ZIMTOUGHSTUFF!!!

ELECTIONS FOR ZIMBABWE... PLEASE NO!!! by Archb Mufaro Stig Hove

2011-03-31T00:58:00.006+02:00

Archbishop Mufaro Stig Hove's Remarks!

A call for Elections for Zimbabwe in the present circumstances is not only mischievous but very highly dangerous and irresponsible.

Elections should only be held if the Conditions can be "free and fair".

With room for correction and addition from ALL fellow Zimbabweans and any other friends, here are the Archbishop's perception of what would be deemed as an Environment where Elections can be deemed as "free and indeed fair".

1. As soon as a date for Elections is announced, there should be nothing as a Ruling Party or an Opposition Party. There are just numerous Political Parties that are "selling themselves" to the Electorate and hoping to get their Mandate to look after the Country's affairs for the next defined period eg Four Years or Six Years etc.

2. There is no "Incumbent" . There is an outgoing Office-bearer who can be re-elected or discarded just as there is no "Opposition" candidate. If there is an Opposition Candidate, then ALL the Aspirants are "opposition" because there will apparently be opposing each other in Policies, Views, Plans ec. But unfortunately in African Politics incl South African Politics, "Opposition Parties" are some real or potential enemies…. What should be done to them then varies from individual to individual. Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe expresses and practises the most primitive and most disgusting attitude.

3. For an Election to be free and fair, Incumbents (for lack of a better word) must clearly announce that they will vacate Office if that is the wish of the majority of the Electorate. Statements like South Africa's Jacob Zuma that "We will rule until Jesus comes back" are dangerous Pub Talk which must never be uttered by any Democrat. So with stinking Corruption, unresolved "Arms Deal" scandals etc etc ad infinitum you still drunkenly shout "We will rule until Jesus comes back!" What's special about you?

4. At ALL times ALL Political Groups should have unfettered access to ALL the available Media Platforms. For Archbishop Mufaro Hove to be banned from the SABC International by some pregnant-looking corrupt ANC Official is recipe for a Zimbabwean-type Crisis where the Zim Crisis itself will be kindergatten stuff in comparison. I was discussing Zim Politics with a PAC Supporter who told me things that resemble ZANU-PF's handling of PF-ZAPU in the 80s. I will share these with you soon , God willing.

5. There should be NO exclusion when it comes to Election Observers. "Only our friends can come……." That's the height of arrogance. Who are you to define who a country's friends are etc and if you have nothing to hide why should your real or perceived "enemy" not come and observe your Elections?

6. Excluding your citizens who are toiling and sweating in other countries is both criminal and never "democratic" by any stretch of the imagination.

7. Candidates who have grievances at any time BRFORE, DURING and AFTER the said Elections should neither be intimidated nor ignored.

8. Last but by no means least, the Rigging of Elections in ALL its forms should never be entertained. Refer certain observations recorded at http://zimdebate.blogspot.com/2007/04/full-submission-on-rigging-of-zim.html

I, Archbishop Mufaro Stig Hove , humbly plead with the people of Zimbabwe.

WILL WE NEVER HAVE A DEMOCRATIC ZIMBABWE?

HOW MANY MORE GRAVES OF POLITICAL VICTIMS SHOULD BE DUG IN ZIM BEFORE WE ADMIT THAT ZIMBABWE IS A DISMAL FAILURE IN DEMOCRATIC PROCESSES?

IF THE SADC AND THE AU CANNOT HELP….. CAN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY NOT ASSIST AFTER SORTING OUT LYBIA?

OR WILL THEY NOT HELP BECAUSE ZIMBABWE HAS NO OIL???

Humby and Repectively Submitted,

His Grace, The Archbishop Mufaro Stig Hove.

(mufarostig@gmail.com)

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The Archbishop welcomes views at his Facebook Page.

PLEASE ALSO CHECK "ROBERT MUGABE WAS NEVER A LEGITIMATE PRESIDENT" by CHOKWAST CHIYE!!!

http://zimgossiper.blogspot.com/2011/03/was-robert-mugabe-ever-legitimate.html

"WHAT HAPPENED TO THE RULE OF LAW IN ZIMBABWE!" by TAFI PAPAYA.

2010-01-08T13:24:00.002+02:00

What Happened To The Rule Of Law In Zimbabwe

By Tafi Papaya

The rule of law is probably the most important pillar of any democratic society. It has been one of the reasons why a lot of the countries that are economically succesful, and politically stable have prospered. There is no point in having a society of individuals that have done a good job of creating good laws; if nobody enforces them. I believe and aim to show that the lack of rule of law has been detrimental to the success of Zimbabwe.

Rule of law is a key determinant of how democratic a society is. It is a benchmark by which societies measure their constitutionality, and their adherance to the spirit of the law. The rule of law is essential for keeping the power of the government in check. It is the basis for protecting the individual from the powers of state, and it is good for ensuring that property is kept safe.

It is important because it ensures equality for all in the state. The law is applied indescrimantly to everybody, and everybody is subject to the law not the principles, ideas and attitudes of the state.

One way those that abuse the rule of law is that they adhere to the letter of the law religiously; but do not care about the spirit of it. Therefore creating an environment of unfairness when the point of law is fairness.

The law does not simply exist as an ends to its own. The law is simply a vehicle for a higher and more powerful concept and that is justice. The reasons we have laws is so that we can transmit justice in a large and complex society. The law is our means and justice is our ends. Unfortunately due to the nature of the human condition; at times justice and law sometimes tend to diverge. These kinds of divergences must be allowed to be the exception; because if these divergences become more than just exceptions they will come to be normal and accepted. If this happens injustice will most definitely prevail and that is not good.

Injustice does not prevail smoothly. In countries where there is a lot of injustice there tends to be a lack of stability. Injustice simply does not prevail even if it driven by law; it is too much of a blight on the human spirit and people do not support it. If one looks at legal forms of injustice like slavery in the US, and colonialism in the third world they simply have not prvailed. They lasted for a long time, but the undying human spirit rose and smited injustice.

Justice is the most clear cut pillar of law and without justice law is just a platitude. For example in Jackson Missouri lives a woman called Debbie Shank. An honest hardworking woman and the mother of 18 year old Jeremy Shank who was killed in Iraq. Eight years ago she had a car accident with a negligent semi driver; where she became mentally disabled and required a lot of financial help. At that point the now 52 year old lady was a stock shelver at Walmart; where she was enroled in their medical insurance plan and was a very conscienscious client.(Kaye)

Walmart paid out $470 000 through its insurance plan for her healthcare, and two years later she won a lawsuit for $417 000 from the trucking company. Now Walmart was asking for all of the $470 000 back; because its health insurance plan has a clause which says that if the patient recieves a settlement in a lawsuit; the company can take its money back. The $ 417 000 lawsuit settlement was put in trust for Debbie. When Walmart sued, the courts awarded them a settlement of whatever was left in the trust; meaning that Debbie would literally have no money to take care of her.(Kaye)

If we are simply talking about justice; can we say that the Walmart loop hole was fair? Is it fair that someone spends so much of their paycheck to get coverage ;and they do not get any money because someone else paid for it. So all the time, effort and money put into getting good coverage should go for naught. How could that possibly be fair, and in the spirit of the law which adheres to the principles of justice.(Kaye)

The public reacted very angrily to this sort of treatment of an individual. It became a public relations nightmare for Walmart to add the the bad corporate image that the company already has. The moral precedent of justice seemed to not be adhered to in this case, and there was an incredible societal backlash. Even though the letter of the law was clearly on the side of Walmart executives; the spirit of the law was not. That is why there is a strong case for judges; people who can act for advocates of the spirit of the law when the letter of the law is in not fair. However with most things human the nature of some of these conflicts are often not even close to being black and white.

For example the legislature, administration and judiciary of the Republic of Zimbabwe are independent entities as in any democracy. The supreme court justices who are the top judges in the land are appointed by the President. Under certain extenuating circumstances he can take them off the bench. In 2001 President Robert Mugabe dismissed Supreme Court Sir Anthony Gubbay because of allegations of treason that were never proved and are still to be proven. In fact they were just allegations which were not based in any evidence. Even though the letter of the law says that he can do that. In a democracy that subscribes to the rule of law somebody is innocent until proven guilty. The spirit of the law was definitely not adhered to in this case.(Afrol May,5)

The result was the country lost a Chief Justice that would challenge the authority of the President. In his place came in one that is known for his allegiance to the President's party. So the law can be manipulated by those in power in an effort to meet their ends. If a country does not have a strong precedent for adhering to the spirit of the law tragic situations can happen as the one in the Zimbabwean government.

There is a fundemental belief in the constitution of Zimbabwe and that is a belief in the independence of the three pillars of government the legislature the judiciary and the executive. The executive is to control vehicles that the judiciary and the the legislature should be entitled to access and use to perform such independent tasks.

Chapter five Part four of the Zimbabwean Constitution says

The President—

(a) may at any time address Parliament; and

(b) shall have the right to sit and speak in Parliament but shall not have the right to vote therein.

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

This is a clear indicator that the process and the independence of the parliament was clearly not meant to be tampered with by the executive.

Chapter eight of the Constitution says

In the exercise of his judicial authority, a member of the judiciary shall not be subject to the direction or control of any person or authority, except to the extent that a written law may place him under the direction or control of another member of the judiciary

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

Clearly establishing and protecting the independence of the judiciary.

Part three of chapter four says

It shall be the duty of the President to uphold this Constitution and ensure that the provisions of this Constitution and of all other laws in force in Zimbabwe are faithfully executed.

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

This clearly limits the roles and powers of the president to a great deal. So with this in mind why is it that the President of Zimbabwe uses tactics that are contrary to these ideals. Since independence in 1980 Robert Mugabe has used Parliament as a rubber stamping institution; to give legitimacy to his agenda however misguided. For a while the country thought the judiciary would be free of Mugabe's meddlesome hands. This only lasted until the millennium when Mugabe went haywire on the judiciary.

In a lot of Western countries the legislature is a lot more independent than the one in Zimbabwe; because the legislature was designed in a practical measure to be independent. Not only that these countries have had a couple of centuries to perfect their system.

The problem is that at independence Mugabe's ZANU PF party was so popular, and powerful it made Zimbabwe into a De facto one party state. So as long as you were supported by the Zanu PF brand; you were more than likely to become a member of parliament if you ran. The brand was so strong that the individual attributes of the person seeking office were never considered when running. A deaf, mute toad with the endorsement of the Party could win an election back in the eighties.

The strong Zanu PF brand was propped up mainly by the skills and guile of Robert Mugabe. He was the principle campaigner for the party since there were only a handful of other politicians in Zanu PF; that could even conduct a decent campaign rally. So most politicians in Zanu PF owed their elected positions to Robert Mugabe; primarily due to their own ineptitude.

Since the party was a de facto one party government, and any official running for elected office got elected. Great power rested with he who chose those that ran for office. Since Mugabe was the most powerful member of the Party it pretty much was his choice. As we all know he used it as leverage for political favors; not only that he used it as payment to those who were loyal. So in essence parliament really ended up with no real divergence of ideas but was instead a sea of Mugabe loyalists.

Democracy is not just a system of government it is more like a way of being; a culture; one that I believe evolves from the bottom up. The people in the bottom of society politically have got to see a need for it. It cannot be imposed from the top because the main actors in democracy are the people themselves. It is only when the masses of society are willing to act as democratic citizens can any society be called a democracy.

The founders of the United States did not establish a Democracy in 1776; how could they only white men with property could vote back then. So how is that a democratic process when it disenfranchises the majority of adults.? This by no means says that they were misguided nor did not know what they were doing. They clearly understood democracy as what it really was and that was a work in progress. They understood that that they could not institute all the tenants of democracy all at once. Chaos would have reigned if people who were not ready and qualified to take part in the democratic process took part instantly.

They chose to do the wise thing and that was to plant the seeds of democracy and not institute everything at once; because the the pragmatic notions of the day did not allow it. How else can you explain a man who says that all men were created equal, but then says a poor man cannot vote. Its not that he believes a poor man is unequal; its just that he does not believe that he is ready to vote because he has no education.

This should have also been a consideration when Zimbabwe was having elections at independence; because less than 5% of the black majority in the country had a high school education at the time. How was there an expectation that the majority of people would understand democracy. How is it possible that somebody who does not understand the basic tenants of democracy be expected to be a full participant. In fact a lot of people were not satisfied by the results of the election, and members of a smaller political party ZAPU got enraged and proceeded to wage a very small civil war for the next six years. So I doubt that Zimbabwe was ready as a country for that process at that time. Maybe an unelected transitional coalition government would have done, or a benevolent dictator for a transitional period could have made the situation in the country better.

Russia, Iraq, DRC and Nigeria are all countries where democracy has failed at one point because they took an approach of attacking democracy cold turkey. Zimbabwe's approach was not as bad and did not have results as drastic. A better approach to accomplishing democracy is to go the Chinese route and that is to slowly democratize. The proponents of cold turkey democratization are not pragmatic and are giddy with ideology. People need to be ready for democracy before you democratize.

The approach has been to democratize first, and that would end up with everything falling into place. The idea was that after democracy the economy would fall into place. Now as a person who has experienced and lived through third world living. I can clearly state that the tenants of democracy are not the prime objective of those that live in third world countries like Zimbabwe.

I guess its good to have freedom of speech, and the press. I guess it is good to be able to participate in the political process without hindrance. However how is freedom of speech going to feed me? How is it going to give me a job? Does it build hospitals and roads? How could I possibly be an active participant in democracy when my basic needs are not met? Unfortunately democracy is going to take a back seat to anyone as they get myself an education, and I try to earn a living to take care of their family.

This is the approach the average Zimbabwean took at independence and they wrote ZANU PF and Mugabe a blank cheque. The average Zimbabwean could not act as a steward for democracy because he was not educated, and he had a lot more pressing issues on his mind. The only people who could act as stewards of democracy were ZANU PF, and acting as such was not in their interests; as this would mean that they would have to accept opposition, and they were not about to do that.

Chapter three of the Zimbabwean Constitution called The Declarartion of Rights outlines the rights of individuals and institutions, and gives the obvious exceptions where those rights are not protected. Those rights are similar to a lot of those found in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. One part of the Declaration of Rights is very similar to the Bill of Rights and that is

Except with his own consent or by way of parental discipline, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference, and freedom from interference with his correspondence.

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

This is very similar to the First Amendment of the US Constitution. So why does it work in the United States and not in Zimbabwe?

For starters the reasons laid out above are key, but there are a couple of major reasons that are different. The founders of the United States clearly wanted everybody to be an equal participant, and have a clear sense of freedom of expression if not at that time in the future. The founders of the new nation of Zimbabwe in 1980 did not see a future beyond their rule, and the democracy they established(quasi one party state regime) reflected that. They interpreted the tenants of democracy in such a way as to establish, and cement their position of authority over everyone in the country.

They were only committed to civil liberties in as much as they were served by those civil liberties. For the liberties of individuals to be asserted justly there needs to be a tacit understanding, and that understanding is that the authorities are going to act in good faith when it comes to the liberties. When I say good faith I mean that the authorities are going to interpret the law in such as a way as to be just. It is not acting in good faith when you say all men are created equal, but in an effort to justify slavery you call slaves 3/5 of a person. That clearly is ludicrous and an action done in bad faith. If interpreted in bad faith a National Constitution can go from a document of empowerment, and enlightenment to a vehicle of tyranny.

The clause that gives one the right to freedom of expression as seen above is followed by several clauses which describe the limitations of such inherent freedom the very first clause says that the fundamental freedom of expression can be limited

in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, the economic interests of the State, public morality or public health

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

Most countries that allow the freedom of expression do limit this kind of expression; for extenuating circumstances that are in the realm of the above issues. It is a public safety issue in the United States to yell fire in a crowded theater, and therefore freedom of expression is not protected under those conditions. It is a public morality issue in the Netherlands to walk around in the nude in public places; so that expression is not protected. Divulging military secrets to the Germans in World War Two by an Englishman; was not protected speech as it was an issue of defence. The above examples are of exceptions where the authorities are acting in good faith.

However when Zimbabwean authorities arrest you for being critical of the ruling party and its human rights violations. That is definitely not in good faith especially if they use the idea that since you are talking ill of the government; you are insisting public disorder. One can make a case that under certain circumstances talking ill of the government might cause a government sympathizer to fight with you but the chances of that are slim. Or you might incite a riot, and the chances of that are even slimmer.

Another clause that can be used to limit the right of freedom of expression in Zimbabwe; is the one that follows in connection with electronic communication; so your freedoms can be limited when:

regulating the technical administration, technical operation or general efficiency of telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless broadcasting or television or creating or regulating any monopoly in these fields

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

The problem with the above clause is that regulating is not clarified. If one was dealing in good faith; regulation would mean things like ensuring that extreme vulgarities were left of the air. Its important for the air waves to be regulated to ensure the well being of society. This is very different from acting as a habitual gate keeper, and sleuth on the electronic media as is present in Zimbabwe.

The Zimbabwean government has not opened up the national airways when it comes to television and radio. It is imperative in a democracy that people have access to all forms of free media, and only the government and its surrogates can broadcast on mass within the country. This is very unfortunate for any opposition party members as they cannot ever purchase any time on the easiest form of mass electronic media. This clearly is a violation in no uncertain terms of somebody's ability to actively participate in the democratic process. The reasons given for justifying the political disenfranchisement of anybody who is not from the ruling party is the theory that someone's rights can be restricted in the case of regulating the air waves. To some extent this is clearly within the letter of the law but is not in the spirit of the law.

As noted earlier if we do things according to the letter of the law, but not within the spirit of the law at times we circumvent justice. This is a situation that cannot be sustained and will collapse as noted earlier.

When the nation of Zimbabwe created the post of Executive President seven years after independence; it did not create an institution that could be sustained. It created a servant to serve a master who was the then incumbent Prime Minister Robert Mugabe. Back then average people were not as educated about these matters, and thought that the powers that be would act as advocates of the people only to discover later that they did not.

Until December 1987 Zimbabwe was country primarily run by a ceremonial President in the form of Canaan Banana, and he had a Prime Minister who was Robert Mugabe. The Prime Minister was the chief executive office,r but was not Head of State, and he served at the mercy of the President who was the Head of State. Now with the new position of Executive President that was created in 1987 the position of Prime Minister has been abolished, and prettty much absorbed into the position of Executive President.

After 1987 a lot of changes were made to the Constitution of Zimbabwe as regards to the Head of State. A lot of these ammendments were made without the public being concious of them even though they were public amendments. The public generally was not aware of the implications of what the president was doing. It trully was done contrary to the spirit of the law.

One of the main tenants of democracy is that each man is equal in the eyes of the law. It creates an environment where everyone's vote counts as an equal vote. Not only that it is a tenant that leads us to believe that each man has equal rights, and they will be protected by the law. However after 1987 an ammendment was made to the Zimbabwean constitution that made the President an unequal member of the nation. This can easily be seen in Chapter 4 Part 1 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.

The President shall not, while in office, be personally liable to any civil or criminal proceedings whatsoever in any court.

Without prejudice to the provisions of subsection (1), it shall be lawful to institute civil or criminal proceedings against a person after he has ceased to be President, in respect of—

(a) things done or omitted to be done by him before he became President; or

(b) things done or omitted to be done by him in his personal capacity during his term of office as President;

and, notwithstanding any provision contained in any law relating to prescription or to the limitation of actions, the running of prescription in relation to any debt or liability of the President, whether incurred or accrued before or during his term of office, shall be suspended during his term of office as President.

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

This amendment allows for the President of Zimbabwe to not be punished for any crimes he committed. This clearly means that the President is above the law. Not only that it acts as an incentive for the President to commit crime. Why would someone not commit crime if it was not illegal.

This has led to numerous violations of internationally guaranteed human rights which is a shame. Immunity of this sort should never be encouraged in any democratic society. A President should be able to pardon people of crimes under extreme circumstances, but not pardon himself.

The three pillars of government should act as checks and balances for one another. Each should perform a specific role the executive's is to govern, the legislature's is to legislate and the judiciary is to try. If one of these pillars of government gets more power than the other two then there is a problem. That pillar is subject to doing abuses without anyone stopping them. This unfortunately has become true of the situation in Zimbabwe. This is clear from Chapter 4 Part 3 of the Zimbabwean Constitution an amendement made after 1987.

· In the exercise of his functions the President shall act on the advice of the Cabinet, except in cases where he is required by this Constitution or any other law to act on the advice of any other person or authority:

· Provided that the President shall not be obliged to act on the advice of the Cabinet with respect to—

(a) the dissolution or prorogation of Parliament

(The Constitution of Zimbabwe)

This part of the Constitution allows the President to dissolve parliament without even giving a reason. That clearly means that the president has power greater than that of the Parliament. This pretty much means that the lawmakers of Zimbabwe cannot make the President do anything he does not want to. This is because if they do he can easily pull the plug on them making them worthless.

The issues above are the bare bones issues as to why Democracy does not work in Zimbabwe. Not only has Zimbabwe taken a legal toll for acting the way it does; it has suffered socially and economically as well. The Constitution was created so that the nation could govern with order, and governance affects all aspects of society.

Democracy in Zimbabwe struggles because the powers that be are concerned with propagating their rule, and not creating good institutions that last into the future. To do this they stuck religiously to the letter of the law at the expense of the spirit of the law. They have managed to manipulate the constitution to suit their interests. They managed to do all of this because the public was not watching them, and the public thought that the powers that be were acting as good stewards for the nation of Zimbabwe.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Constitution of Zimbabwe. Retrieved on May 3 2008

www.chr.up.ac.za/hr_docs/constitutions/docs/ZimbabweC(rev).doc

Blaustein, A. Gisbert, H. Hackwill, G(1980) Constitutions of the Countries of the World: Zimbabwe.

New York. Oceana Publications

Kaye, R. Brain-Damaged Woman at Center of Walmart Suit. CNN.COM. Retrieved on May 20 2008

www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/25/walmart.insurance.battle/

Zimbabwe Judiciary and Government at War. Afrol.com. Retrieved on May 7 2008.

www.afrol.com/News2001/zim005_judiciary_vs_gov.htm

Zimbabwean Judge Gives in to Pressure. Afrol.com. Retrieved on May 5 2008.

www.afrol.com/News2001/zim009_new_chiefjustice.htm

Zimbabwe Legalises Communications Censorship. Afrol.com. Retrieved on May 9 2008.

www.afrol.com/articles/25760

Zvobgo, E. (1987) Democracy in a Socialist State.Symposium on Parliamentary and National Issues.Harare. Zimbabwe

United States Constitution.Cornell University Law School. Retrieved on May 6 2008.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html

ZANU-PF'S PLANS TO PHYSICALLY ELIMINATE TOP MDC-T OFFICIALS!

2010-01-07T11:07:00.003+02:00

Awaiting Top Secret Document from a senior CIO Officer!

Please keep checking this link!

Rev M S Hove... Cell; 0749498923 RSA.

OPEN LETTER TO MR DAVID COLTART!

2008-03-07T14:25:00.003+02:00

ZIMBABWE: OPEN LETTER TO MP. DAVID COLTART

Dear David Coltart

Greetings to you in Jesus name.

Thank you for information in your newsletters about the delimitation process in Bulawayo.

David l don't understand the Leadership on your side of MDC. Why is it that your leadership specifically Aurthur Mutambara spend more time criticizing Morgan Tsvangirai. l still don't believe that Mutambara is honest to Zimbabweans. Many people believe that he is being used by ZANU PF.

Its ironic that your faction is supporting Simba Makoni. Makoni is ZANU PF. And l know all ZANU PF leaders are oppressing the Zimbabweans together, stealing taxes from the poor. Benefiting unjustly from poor taxpayers through inflation and other destructive policies. Dr. Simba Makoni recently declared that he has been faithful to ZANU PF for the past 27 years. When ZANU PF was murdering the Ndebeles he was faithful. When ZANU was invading commercial farms and companies he was faithful to it. ZANU starving and torturing opposition he was faithful. And your President Arthur Mutambara said that he support Simba Makoni. Assuming that Makoni will win march 2008 election How is he going to govern the country without a party? Why was his decision so sudden, less than 3months before critical elections?

Zimbabweans we don't trust Arthur Mutambara and your Secretary General Welshman Ncube. Ncube is already in possession of a commercial farm he was given by ZANU PF. Before he was criticizing ZANU PF leaders' behavior over White owned farms.

Personally l believe Simba Makoni you are supporting is being used by ZANU PF to divide votes between Tsvangirai MDC and ZANU PF. The same thing that a ZANU PF official Edgar Tekere did in the 1990s. People don't see any accountability and transparent in your MDC faction.

I think your decision to support ZANU PF, Makoni is good since it mark the demise of your faction. Morever you don't have a presidential candidate. Already you know you don't have grassroots support.

"...Simba Makoni provides the best way out of the mess that Zimbabwe finds itself in
today."

Some few months you were telling us that your MDC faction under the leadership of Arthur Mutambara is the way. Zimbabwe don't want confused leaders like you. You have to campaign against Mugabe with the view that your party rule the country. But you don't even trust yourself and your leader Mutambara therefore Zimbabweans cannot trust you.

There is no hope in ZANU PF. They have lead us where we are and how can they help us out of the crisis. The best way that ZANU PF can help Zimbabwe is for them including Mr. Simba Makoni to leave politics. They have failed. For the past 27 years Zimbabweans have been pushing a car without engine. Thank God that majority now see that ZANU PF leaders including Simba Makoni are cruel and heartless.

l have never had of Simba Makoni visiting Zimbabweans in exile in South Africa and Britain to see their plight. He, Makoni sleep dreaming that he wants to be president of Zimbabwe. Whereas he does not not care about the poor and oppressed Zimbabweans.

"If it is a trick why has Mugabe in the last few days spewed out such venom against Makoni
calling him a prostitute and a frog?" (David Coltart).

Mugabe has to call Simba Makoni a prostitute so that people can think that there are opponents whereas they are working together to divide votes and cause confusion. Mugabe did the same to Edgar Tekere and later they were together.
In reality political leaders who don't care about the poor, who benefited from ZANU oppressive system are 'political prostitutes.'

So David your argument is not strong. We don't support Makoni a ZANU PF loyalist for the past 27 years. Mutambara and Welshman Ncube are pretending as if they want to unite with Tsvangirai MDC which l don't believe is the case. You don't even criticise Mugabe and ZANU PF in a way you criticise Tsvangirai's MDC.

People trust Morgan Tsvangirai because of his track record, steadfast opposition to Mugabe. Mugabe only see Tsvangirai as a threat so is preprepared to Murder him or sponsor opposition leaders (black or white) who will oppose him. I'm glad that the situation is not hopeless because we have God who see and judge history. God wants Zimbabwe to be free from oppressors. Responsible people should rule the country. Its tragic that our fellow opposition are getting bribed along the way. We have come a long way with the struggle and we will not take short cuts.

l have attended many meetings of MDC in Johannesburg. l have never had them criticizing your faction. l was so much inspired by the words of President Morgan Tsvangirai, 'l will not rest until Ncube, Sibanda etc... is back. Zimbabweans let us not despise each other...'

I implore some of our opposition political leaders to be serious. Mugabe must go, all ZANU PF leaders including Simba Makoni must go. Zimbabwe must be rebuild people are dying every day due state starvation, torture, murder etc... We don't want fake oppositions working for ZANU PF, determined to confuse the electorate.

Yours For true freedom & justice

Collen Makumbirofa
Foundation of Reason & Justice
zimnews@mail.com
http://forjustice.atspace.org
www.zimjustice.blogspot.com

THE SHARKS THAT FEED ON THE ZIM CRISIS!

2007-12-03T09:05:00.000+02:00

PREAMBLE:

That there is a serious raging crisis in Zimbabwe is not in doubt. That the inflation rate is far above 10,000% is not in doubt. What is completely puzzling is how the country continues and how the people survive in that kind of situation. Some are even building magnificent houses that are not even commonly seen in South Africa.

Journalists at “SWRADIOAFRICA”, “STUDIO 7” of the Voice of America and “the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE” always ask the Zimbabweans how they survive. May I take this opportunity to thank all the Donors and all the journalists who work inside and outside the country to provide other sources of news about the crisis-ridden country of Zimbabwe. Whoever calls those radio stations “Pirate Radio Stations” is a hypocrite who must not be taken seriously.

Professor Jonathan Moyo is one that is now benefiting from having his views heard on these same Radio Stations that he called “pirate and sellouts” and his writings are accessed by many through www.newzimbabwe.com among other websites. Does he still call them “pirate radio stations”?

THUMBS UP TO RAY CHOTO, JOHN MATINDE, TERERAI KARIMAKWENDA, VIOLET GONDA, MANDISA MUNDAWARARA, VICTOR MUDZINGWA, etc etc.

SO HOW ARE THE PEOPLE SURVIVING??

It is said that a Medical Doctor earns an equivalent of R120 per month as we speak. Teachers earn an equivalent of R70. Since nearly all foodstuffs and other commodities are imported from
South Africa, it really makes it tragic and pathetic that professionals have been reduced to such frightening destitution. How do they afford the goods that are brought illegally into the country and are sold at higher prices that they cost in South Africa?

I will not give the full statistics of what costs what in Zimbabwe at the moment but surfice to say under normal circumstances the country of Zimbabwe should have been declared insolvent and closed down were it a private individual or a Company.

Numerous professionals, as we all know, are now fully employed in South Africa, the UK, etc. Some joke and say Zimbabweans now need Councillors and MPS where they are now permanently residing whether its Botswana or Namibia. Those working in foreign lands send millions of rands, pounds, US dollars etc back home. Without this input, millions at home would die of hunger, disease etc and be literally buried.

The ZANU-PF Regime itself prints trillions of local currency (if those bearer cheques are currency) and they buy the much-needed foreign currency on the flourishing black-market. Those that deal on the black–market would also starve to death if they did not buy and sell the various currencies. They buy at a slightly lower rate than the one they sell at and each day they make thousands of rands etc in profit.

If one starts off with, say, R5,000 and makes only 5% profit on each rand they sell, that gives them R250 on that “capital amount”. Now the truth is that they usually have R30,000 or more each which can be sold in a single day. They buy rands from those arriving from South Africa and sell them to those going to South Africa and use the acquired Bearer Cheques to buy more rands which will give them “buying power” to acquire even more rands etc etc and the “business” grows bigger and bigger with each passing day.

In an economically volatile situation like Zimbabwe, no-one should be blamed for trying to make a quick-buck from the crisis. But who ultimately benefits from these illegal business empires?

Zimbabwean Police, Soldiers and other civil servants have their relatives, girl-friends etc operating these informal “World Banks.” These Government workers spend most of their time buying in bulk at points where scare commodities are available and under the guise of “controlling queues”, purchase in bulk various goods which they will give to their wives, “small houses” and other agents to sell for them at various illegal “underground” illegal selling points.

So in effect, the ordinary taxpayer is funding these activities by supplying the Civil Servants with the precious fuel, the vehicles and the man-hours they use in the promotion of the myriad of illegal financial transactions.

Whoever is related to these civil (or rather uncivil) servants does benefit as they assist in related activities eg the advertising, actual selling etc of the scare commodities that disappear from the shelves and “surface” on the black market.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, survive by services rendered in these illegal markets. Whoever can buy from these expensive markets can still make more profit if they go into the rural areas and to the “new farmers” and exchange the sugar, the bars of soap etc with maize, “dovi” (peanut butter) and other such stuff which will then be sold in the urban areas.

They can use the money thus acquired to buy other goods eg clothes which they can similarly exchange for cash or illegally mined gold, diamonds etc at the numerous illegal mining points.

The trick is to calculate well before falling for any transaction. Old ladies who appear illiterate will shock you by producing 12-digit calculators from the strangest sections of their garments.

This raging crisis has produced the best mathematicians from the least expected among the Zimbos, believe it or not!

On trips to Zambia, South Africa etc there are numerous other beneficiaries.

Bus drivers and their support staff are some of the greatest beneficiaries of the crisis. Over and above the bus fares which they usually quote in Rands, Pulas, etc, they make even more as they charge (say) R100 to R200 for each of those “parcels” which you see hanging precariously on their overloaded and under-mantained vehicles. Make a calculation of R100 each from 65 passengers and multiply that by a possible 10 trips per month. That’s a frightening R65000 in a single month to be divided among a crew of not more than three and the owners of the buses may not know a thing about this extra cash since receipts are not issued for these extra transactions.

And we have looked at just one bus! How many buses are involved in “cross-border” trade?

Bus crews and cross-border truck drivers make even more by charging 10% for the Foreign Currency which they carry into the country to deliver to hundreds of thousands in Zim from their relatives in SA, Botswana, etc. How much is being ferried by each bus and each truck each day can never be known or even estimated. But suffice to say it runs into tens or even hundreds of millions of Rands, Pulas etc each month. Ten percent remains with the bus and truck crews.

How can you fail to get “building booms” in Zim when you have millions landing in the hands of simple drivers, etc? Whoever says, “I went to Zim and I saw double-story houses going up in many of the towns” should know that its not the faithful simple workers who are erecting those structures. The common worker can’t even pay for his transport to work from the salary he receives. It’s the few “dealers” who make astronomical figures in illegal income who are giving the impression of Zim as a functioning economy of some sort.

Numerous also benefit from bribes as they undertake to protect these illegal actors.

Police and soldiers on both sides of the border make unquantifiable amounts in bribes.

Bribes to let in travellers without travel documents, bribes not to search the buses and trucks, bribes to ignore any anomalies they make come across etc.

Dealers in foreign currency at Musina, at Beitbridge, at various points along the way and even in the cities of Harare, Bulawayo etc must have cash ready to oil the hands of any official who pretends to be checking on these illegal activities. These officers get much, much more in these bribes than they would ever get from their humble salaries.

As I wrote in a previous submission, this is actually more prevalent on the South African side than on the Zimbabwean side. So the gains to a certain select few of the Zimbabwean Crisis can never be quantified or estimated.

Many analysts and politicians wonder why there are low voter turnouts whenever Elections are held in Zimbabwe especially of late.

Besides the fact that:

(a) there is general voter apathy and that being caused by people’s frustration by the rigging done by ZANU-PF and

(b) that numerous are busy “suffering” and hence worried more about matters of survival than politics, attending rallies, voting etc; and

(c) the fact that the Oppositions Forces are being led by thick-headed individuals who can not “iron out” their differences and present one united front, the more frightening truth is that hundreds of thousands, if not millions are actually praying that the crisis continues lest they loose the returns which they are getting from the numerous illegal activities which would disappear if Zimbabwe were to return to a more normal situation.

SO WHAT IT WAY FORWARD IN SUCH A DEPRESSING SITUATION?

It is very important to recognise that ZANU-PF is not really in charge of the situation in Zimbabwe. ZANU-PF continues to be in power just because there is none that can be charismatic and relevant enough to challenge the corrupt status quo.

Tsvangirai did his best (apparently) but he is not able to acknowledge anyone else. He is as myopic as Robert Mugabe.

The struggles of the 60s and 70s were able to evolve because the people followed a new leader if he explained why the previous leader had to be discarded. Robert Mugabe followed after the Rev Ndabaningi Sithole who followed after Dr Joshua Nkomo etc etc.

Now to Morgan Tsvangirai, Professor Arthur Mutambara is a CIO implant who must be shunned.

Shame on you Mogiza!

The so-called “Mutambara faction” did not take you to Court for various issues simply for the sake of not disrupting the overall struggle. But we will not leave you untouched lest we develop a worse character than Robert Matibili-Mugabe.

Mugabe and ZANU-PF are at their weakest and Morgan you have also chosen to be myopis and stiff-necked!

We will never forgive you Morgan! But its not your fault. A person cab never rise above his own limitations. Unfortunately morons do not see their limitations. Over and above that, they breathe fire and brimstone on those that humbly try to assist in complementing the efforts of those that started before them

If Morgiza were a true Statesman, he would have long worked with his fellow brothers in the other so-called “faction” and we would be talking of “HEZVOKO”, “ONE TIME” etc etc with confidence.

So our salvation will have to come from elsewhere.

I FEEL TEMPTED TO AGREE WITH THOSE WHO SAY ONLY A MILITARY “COUP” (IF THERE ANY UPRIGHT PERSONS IN THE ARMED FORCES) OR AN INVASION OR AN ARMED STRUGGLE OF SOME SORT CAN RESCUE THE SATANIC ACTIVITIES RAGING IN THE BEAUTIFUL BUT CALAMITOUS LAND CALLED ZIMBABWE.

Whoever does anyone of the above three options will not hand power to Tsvangirai.

Tsvangirai, we are more concerned with the future of millions and not just having you or anyone else having “Bed, Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner” at that haunted State House where Matibili presently resides with Stanley Goreraza’s wife.

Tsvangirai, do you know what Statesmanship is all about??

Respectfully Submitted,

Rev Mufaro Stig Hove.

www.zimfinalpush.blogspot.com

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

(Please also read the article below ex "THE ZIMBABWEAN": LINK!!! )

How do ordinary Zimbabweans survive?

Wednesday, 28 November 2007 14:37

BULAWAYO - How is it possible for a worker to earn less or slightly above his monthly transport budget but still report for duty daily? Inconceivable, you might say, unless you come from Zimbabwe.

This is the predicament thousands of workers, including civil servants, find themselves in, in a country whose economy has virtually collapsed. Inflation is at a staggering 15,000 percent and continues to rise.

Indeed there is serious brain drain in the country, as professionals and general workers leave in large numbers to seek greener pastures in regional countries, mostly South Africa, Botswana and Namibia. Britain and Canada are the favourite destinations for many other Zimbabweans.

But not all have managed to cross the borders in search of better remunerating jobs as some are surviving through other means and there are those who simply won't leave because they remain hopeful the economic crisis will end.

Most of those who have stuck around in the face all the hardships the majority of Zimbabweans are going through have resorted to crime. That's their survival tactic.
The criminal activities are carried out at workplaces, or in some cases, masterminded there but executed elsewhere. It all depends on what sort of trade one does. If, for example, you are a traffic policeman, you take bribes from motorists. Instead of issuing a ticket for a traffic offence, you pocket what the driver is offering, as long as it is an acceptable figure.

Commuter omnibuses are a big source of revenue for the police in Zimbabwe. The drivers at times operate on expired permits, overcharge passengers but they almost always get away with it as long as they know how to grease (street lingo for bribe) the cops.

"We also drain fuel (from the vehicle) and sale it on the black market. At times we are hired by a group of people, say from a church, and we charge them a fixed amount. We give the boss (operator) his average daily takings and of-course the rest is ours," confessed Dumisani Jamela, a commuter omnibus driver from Bulawayo.
What does an electrical appliances repair shop worker do? He diverts some of the customers who call at the business premises and does the job for them privately at their homes for far less.

A cellular telecommunications employee buys several lines under fictitious names and resells them for a profit of up to 40 times the official price. And you expect such a person not to report for duty every day?

A sugar company worker gets a sugar allocation every month. He sells the commodity on the vibrant black market and makes about Z$8 million from each of the bags.
A bus driver capitalizes on transport blues to take bribes from anyone who wants to jump a queue. Then, after dropping off his passengers, he drives to his house or finds a secluded place, drains some diesel and resale it on the parallel market.
If the usage of company fuel is under strict monitoring, he connives with the manager and they share the spoils.

The practice of draining fuel from vehicles is rife among those using company cars, including managers. The temptation is too much to resist given that as little as 5 litres of fuel gives you Z$7 million.

The majority of Zimbabwean workers in industry get a net salary of between Z$10-Z$15 million a month against transport costs of about Z$12m.

Teachers engage in private lessons for children not in formal school and the lucky ones are paid in foreign currency by parents of the scholars, who would be abroad.
Recently a High Court judge stunned employers when he openly stated that they were promoting criminal activities at workplaces by paying ridiculous salaries, which fell far short of basic needs of workers.

"Have you ever paused to wonder why the majority of workers persistently bother to go to work everyday at great expense without fail when at the end of the day, they get paid wages which are not enough to cover their basic transport costs, let alone food and other basic amenities of life?

"The answer is simple: It is at work that they play criminal games for survival.

"What has never ceased to amaze is what will be going on in the employer's mind when he sees employees whom he does not pay enough to cover their basic transport costs religiously reporting for duty everyday," said Justice Chinembiri Bhunu, when addressing participants at an Institute of Personnel Management of Zimbabwe 2008 Labour briefing in Bulawayo recently.

– Own correspondent.

WHY COULD PRES MBEKI BE PROTECTING POLICE CHIEF SELEBI?

2007-11-22T16:44:00.000+02:00

Police commissioners: Satisfying the whims and caprices of their presidents.

22 November 2007, 15:52 GMT + 2

LINK!!!

The relationship between President Thabo Mbeki and Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi is one of the less understood of political relationships.

It will probably go down in history as the most controversial.

Yet there are many theories being bandied about as to why Mbeki is protecting Selebi - or more precisely, why search and arrest warrants issued by two separate courts were cancelled by Mbeki’s newly appointed National Director of Public Prosecution, Mokotedi Mpshe after he had met unnamed officials from Mbeki’s office and officials from the Department of Justice. This after Mbeki suspended NDPP Vusi Pikoli, questioning his fitness to preside over the important institution.
As is now well known, if it were up to Pikoli, Selebi would, by now, be in and out of court, answering for himself on charges of obstructing justice, racketeering etc.

Without digressing too much, back to the theories:

One theory is that Selebi has a lot of dirt on the President, which inevitably serves as a hedge. This theory casts aspersions on the President. And of course, this theory is often presented in a form of question rather than by giving evidence: What is it that Selebi has on Mbeki that he would go all out to block his imminent arrest? It is a justifiable question for which an answer will remain elusive.
Another theory is that Selebi has served Mbeki just right previously. Why would he dump him in this crucial hour.

This relates to the fact that a few months ahead of the ANC’s 51st national conference at Stellenbosch in 2002, Selebi publicly confirmed that he was investigating ANC leaders Cyril Ramaphosa, Tokyo Sexwale and Mathews Phosa for ganging up to topple Mbeki. The ANC therefore had to protect and defend Mbeki against the plotters. This was the second major conspiratorial statement after the 1994 democratic breakthrough. (The first was made by General George Meiring, who alleged that Winnie Madikizela-Mandela and other ANC leaders were plotting to oust the Nelson Mandela government. Mandela moved swiftly to fire Meiring for making inflammatory statements.)

And after Selebi and his then political boss Steve Tshwete publicly lied about the three senior ANC leaders, they got nothing but tacit approval from Mbeki. Talk about unshakable loyalties: Mbeki and Selebi’s relationship is cemented by political conspiracy.

Contrast Mbeki’s leniency towards Selebi with Mandela’s forthright handling of George Meiring. All of these proved to be damn good Political Conspiracy 101 for Jacob Zuma. When he says there is conspiracy aimed at blocking his political aspirations, it’s difficult not to believe it, especially when conspiracy was previously used and legitimised by the head of police to damage the reputations of individuals, who, as has it since become clear, are untainted.

Not satisfied with conspiracy as an analytical tool to understand the Mbek-Selebi relationship, I went searching in the library for clues. I paged through many books and journals, read relationship theories and decision-making theories. This I did after realising that the Constitution of the country and all the laws on the president’s prerogatives are too legalistic and would not help. The day judges were hounded at night to cancel the warrants of arrest, was the day legal principles fell by the wayside. And so an explanation had to be found somewhere else.
So in my literary sojourn, I came across one article, which, though not satisfactory, provides some insights that might or might not help us understand the Mbeki-Selebi relationship. The article, written by Alice Hills of the School of Politics and International Studies, University of Leeds, was published in the Journal of Modern African Studies (Vol 45, No 3, September, 2007). Entitled “Police Commissioners, Presidents and Governance of Security”, argues that the assessment of Africa’s police in terms of their adherence to democratic criteria results in inaccurate analysis because “the police are actually governed according to presidential preferences”.

The article explores the relationship between presidents and police chiefs in Ghana, Kenya, Uganda and Zimbabwe – all of which, according to the article, “confirms the negligible role played by public accountability.”
One could be forgiven for thinking that the author might have also have had in mind the current developments in South Africa when she wrote the article. The article asks pertinent question: How are presidential political choices operationalised? What part do commissioners play in this process?

It then offers an answer: “Presidents employ (police commissioners) both to intimidate, constrain and use the police for purposes in which public accountability plays no part.” It sounds familiar.

Based on the analysis of events in other countries other than ours, Hill further states that the “the more usual pattern is for commissioners to be retained while useful and dismissed after offending their presidents in some way.
“Thus [Nigerian Inspector General (police chief) Sunday] Ehindero should have retired on reaching the mandatory age of 60, but [Nigerian President Olusegun] Obasanjo evidently found him useful and twice extended his term. In contrast, an angry President [Levy] Mwanawasa of Zambia dismissed Zunga Siakalima in July 2005 for delaying the arrest of an opposition leader, and questioning the legitimacy of his verbal orders.”

Hill further writes: “politicization is most evident in Zimbabwe, where Commissioner Augustine Chuhuri offers an examplar of the explicitly political role (police) commissioners play in operationalising presidential survival strategies. Although the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) are officially under the authority of the Ministry of Home Affairs, in practice its important roles and missions are controlled by the President’s Office….

“The operational effects of Chihuri’s relationship to Mugabe are evident in his overtly political role. Witness Operation Murambatsvina, in 2005, when more than 30 000 people were subjected to an intimidating arrest-detention-release cycle, and 200 000 lost their shanties to bulldozers and police armed with matches and kerosene (IWPR 2005). Kembo Mohadi, the hawkish Minister of Home Affairs responsible for police, avoided publicly commenting on the controversial operation, but Chihuri showed no reticence: ‘We must clean the country of the crawling mass of maggots bent on destroying the economy’ (ZWNews 2005).”

In her article Hill presents a somewhat encouraging picture on Ghana. The appointment of Patrick Kwateng Acheampong by President John Kufuor has been hailed. On one occasion Cheampong is reported to have told a gathering that it was wrong that he should be seen to be satisfying the “whims and caprices of politicians” (Addo 2002).

What is evident here at home is that satisfying the “whims and caprices of politicians” actually pays.

Ask Jackie.

MPUMELELO MKHABELA

CIO LEAKS LIKE A SIEVE????????

2007-11-08T08:35:00.000+02:00

PLEASE BUY THE PRINT COPY!!!

LINK!!!!!

BY WILF MBANGA

LONDON - During the past few weeks The Zimbabwean has received a number of so-called secret CIO documents from serving and former CIO officers in Bulawayo, Harare, Pretoria and London.

These have been subject to careful scrutiny by various experts, some with inside knowledge of the workings of the CIO.

The expert analysis of the documents on which we based our front-page story last week, about the bombing of The Daily News, is that these are not genuine. The source of the documents is, however, a bone fide former CIO officer who fled the country several months ago.

One very senior former CIO officer who studied the documents said the source "certainly has inside knowledge of the CIO" but dismissed the content as "suspect".

"The Daily News bombing most certainly took place and was almost certainly perpetrated by a combination of CIO, military intelligence, and military explosives/bomb squad personnel," said the officer.

Although the names mentioned by the source were serving members, they were not members of the dirty tricks department.

He said the documentary account of Learnmore Jongwe's killing, which we had intended to run this week, "just did not ring true".

The documents also mentioned the "murders" of Josiah Tungamirayi, former Commander of the Zimbabwe Airforce, and Cain Nkala, a Zanu (PF) official who was kidnapped, tortured and killed in Matabeleland. MDC officials were framed for this murder and held in prison for several years, after which they were acquitted.

Concerning these allegations, the former CIO officer said: "I rather get the impression that he/she is making up stories, adding intelligence jargon to make it sound more authentic and mouth watering but with very little, if any, factual backup."

Another expert doubted that the CIO would commit to paper such sensitive information six years after the events took place.

"It is possible that this operative was indeed involved. He may be simply setting down his memories of events," said the expert.When we tried to get back to our original source to communicate these findings, his mobile phone went unanswered for days.

Another leaked document claimed to prove that the CIO had orders to assassinate opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, his spokesman Nelson Chamisa and former Archbishop of Bulawayo, Pius Ncube. The memorandum (see photo), given to our reporter, was numbered CM53/09/07, signed by Z E Chibaya, said to be a senior CIO officer based at Bulawayo's Magnet House.

CIO sources also told The Zimbabwean that the adultery allegations against Pius Ncube was Mugabe's 'plan B' after the assassination task failed.

Our CIO expert dismissed the document as a forgery, as such delicate operations were never committed to paper, but communicated by word of mouth at closed meetings.
"The configuration of the layout is all wrong. Reports from PIOs are normally addressed to the Director Internal (DIN) as the main addressee. In addition, the addressees are wrong. For example there is no Assistant Director. It should be Deputy Director," he said.

According to one CIO operative, 'plan A' was ditched because "when the order came, we had reached a situation where the opposition and civic groups had become so united that they could easily lead the people into violent street protests that would succeed in toppling the government".

Analysts say the information being leaked is probably genuine, and is indicative of increasing discontent within the CIO and a desire for the truth to be known, possibly with a view to avoiding prosecution once the Mugabe regime crumbles.