The Sunday Mail
CIVIL disturbances (commonly referred to as Gukurahundi) that occurred mainly in Midlands and Matabeleland provinces in the 1980s have been a hot topic and the Government has since moved in to address the issue and bring closure to affected families. Our Correspondent Wallace Ruzvidzo (WR) sat down with the Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi (ZZ) and discussed the recently released Global Peace Index report and the Government’s current position on planned exhumations of victims of Gukurahundi.
********
WR: How does the Government respond to recent suggestions by some NGOs that Gukurahundi has not been resolved and because of this, Zimbabwe is not considered a peaceful country by the Global Peace Index?
ZZ: The Government is of the view that some civil society organisations or non-governmental organisations are trying to find relevance by uttering reckless statements that create divisions. Gukurahundi is indeed topical and emotive. However, to state that the country is not at peace because of lingering legacy issues is outrageous and deserves contempt from all progressive Zimbabweans.
WR: The Gukurahundi issue is emotive. May you please narrate to us the facts from the Government’s perspective.
ZZ: Indeed, due to the emotive nature and delicate balance that needs to be reached for the sake of our peace, the Government will not dwell on rhetoric, but state facts.
After a difficult period between 1982 and 1987, wherein the National Army was deployed to suppress dissidents that had sparked civil unrest throughout the country and retreat to Matabeleland and Midlands regions due to political differences between ZANU PF AND PF-ZAPU, the founding fathers of this country, Cde J. Nkomo and Cde R.G. Mugabe, came to their senses and ceased hostilities through signing of the Unity Agreement.
The Unity Accord, signed on December 22, 1987, was a product of negotiations conducted from 1985 to 1987. The processes took at least 10 formal meetings convened at the Parliament of Zimbabwe to come up with the document, with equal representation from both parties. Although the document essentially unifies the two liberation parties, its preamble is clear on why this was necessary.
WR: Can you give us some key extracts from this document?
ZZ: “ . . . Desirous to unite our nation, establish peace, law and order and guarantee social economic development. Determined to eliminate and end the insecurity and violence caused by dissidents in Matabeleland; Convinced that national unity, political, stability and order, social and economic development can only be achieved to their fullest under conditions of peace and unity . . . ”
The nation celebrated peace at last by commemorating the Unity Accord by establishing a public holiday we celebrate every year on December 22, our Unity Day.
The day does not only serve to remind us of the horrors of civil unrest but its commemorations remind us of Gukurahundi every year and that it should never recur.
Since both sides of the conflict may have committed offences, as a part of the transitional period, in 1988 the Government promulgated General Notice (GN) 257A/1988 that granted amnesty to “dissidents”, collaborators and members of the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) and in 1990 a General amnesty, repeating GN257A/88, was promulgated to include the State’s uniformed forces, deployed from 1982 to 1987 to suppress the dissidents.
This was done to foster a new Zimbabwe based on peace and unity. The practice of granting amnesty after the conflict was not new to the country as in 1979 and 1980 Amnesty Ordinances of 1979 and 1980 were granted by the transitional government at the sealing of the Lancaster House Agreement. Such was the custom during the time.
However, noting that the country required healing, in 2013, a new constitutional dispensation ushered in a new era that provided for the establishment of the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC). The NPRC’s mandate as led by Honourable Justice Selo Nare was to find ways to resolve the legacy of conflict in the country, especially the 1982-87 conflict. The commission’s exercise was to be focused on citizens and residents that still required psychosocial support.
Noting concerns raised by citizens, the Second Republic, through President Mnangagwa dispelled fears that the Gukurahundi issue was taboo. He encouraged citizens and activities to discuss the matter freely. In his wisdom, noting that Western-centred approaches were not effective in the regions affected by the conflict, mandated the National Council of Chiefs and the chiefs of the affected regions to bring closure to this issue.
Since 2019, consultations have been conducted by stakeholders on how the matter should be handled. The capacitation of chiefs is still ongoing, so that they properly document testimonies of those affected by that conflict.
WR: Can you shed more light on the process the Government is currently undertaking to bring closure to the matter?
ZZ: The process that we are currently undertaking is what is called victim certification so that any compensation, State aid or psychosocial support that is required by affected families and communities can be provided to them according to their needs. There is no society without a legacy of conflict. However, we should not let it define us as a nation.
As Government, we believe that the 1987 Unity Accord signifies resolution of Gukurahundi. However, we as a nation are still dealing with the legacy of that conflict and it will subside when those affected are ready to move on.
We as the Government shall continue with bringing development to regions affected by that conflict. We shall not leave anyone behind as we pursue our collective aspiration towards Vision 2030.
The accessions by agents of our detractors shall not prevail, our peace shall triumph and we will remain on course as a nation.
WR: What is the Government’s current position on Gukurahundi exhumations?
ZZ: The Government shall be guided by findings of the National Council of Chiefs and chiefs of affected regions after consultation with people in those jurisdictions.
The people themselves, families and communities shall determine whether or not they require exhumations.
The Government will only provide technical and financial support where required. In other words, it is not averse to exhumations and reburials being done in terms of customs and practices of those affected and the wishes of those families and communities.
Also, the State will consider judicial opinion in this case such as in the case of M v M & ANOR HH 399-16 handed down by Mafusire J on burial rights. It was held that where burial rights are contested, the following principles should be considered and cumulatively applied:
- An heir to the estate of the deceased has some right in the determination of the burial place of the deceased person, but the rights of the heir concerning burial rights are not exclusive.
- The voice of the surviving spouse of a deceased person carries greater weight than all other voices, but regard must always be paid to the wishes of the deceased’s broader family.
- The wishes of the deceased, during his lifetime, as to the choice of his or her burial place, if proven by cogent evidence, have to be taken into account, but only in so far as it is practicable to do so.
- The customs, traditions and cultural practices of the family or community must be taken into account in so far as they are not in conflict with the general laws of the land.
WR: There was a debate in Parliament recently on whether there is legislation that governs the Gukurahundi exhumations. Is there such law in place?
ZZ: There is no specific law that regulates exhumations of Gukurahundi victims. However, exhumation and reburials have been conducted in the country utilising policies provided for by the Ministry of Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage and the Registrar of Births and Deaths. In fact, to date our courts have made determinations on issues of reburials. Therefore, I see no impediment to reburials and exhumations for Gukurahundi victims. However, where there is need, appropriate statutes may be promulgated if the people feel that the administrative policies at hand are inadequate.
WR: What is the progress on the national policy on identification, exhumations and reburial of Gukurahundi victims?
ZZ: The nation’s policy is guided by the wishes of the communities and families directly affected by the Gukurahundi. As I have already articulated, there is a process being carried out by the chiefs and that process will provide recommendations on the best way to proceed with this matter.
The approach that we have adopted is victim-centred or a bottom-up approach. We feel that as Government, we have created a conducive environment for all those concerned to voice their opinions and opened up the bureaucratic apparatus to assist the process.
We believe that this process will lead to closure for many concerned and as the State, we shall open doors to those who are willing to collaborate in the process. However, we shall not pay attention to organisations or individuals that will impose their perceptions on people, thereby muffling the voices of those that require this process to succeed for the victims to get closure. The Second Republic has been blessed to have a listening President, who is liberal, and we should not take that political will for granted.
