16 JUNE; IT’S ABOUT THE AFRICAN CHILD, IT’S ABOUT THE STUDENT & IT’S ABOUT US

By Brighton Taruberekera

If black lives really matter, then 16 June should mean a lot for us as Africans. It is a day to commemorate and reminiscent the sad memories of June 16, 1976 whilst at the same time focusing on making the future brighter and better for all Africans especially its tender ones. 

Today is 16 June. Some forty years ago in the township of Soweto in South Africa, nearly ten thousand black students marched in the streets to protest over the poor quality of their education. They marched as a way to demonstrate their disapproval of the Black Education Act which segregated students based on their race.

The Soweto protest has come and gone but we have a couple of lessons to learn from that incident. Firstly, that black lives matter and that education should be accessible to all.

The Day of the African Child is an opportunity to raise awareness for the ongoing need to improve the education of children living across Africa. It’s a need that still very much exists today.  As I write this, thousands of African children are being denied the right to education. Across the continent, the Covid-19 induced lockdown measures have seen countries adopting e-learning as an alternative to conventional teaching methods. Education, once again has become a monopoly of the privileged few. It is no longer about burning candles and putting ink on paper. It is now about paperless browsing, streaming, downloading and uploading. The world is going paperless and who cares about those that still cannot afford even the paper itself?

Surely something need to be done to ensure that education is accessible to all. The future of Africa depends on its young ones. As we commemorate the Day of the African Child, let’s remember to make education accessible and affordable to all, especially to the African Child.



Brighton Taruberekera is a Zimbabwean citizen, politically active and socially interactive.

 tbmunyori@gmail.com | www.facebook.com/tbmunyori | taruberekera.blogspot.com

#Balance4Better - Agreed, but should we keep on sending non-performing MPs for the sake of balancing genders only? Or should we do more? Here is my take on the PR system beyond 2023.

By Prince Gora

 In October 2019, the government gazetted Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Amendment Bill Number 2, which seeks to introduce several amendments to the 2013 Constitution. Parliamentary Consultations on this Second Amendment are set to start shortly which has opened pertinent conversations about the proposed ammendments.

Today, I want to specially focus on the women's quota (PR system). According to the 2013 constitution, the PR system was set to end after 10 years but if the Constitutional Ammendment Bill No.2 is to be adopted, then the PR system will continue beyond 2023.

...but do we really need it? Has it achieved enough thus far to merit a continuation? Has it politically empowered women in such a way that come next election, women who were previously in parly based on the quota system can not only directly contest, but contest and win?

Personally  I have a number of issues concerning the current qouta system and as women and youth go out for parliamentary public consultation beginning this week, I would like them to voice out these issues.  I suggest that the qouta system be continued but with these reforms:

1) A ballot be available for the selection of women for PR in each province.

Let's get women electing other women in their provinces with the top 6 going to parliament. In this way candidates will have an opportunity to either contest as independent or under a political party. The party list system is exclusionary and subject to abuse by party bigwigs which is why the media is awash with claims and counter claims that PR MP y and x got in parly through the bedroom. Let's do away with PR women who serve party political masters.

By being directly elected by other women, they will also have direct constituencies which the current quota system does not provide. They will have a people to which they can report back to.

2) Let's put limits to women who participate in PR. 

The major purpose of a PR system is to mentor young women, isn't it?  If so, I think we need an age limit,  is it not possible to say anyone above 35 or 50 isn't eligible to contest under PR? I say this because many women in parliament through the PR system right now are just old women sleeping day in, day out without any serious political future.


Secondly, I think people who have previously saved as MPs before (both as PR and/ constituent MP) should not be allowed to go back in parliament through the PR system, they need to leave that space for others. We've people like Priscilla Misihairambwi-Mushonga who has been in parliament twice before but is now back in parliament as a PR MP. Isn't that defeating the whole purpose of PR? Are we not recycling "dead wood" in the name of political empowerment for women?

3) Let's make the political environment more friendly and safe for women.

While the PR system is trying to balance the numbers in parliament, it's failure to achieve a 50-50 gender balance can be attributed to a political environment that is not friendly for women. This needs to be tackled to ensure equal participation of males and females in politics and parliament. The ongoing brutality being perpetuated at Netsai, Cecilia and Joana, for example, will only serve to scare young women away from politics.

Most women fear for their lives and dignity because of what they see happening to other women in politics. There is need to level the playing field in such a way that we can have more women participating in politics.



To conclude,  I think we need to continue with the PR system and even introduce it to youths  (but not with the paltry 10 seats that were proposed by the government) but we need to reform it!

P. Gora

What role should the church play in Zimbabwean politics?

By Prince Gora

Ever wondered what role should churches play in the political process of our nation? What – if anything – should 'men and women of God'  say about politics from the pulpit? What about voting? Should the clergy try to influence the results of an election or encourage people to go out and vote? What about a more direct involvement in politics,  should churches ever call for the removal of a leader? Can they demonstrate when faced with incompetent leaders and systemic injustices? Or should they remain silent and docile instead?

Is support for candidates or discussion of issues from the pulpit activism? Is encouraging everyone to get out and vote activism? I ask these questions because the Christian  community is largely divided on these issues.

We have people like the famed Pastor Evan Mawarire who openly called for the removal of Robert Mugabe and led demonstrations in pursuit of that goal. More recently, we've had Pastor Shingi Munyeza who, just a few weeks ago, was defending the ZANU PF government but has since become a vocal and leading critic of it. Of course we also have Apostle Talent Chiwenga, whose relentless activism at the pulpit has now landed him in trouble. The Catholic church is no newcomer to Zimbabwean politics and the Catholic Commission for Peace and Justice (CCJP) has never hesitated to call a Rhodesian or Zimbabwean government to order whenever one has strayed.

But we also have many church leaders who urge their followers to only pray and disengage from political activities arguing that leaders come from God. This group of church leaders say that the church shoud simply be the church with its priority being only to pray for the government  the day no matter how it came into being.

One of the main reasons for this is undoubtedly fear and indeed many church leaders tell their followers to stay away from politics for fear of the unknown. History is awash with church leaders and their followers who got themselves in hot soup by being political, Archbishop Pius Ncube being the most high profile of those.

There's also a group of church leaders who rarely comment about politics but are then seen in the company of political leaders. This has of course always raised eyebrows like when President Mnangagwa met with Baba Guti last year.

Talking about issues is even more polarising. It is hard to ignore the poverty around us at the moment nor the corruption and the injustices that the Zimbabwean citizenry is facing, yet the moment one starts talking about these issues they are quickly labelled as regime change agents. But aren't they talking about real issues?

Those of us who keenly follow Zimbabwean politics will remember that not long ago church leaders tried to kickstart a dialogue between Nelson Chamisa and Emerson Mnangagwa. Isn't this another role which the churches must regularly play?

 The church, I believe, should be a place where unity can be achieved but is that going to happen?  When some of our church leaders either shun away from politics or choose to pretend to be blind to the challenges affecting the country? Will it happen when they can't speak openly about political issues and even discourage their followers from speaking openly about politics?

Then of course should the church pray so the economy gets better or so that our lives are happier or easier as we are about to witness on June 15, 2020?

If God does have authority over the ones who are elected, then doesn't his will need to be known as a part of the process. As Christians, if we disagree with something, shouldn't we vote to make our voices heard?

My opiniom is that Christians should play a role in the political process. Whether or not one is involved in the political process, they will be affected by political outcomes and will soon start crying ‘sour grapes’ when things go wrong like they are currently doing.

I strongly feel that the church should advocate for the oppressed. It should call out injustices that are perpetuated within our political systems. If you were to ask me, I would say it is the church's duty to keep watch, listen, and to respond where there is injustice.

The church should provide a foundation for people in  communities. When people feel helpless in the face of a turbulent political climate and in the presence of systemic injustice, the church should be the place where they reclaim hope.

Conclusion
Churches command a huge following and thus have an important role to play in politics. They need to give credit when credit is due and criticism when criticism is due, being silent will only harm the very people they purport to serve.

As long as they are silent, systemic injustices will be perpetuated because as they say, silent means contentment.