Asiagate: To punish or to rehabilitate?

I don’t want them to smell like goats to a leopard because I strongly believe the majority of players who accepted money to throw games in the period under review were not instigators. They just found themselves in the mess and having reached a point of no return after responding to call for national duty. Their biggest mistake was not reporting back home what transpired on the trips. But where would they report and who would listen to them? Anyone opening his mouth at that time obviously risked ending his Warriors career.

Of course, I will shed no tears for some individuals who I believe were the masterminds and reaped huge rewards, but I’m sorry for the young boys whose careers are hanging by the thread because they responded to the call of national duty, only to be caught up in a big web of match-fixing that has caught the attention of the world.

Having gone through parts of the reports of the Independent Ethics Committee which was leaked to the media, and having realised how Zimbabwe stands to lose a whole generation of footballers because of Asiagate, I was left asking myself the kind of a disciplinary process the nation wants to take in this case.

I liked what I got from a Journal by one Andrew Uduigwomen, titled “the Christian Perspective on Capital Punishment: An Evaluation of Rehabilitation.”

Read on “. . . Rehabilitationism is the theory that the criminal is not just a reprobate to be merely punished as he deserves with no interests of his own to be preserved, but a person in need of re-education and rehabilitation. Rehabilitationism is based on a remedial or reformatory view of justice. It sees the criminal as a patient who needs treatment or cure. Instead of being punished for his crime, the criminal should be corrected, re-socialised along the right path and taught to acquire suitable skills for honest and profitable livelihood. We cannot cure him by killing him. Just as patients need a doctor, socially ill people need a psychiatrist, not an executioner.

“Also called corrective or emendatory theory, rehabilitationism is a relatively new theory of punishment which grew from the influence of the positivist school of criminology. Under the impact of this school, modern penal practice has tended to confine attention to the criminal and the circumstances impinging on him, instead of focusing on the crime. The assumption here is that the criminal is simply a victim of psychological disorder brought about by poor socialisation in a socially deficient and poor environment. It is argued that since crime is a lower-class phenomenon, the better the lot of this class, the better the lot of the criminal.

“While Christian Rehabilitationists quote the Bible to condemn capital punishment, Christian non- Rehabilitationists argue with equal force in favour of capital punishment, citing the same Bible. In what follows, we examine the arguments of the former group and the counter-arguments of the latter. First and foremost, Christian Rehabilitationists argue that the primary aim of justice is rehabilitation or reformation, not punishment. This is anchored on the biblical declaration that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turns away from this iniquisities and obtain pardon (Ezekiel 18:23). God is not willing that any person should perish, but that all sinners should acknowledge their sins, turn away from them and turn to God (2 Peter 3:9; Prov. 28:13). God wants to heal the sinner, not to kill him.

“No wonder when God gave the Decalogue, his first commandment is ‘Thou shalt not kill’ (Exod. 20:13). It follows from this that all must regard the life of man as sacred because God created man in his own image and likeness. If we look at the dignity of man in the light of divinely revealed truth, we cannot but esteem it more highly. Specifically, the rehabilitationist position regarding the outright abolition of capital punishment is based on a deeper understanding of God’s commandment to love the enemy (Matthew 5: 43 -47). This shows that even the life of the enemy is sacred in the sight of God and should as much as possible be protected and sustained.

“In response to the argument above, non- rehabilitationists argue that the primary purpose of justice is punishment, not rehabilitation or reformation. This, they argue, is clearly indicated in both Old and New Testaments. God himself punishes sin and enjoins those in authorities to do so (Exod. 20: 5; Ezek. 18: 4, 20; Gen. 9: 6; Exod. 12: 12). The core of the penal view is revealed in the death of Christ who received capital punishment as ‘the just for the unjust’ (1 Pet. 3: 18). Paul the Apostle declares that ‘the wages of sin is death’ (Rom. 6:23). While it’s true that those who commit non-capital offences can get reformed as a result of their incarceration, this is not the primary goal of capital punishment.

“Rehabilitationists argue that capital punishment was abolished with the Mosaic Law as part of the Old Testament legalistic system, by Christ. The Old Testament gave death penalty for offences such as breaking the Sabbath (Numb. 15:23), blasphemy (Lev. 24:10-14), rebellion against one’s parents (Exod. 21:17), kidnapping (Exod. 21:16), outright, premeditated murder (Numb. 35:16), witchcraft (Exod. 21:16), adultery (Lev. 20:10), prostitution (Deut. 22:24), idolatory (Exod. 22:20) etc. It is also argued that, even in the Old Testament capital punishment was not always given for capital crimes. For example, when Cain killed Abel, instead of allowing him to be killed in retaliation, God put a mark upon him and protected his life. Thus ‘Blood revenge was averted by God through protective care, just as later removal to a city of refuge would avert an avenger’ The case of David who committed two capital crimes (adultery and murder) and was pardoned and even restored to his throne after acknowledging his sins and confessing them (2 Sam. 12:13; Psalm 51) is also cited to buttress this argument.”

Back to our life story, do we want to banish and kill the carriers of all those boys who were merely taking instructions from their coaches and other officials as well as match-fixers from Asia, or we want to show them that what they did was wrong and then we do some kind of remedial process to rehabilitate them?

The recommendations by the Ethics Committee are very serious, taking into consideration the serious nature of match-fixing and that it should have no place in our sport. The committee recommended life bans to some players and officials whom they believed were deep inside the mess, while some players and officials were to be suspended for between six months and ten years, with the majority of players getting five year and two-year bans and a few getting seven and eight years.

Nonetheless, the nation is debating what should be done. Some argue that it would not be fair to kill the livelihoods of all the boys. They have to be punished yes, but they should still be allowed to continue with their football so that they fend for their families and serve the nation in future. The kind of punishment needed is reformatory. They were exposed to the evil side of football, and it is the duty of Zifa to rehabilitate them and show them the right path.

Some argue that they all have to face the music. The argue that some people who break the law are sent to jail, even for some “minor” offences, and they start their lives all over again when they are released from jail, so all those who were part to selling the soul of the nation though match-fixing should suffer the same fate.

The ball is in the Zifa court, but the recommended years of suspension can be suspended, so that when the individuals are caught offside in match fixing again, they are made effective, and then the players are made to pay fines for the matches they played in Asia. If they were getting $1 000 for a game, then an individual will have to pay the same amount for each game played ($5 000 for five games), even if it means they spend the whole season paying Zifa. That was someone’s suggestion, but as we all know, the Zifa board will have the final say on the way forward and some will actually be handed over to the police so that the courts can deal with them. It’s bound to be a bumpy road for some.

l Has the Bosso goalie jetted in from Luanda?

The biggest football match of the season is on tomorrow in Harare, featuring Highlanders and Dynamos. The importance of the match cannot be overemphasised as the winners will have a big shout to the league title with four games remaining from Sunday.

After watching Highlanders bow out of the Mbada Diamonds trophy at the hands of a determined Monomotapa at the Colliery in Hwange on Sunday, I felt Highlanders needed to urgently dispatch a search party to Luanda, Angola to look for their goalkeeper Ariel Sibanda who was with the national team recently. The guy guarding the posts for Highlanders was not the Ariel who is touted as the number one goalkeeper in the country. He was certainly not the Ariel who put up a brave fight when the Warriors lost to Angola 0-2 away two weeks back. He was not the Ariel who stood firm, recording clean sheets for up to five games as Highlanders marched to a record 23- match league unbeaten run this season.

With Highlanders on the driving seat inside 20 minutes thanks to two beautiful goals by Bhekimpilo Ncube, Ariel was to gift Monomotapa an opener a minute before halftime when he failed to cut a corner, and a few minutes after restart, he gifted them the equaliser when he threw into his own nets a free kick from outside the box, and with the match seemingly headed for the penalty lottery, he could only dive in vain as Monomotapa scored the winner, from a well taken low shot from afar.

Nonetheless, Highlanders coach, Kelvin Kaindu, refused to blame Ariel for the two goals, and the loss as it were, arguing that “we win as a team and we lose as a team”. The coach felt his whole team lacked concentration at some point and allowed Monomotapa to run away with the game.

The Zambian is hopeful of putting an end to Dynamos’ dominance in recent years.

“I think this season there is a lot that the team has done which can make us beat them. Obviously God has been on our side and by faith, the same God who has guided us to where we are can give us an edge over Dynamos on Sunday,” said Kaindu.

l For feedback, email [email protected]. You can also follow the writer on Twitter and Facebook.