In a recent documentary where former President Robert Mugabe was expressing his bitterness over what he alleged was betrayal by His Excellency President Emmerson Mnangagwa and his deputy Constantine Chiwenga, it is what he did not disclose that was hidden in plain sight. In every conversation between two people or among several people, there are two zones within which people communicate – the disclosure zone and the concealment zone. Every person when they speak or write chooses the degree to which they will disclose or conceal. Even if concealment constitutes 10% and disclosure is 90%, the ultimate truth always lies in the concealment arena.
By GLORia NDORO-MKOMBACHOTO
To entrench his grip on power, one of the deviously and consciously conceived strategies Mugabe used was to generously reward his key lieutenants, the ones wielding physical power, the security establishment and the power elite, heading up ministries. Allegations are abound that they were allowed to help themselves as they wished, from predominantly national resources willy-nilly as “payment” for their loyalty.
The discussion below is not comprehensive in any way but it is an indicator of the potholed political and economic terrain that whoever wins the 2018 elections would have to navigate judiciously, perspicaciously and skilfully.
Rule of law
Our most important intangible resource in Zimbabwe is the rule of law (ROL). In simple terms, the ROL implies that there is no one above the law. When Parliament crafts the law, such laws are comprehensive, understandable and logical. They are also explicit, coherent, just and publicised, as they are meant to be applied evenly to protect the security and fundamental rights of persons, core human rights including property rights. The laws as they are developed have to be in harmony with the main law: the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
Not one single person, regardless of their position and rank in society, is above the law. But there are always some who believe that because of the leadership positions they hold in society, they are above any laws of the land.
Zimbabwe Inc. is weak where enforcement of the ROL is concerned. Not a week goes by without disclosures in local and international media about bodies of evidence of scandal and corruption in government and state-owned enterprises [SOEs] and yet very few if any of these cases get prosecuted, never mind get convictions if prosecution happens at all. The end result is anarchy, lawlessness and deep-rooted corruption. Without the ROL all efforts to mend Zimbabwe Inc towards economic prosperity will fail. Compliance with the ROL must start with the leadership of the country because that is the only yardstick that the citizenry will be able to gauge their sincerity and commitment to the development of the country.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
Land
In a Tuesday November 30, 2010, Guardian article by David Smith, entitled, Mugabe and allies own 40% of land seized from white farmers – inquiry, Smith quoting from the national news agency ZimOnline, submitted that “Mugabe has bought the loyalty of cabinet ministers, senior army and government officials and judges with nearly 5m hectares (12,5m acres) of agricultural land, including wildlife conservancies and plantations.” At the time of writing the article Smith further alleged that Mugabe’s family were “said to own 14 farms spanning at least 16 000 hectares”. ZimOnline had carried an investigation and contrary to statements being touted by Mugabe at the time that “they had given the majority of black Zimbabweans their rightful inheritance…and the programme had mainly benefited the poor black masses,” it was Mugabe and his cronies who benefited from the lion’s share. ZimOnline had found that, “a new, well-connected black elite” of about 2 200 people controlled nearly 40% of the 14 million hectares seized from white farmers. These ranged in size from 250 to 4 000 hectares in “the most fertile farming regions in the country”.
It is well documented that during his reign, most of ministers and deputy ministers in Mugabe’s Zanu PF party were multiple farm owners. Top dog Zanu PF members, their wives and children and their cronies, supporters, the security establishment, some members of the judiciary, top government officials, traditional chiefs and the who is who of Zimbabwe who openly supported ZanuPF benefited from free farm land.
ZimOnline also established that when the scramble for these farms was underway, those who benefited included Mugabe’s then deputy Joice Mujuru, and her husband, former army general Solomon Mujuru, and their relatives, who (it is alleged) own at least 25 farms totalling 105 000 hectares.
The Zimonline report continued to establish that “all Zanu PF’s 56 politburo members, 98 members of parliament and 35 elected and unelected senators were allegedly allocated farms, and all 10 provincial governors have seized them, with four being multiple owners. Sixteen supreme court and high court judges also own farms.”
But in an earlier The Guardian article of Monday November 8, 2010, entitled, Don’t condemn Zimbabwe, Ian Scoones and Blasio Mavedzenge argued that, “Despite the global outrage, Robert Mugabe’s land reforms have had some successes and are boosting trade.” Based on a 10-year study they had conducted in Masvingo province, ordinary “people’s livelihoods had changed…although not every story was as positive”, …(but) “the hard evidence was complex and nuanced and it also contradicted the overwhelmingly negative images of land reform presented in the media.
Mining
According to The Citizen of March 4, 2016, in an article entitled, $15bn in diamonds looted in Zim – Mugabe “, in 2013, the state-owned Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC) projected that the Marange diamond fields would produce 16,9 million carats, making the project “the single largest in the world in terms of carats produced annually.” Zimbabweans citizens were elated. Finally, proceeds from their very own national resources would fund the turnaround of the economy and end their economic woes. It was estimated at that time that Zimbabwe “stood to earn upwards of US$2 billion per year, government officials claimed…Yet in 2012, the then Finance minister Tendai Biti complained that only a measly US$19 million had actually reached the state treasury.
Then in 2017 in an astonishing confession, Mugabe revealed “that diamonds worth more than $15 billion were looted in the eastern mining area of Marange.” The Mines and Mining Development minister at that time, Walter Chidhakwa, had previously stated that the amount which reached the public purse was $600 million out of the $15 billion expected. Recently in April 2018, Mugabe, after being deposed in November 2017, is finally being summoned over the missing diamond billions. Parliament intends to interrogate Mugabe over his 2016 claim that the country had lost $15 billion in income from diamonds due to corruption and foreign exploitation.
The plunder of Zimbabwean resources has not only taken place in the diamond mining sector. Allegations are abound relating to the securocrats having mining concessions along the Save river basin and other special grants and EPOs throughout the country.
When the security forces are allowed to dabble in business, a huge problem is created. Once they develop a taste for money it will be difficult to keep them in the barracks. Their core business that is, the defence of the nation, will suffer as they scurry all over in search of riches. Once they have wealth in their hands their next target is political power. Once they have both money and power they won’t want to relinquish both. Not only that, proceeds from these national resources would be used to fund the oppression of the citizenry.
According to Rob Wiles writing on November 21, 2017 on money.com, in an article entitled Robert Mugabe accumulated riches as Zimbabwe crumbled, Jeffrey Smith, executive director of democracy group Vanguard Africa, told money.com in an email to Wiles, that, “It’s long been suspected that Mugabe, his family and close associates have been dipping their hands into state coffers, or otherwise plundering Zimbabwe’s immense natural resource wealth for their own benefit.”
money.com elaborates that “In 2011, Wikileaks published a cable written a decade earlier by the United States. embassy in Harare that stated, “The full extent of Mugabe’s assets is unknown, but are rumoured to exceed $1 billion in value, the majority of which are likely invested outside Zimbabwe. The overseas assets are rumoured to include everything from secret accounts in Switzerland, the Channel Islands, and the Bahamas to castles in Scotland.”
On November 27, 2017, a news24.com article entitled, Mugabe leaves a legacy of economic ruin, upheaval in Zimbabwe, the Associated Press argues that “The Marange diamond fields, discovered in 2009, proved an unexpected windfall. The high-quality gemstones in easily exploited alluvial fields brought in billions of dollars. Mugabe used the army to take over the area and the mines were nationalised, cutting out British and Chinese companies that had been operating there. But very little of the funds from the diamonds went into state coffers to help the country’s dilapidated education and health services. Mugabe, his family and his closest allies amassed world-class fortunes.” State-owned enterprises (SOEs) and government
Recent revelations about allegations of corruption involving ZESA top dogs and Wicknell Chivhayo on $5 million supposedly spent on a non-existent solar project in Gwanda appear to have just fizzled out.
The recent goings-on at NSSA demonstrate that when ministers are appointed, they generally prefer to appoint their cronies into strategic positions within the SOEs which fall under their purview of responsibility. Without knowing the full details of the charges levelled against ex-NSSA chairman Robin Vela and ex-CEO Elizabeth Chitiga, what has been known for a long time is that NSSA has been used as an easily accessible money box for government, the corporate sector and a source of discounted loans for its executives. The certainty is that competent, qualified and skilled Zimbabwean professionals who are experienced fund managers, like Deborah N Peters for example, available to serve Zimbabwe Inc, and run NSSA and who have been entrusted by other countries to run profitable billion dollar funds, will never be headhunted based on merit. If you do not subscribe to the ethos of the looting deal flow mechanism, you are excluded.
In a recent exposé by international journalist Hopewell Chin’ono entitled Mandiwanza’s ‘Supa’ Corruption Exposed, dated April 19, 2018 published by Nehanda Radio, Chin’ono makes allegations, laying bare the exclusionary old boys’ network, its incestuous spider web of wheeling and dealing with ICT minister Supa Mandiwanzira at the centre, pulling the strings of “if you scratch my back, I will scratch yours.”
Award-winning journalist Dumisani Muleya, in an opinion piece he authored in the Zimbabwe Independent of July 17 2017, a sister paper to this one, entitled, Corrupt networks looting Zimbabwe, argued that during Mugabe’s reign, “It is now very difficult in Mugabe’s government to find an official who is not corruptible. Some of them just go to work to solicit for bribes, extort money and engage in corrupt activities. They have no sense of shame and proportion in their systematic and grand theft.” That was in 2017. In 2018 under the new dispensation it would appear nothing has changed. Dr Alex Magaisa blogging on November 30, 2017 about the composition of the new Cabinet referred to it as a case of “old wine in new bottles.” He was right. Nothing much seems to have changed. The tyrant left, but tyranny still remains very much within Zimbabwe Inc.
The details of the looting of SOEs are documented in the Auditor-General’s reports of many years. Muleya continues, “There is even proof, which is different from evidence, of such plunder. Yet nothing is done to ensure prosecution and accountability.”
Muleya further remarks….”When you consider that Zimbabwe’s entire national budget is US$4 billion, it becomes clear that the proportion of plunder is massive and damaging to the country and people’s lives.”
Todd Moss, writing an argument for foreignpolicy.com on 21 December 2017, entitled, Mugabe Is a Goner, But His Looting Machine Is Here to Stay, observes that, “Zimbabwe’s military didn’t topple the regime. It just restored the ruling party’s corrupt old guard to power.”
Moss continues his thoughts, thoughts that are not new because they have been echoed time and time again by Zimbabwean journalists, writers, academics and opposition politicians. Moss suggests that “…the long-term survival of any new Zimbabwean government will depend on resolving the country’s cash crisis and reviving the economy.”
But what Zanu-PF knows, Zanu-PF does exceptionally well. It might be poor at governance, but knows how to stay in power and “has shown a remarkable ability to resist reform, even under the most trying of circumstances. Just as Mugabe inexplicably clung on to the bitter end, the looting machine he is leaving behind may keep on running, regardless of the cost.”
Why should foreign investors and foreign aid gravitate towards Zimbabwe?
The question that begs an answer is why should foreign direct investment (FDI) and the taxpayers in other countries support Zimbabwe Inc. with foreign aid when the alleged looters have kept the loot offshore, in essence, creating jobs with Zimbabwe Inc’s resources in those economies? If not hidden in black plastic bags in grave – like pits underground in Zimbabwe, or in ceilings somewhere in the world, that loot is stashed in the banking system throughout the world. Both the Eastern and the Western governments are aware who stashed money where and how much. Why are they not helping Zimbabwe bring that money back?
Should FDI and foreign aid not be conditional on the return of these looted resources back to Zimbabwe Inc?
That is why Financial Times investigative journalist Tom Burgis, in a new edition of his book The Looting Machine, probes the paradox of “the (African) continent that is at once the world’s poorest and, arguably, its richest.” Amongst other recommendations, Burgis suggests that “the growth of offshore banking in the late 20th century created new opportunities for resource tycoons to cover their tracks, a practice laid bare in the Panama Papers…and… In the case of African resource deals, offshore funds have been shown to conceal questionable transactions.” Burgis further argues that “”Bribery now is much more sophisticated, and has become harder to define as bribery if it’s (through) offshore transactions or people being given equity shares in offshore companies…You have to crack open a lot of offshore secrets to see the conflict of interest that lies at the heart of them.”
If Zimbabwe is resource rich then it makes sense for FDI and foreign aid to be conditional on the return of looted resources.
How do we wrestle Zimbabwe Inc.’s resources from the grip of the power elite and those holding the guns?
Please search me if I know. I have no idea. What I know is Mugabe left us a terrible legacy. That monstrous and dreadful legacy is the main source of the betrayal he feels from the top two. Securocrats should have never been allowed to be low risk business people whose primary businesses are the plunder of national resources.
What remains true is that power and access to unlimited resources, corrupts. Absolute power and access to unlimited resources corrupts absolutely. In Zimbabwe Inc. we are dealing in absolutes. Writing on page163, in Khwezi, The Remarkable Story of Fezekile Ntsukela Kuzwayo, her second book, Redi Tlhabi, South African radio talk show host, broadcast journalist, and author, aptly summarises powers’ manifestation “…but power seldom holds a mirror to its own face. It does what power does: determinedly pursues its target, using other people’s lives as stepping stones.” Zimbabweans are never going to taste political and economic freedom unless those in power stop using national assets that belong to all citizens as stepping stones for the benefit of a few.
We set a tricky and problematic precedent when “Operation Restore Legacy” happened. Whilst awkward, uncertain and precarious, the coup, which was not a coup, was long overdue. The citizenry was acutely aware of the fact that it was only the security establishment who would have the courage, power and machinery to execute it. The people had the legitimate right to remove Mugabe but lacked the wherewithal to do so given the fact that Mugabe and the security establishment were embedded and he had closed all avenues for democratic leadership renewal or change.
The challenge we are facing today is, it is conceivable for anyone from the power elite, connected to those holding instruments of state coercion, could possibly in the future, decide at their own whim, to conduct their own version of Operation Restore Legacy.
