of the faction led by Morgan Tsvangirai it has become apparent to me that remaining an independent would be increasingly untenable.
A majority of those who have come to my meetings and who have written to me have expressed to me that they understand why it is impossible for me to join the Tsvangirai faction and support me in that decision.

I must now move on. For the last seven months I have been in a state of limbo and I believe it is imperative that I resume my work in this collective struggle to bring freedom and democracy to Zimbabwe. I believe that I will be more effective working in conjunction with colleagues who share a similar vision for a new Zimbabwe and who are committed to using the same means as I am to reach that goal. I should also state that I find myself in an invidious position in that I would far rather remain in a united MDC than join any faction, but that clearly is not possible now.

With this in mind during the last few weeks I have met with leaders of what I perceive to be the pro-democracy faction of the MDC and in particular with Arthur Mutambara. I have been encouraged by these discussions and in particular by the following:

1. Their agreement to set up an independent commission of inquiry to investigate and remedy all the violence which has afflicted the MDC since September 2004;
2. Their stated commitment to adopt a zero tolerance disciplinary approach to any future acts of violence within the MDC;
3. The acceptable assurances that I have been given regarding their commitment to engage in peaceful, constitutional and, most importantly, nonviolent forms of mass action designed to get the ZANU PF regime to agree to a new constitution and free and fair elections;
4. Their commitment to respecting all the policy decisions taken at the December 2003 conference of the MDC, in particular the resolution to press for a victim orientated Truth Commission which will investigate all human rights abuses, crimes against humanity and acts of genocide which have been perpetrated in Zimbabwe since 1965;
5. The acceptable assurances that I have received of their intention to rebrand the pro-democracy faction of the MDC, to end as soon as possible the present confusion experienced by the Zimbabwean electorate following the division of the MDC into two factions.

Accordingly I have now decided to formally align myself with the pro-democracy faction of the MDC led by Arthur Mutambara. In stating this I should stress that I will continue to work within the pro-democracy faction and with friends and colleagues in the faction of the MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai to unite the two factions. I remain absolutely convinced that the struggle for democracy will remain severely handicapped for so long as we are divided.

I am pleased that I have been able to make this decision after the result of the Budiriro by-election. Since adopting my position of neutrality seven months ago I have been accused of fence sitting, which also implies that I have been waiting to see which way the wind would blow. I trust that my decision today will lay to rest those accusations. I have solely based my decision on principle and am pleased that no one can now accuse me of acting expediently in the aftermath of the Budiriro by-election. Indeed I would rather lose my seat in Parliament than compromise certain principles that are fundamental to my belief system.

The Budiriro by-election shows that the pro-democracy faction of the MDC has a mountain to climb if it is ever to govern Zimbabwe. However I am not impressed by mere numbers. I was never impressed by the overwhelming majority of support ZANU PF received in the 1980s when its leaders were then committing crimes against humanity. Likewise today the mere fact that the faction of the MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai won so convincingly in Budiriro does not in itself persuade me to join that faction.

In this regard the words of Thomas Jefferson in his inaugural address delivered on the 4 March 1801 are pertinent:

“All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”

The pursuit of freedom is never an easy task. There is always the temptation to take shortcuts and to compromise regarding the means of reaching the goal of liberty. In this regard I have been very impressed by the courage and determination shown by my colleagues in the pro-democracy faction in the face of unjustified and sometimes vicious attacks simply for standing up for what they believe in. I remain convinced that unless we stand on principle and for what we know is right this long and desolate night of tyranny will continue in Zimbabwe, albeit under another guise. We will only change Zimbabwe for the better if we change our own ways first – that is the very essence of “chinja maitiro”.

Accordingly I now look forward to putting my shoulder to the wheel with colleagues of a similar mind so that we, working in conjunction with democratic compatriots in other organisations, can bring this long night to an end and usher in a new dawn of democracy and freedom to Zimbabwe.

God bless Zimbabwe.

The Hon. David Coltart MP
Bulawayo South
15th June 2006

Posted in Statements | 7 Comments