The Sunday Mail
Social security is a concept enshrined in Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which encourages nations to actively advance the economic, social and cultural rights of their people and to promote the development and well-being of citizens.
The mention of social security usually invoke thoughts of pension funds and other financial schemes for the provision of health, food and shelter for a country’s citizens. However, it must be noted that the fundamental objective behind the concept of social security is the promotion of human dignity, which is a constitutional right.
This means that where people are socially insecure, there is no human dignity.
This is true in war zones like Syria where citizens have been arguably reduced to refugees and rebels, and where homes and livelihoods have been irrevocably destroyed.
Yet when I consider Zimbabwe, I wonder what institutions and networks we have within our society to assist in providing social security to Zimbabwean citizens.
Of course, the National Social Security Authority (NSSA) is the primary state-sanctioned legal entity that is tasked with providing social security for Zimbabweans.
Whether or not NSSA is currently fulfilling its role is debatable.
A secondary source of social security is the Zimbabwean Diaspora (The network of Zimbabwean citizens living and working outside of Zimbabwe).
The role of the Zimbabwean Diaspora in providing social security for families back home is undeniable and should never be ignored.
According to reports, the Zimbabwean Diaspora remits about USD1,4 billion per annum and these funds are used to provide food, healthcare and shelter, among other things, for people in Zimbabwe.
What is interesting is that there are two other social institutions that should be primary sources of social security but are perhaps not fulfilling their roles.
A man fights his wife after finding her aboard a Gokwe bound bus. There is a need to focus on micro institutions such as the church and the family as they are the primary providers of social security
These are religious organisations (churches) and families.
The role of the family in
providing social security
The role of the nuclear and extended family in providing social security is extraordinary.
Owing to the historic influence of the cultural principle of ubuntu/hunhu, the family provides a secure retirement environment for the elderly and is a source of social protection for widows and orphans, especially in the wake of the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
Having said that, however, the recently ended “16 Days of Activism” opened my eyes to the reality that many families in our midst are dysfunctional, and are in fact sources of social insecurity.
This is principally due to marital abuse and the subsequent denigration of human dignity.
During the “16 Days of Activism”, many accounts of emotional and physical abuse were narrated, but two were particularly dreadful to me.
ln one of the accounts, a husband contracted HIV and then infected his wife. After that, he would physically and verbally abuse her and then force her to have unprotected sex with him.
Then there is a husband who refuses to give his wife any money for transport, clothes, toiletries or medicine.
Clearly, these women are socially insecure within the institution of marriage, which is supposed to be a primary source of social security.
Of course, there are many other accounts of intra-marital and intra-familial incidents of physical, emotional and sexual abuse, all culminating in social insecurity.
I was surprised to hear of the extent of social insecurity in marriages. Statistics say that between 50 and 60 percent of married and cohabiting women have experienced such abuse in Zimbabwe.
This is shocking to say the least, because charity should begin at home.
In other words, before we point fingers at political or business leaders for not providing social security for employees or citizens in general, we should ask ourselves if individually we make our spouses and families feel socially secure.
Put simply, we should ask if we are actively working to uphold the human dignity of those people closest to us.
Faith-based organisations have a critical role to play given that they promote family values which in turn feeds into providing social security with the family unit.
However, prosperity gospel seems to have become the principal focus of our clergy.
Let me state categorically that I do not subscribe to the doctrine of gender egalitarianism.
I believe in the principle of treating others in the same way as I would want to be treated.
That is the principle that I believe we should all apply in our marriages.
There is a need to focus on micro institutions such as the church and the family as they are the primary providers of social security.
Tau Tawengwa is a researcher based in Harare. He holds a Master’s degree in Industrial Sociology and Labour Studies from the University of Pretoria, RSA. Feedback to [email protected]
