Avoid stereotypes against women

receive in the media. 
The narrative in some media went beyond what was really necessary to describe the story and instead touched on sensitive issues about Masaiti’s private life, which seemed to be at casting doubt on her personal integrity. It is doubtful that such treatment would have been meted to a male politician.
For example, having narrated the refusal by the Masvingo magistrate to preside over the marriage on the ground that her prospective husband had failed to produce the required certificate of no marriage from his home country, some media reports, especially on the websites, went on to describe how Masaiti’s previous husband, Isaac Matongo had died.
The language used seemed to suggest that Matongo had died as a result of a sexual encounter with Masaiti. A report on one website describes in the following crude terms: “Matongo died of a heart attack on May 2, 2007, after romping with Masaiti”.
The language suggests that Matongo succumbed to his death following a sexual encounter with Masaiti. This comes after a paragraph that describes Masaiti’s alleged infidelity. Basically the report tries to paint Masaiti’s character in hideous terms.
In basic terms it says: here is an MP, whose previous three husbands have died, including one who died in the aftermath of a “sexual romp”, who has been accused of infidelity and is now seeking to marry a younger, foreign man. At a time when Zimbabwe is apparently making strides to improve the lot of women, to change attitudes toward women and women politicians in particular, such reporting in the media is unhelpful and simply strengthens the age-old stereotypes of women in public life. It is this type of characterisation that dissuades women from entering public life, let alone participating in politics. Besides the old stereotypes about women, it also perpetuates negative stereotypes about widows. It is unfair, morally questionable and discriminatory to treat women who have suffered misfortune in this way.
This is why the Constitution must be emphatic about the prohibition of discriminatory conduct towards women on the basis of marital status. It is also the same reason why hate speech or language that promotes hostility and discrimination towards women must be proscribed in the Constitution.
Freedom of the media is a wonderful thing which must be vigorously defended but it is important to have provisions which ensure that speech that encourages hate, hostility or discrimination must be prohibited and those responsible for it must be held to account.
One can imagine young women aspiring to enter politics reading such a negative story that reveals ugly but unnecessary private detail about a politician and makes hostile innuendoes. Picture a widow who has ambitions to enter politics or participate in public life. Would they be prepared to put up with unnecessary revelations about their private lives — details not about the fact that their husbands died but that seem to suggest that they were somehow responsible for it?
And worse, even when such innuendoes are not supported by facts but reflect a reporter’s reckless and wild imagination? It is such attitudes and practices that continue to place serious barriers in the paths of women engaging in politics or public life in general. The media has a serious responsibility to discharge in undoing the old stereotypes towards women and widows. It has a moral obligation, having so much freedom that is rightfully defended, to promote and further the cause of women. On the issue of the refusal by the magistrate to preside over the marriage, one would have expected a more robust and critical analysis of the law that effectively prohibits Zimbabweans (men and women, alike) to marry foreigners. Indeed, the requirement to produce a certificate of no marriage could very well be in violation of Zimbabwean citizens’ fundamental rights – to movement and association.
Magistrate, Jabulani Mzinyathi is reported to have stated that “Under the law reforms, foreigners are now required to produce a verifiable ‘certificate of no marriage’ from their countries of origin before they marry in Zimbabwe.”
In efforts to control the influx of foreigners trying to exploit Zimbabwe’s lax immigration laws through the marriage institution, the state has responded by creating measures to prevent what are commonly referred to as sham marriages or marriages of convenience. It is not unusual for foreigners seeking immigration papers to pay their way into a marriage. The State’s mechanism to control the escalation of such marriages is to require the foreigner to produce a certificate of no marriage.
The public interest to control immigration must be balanced with the private interests of the parties involved, in particular the Zimbabwean’s citizen’s fundamental rights. Using this test, it is possible to judge whether the requirement of a certificate of no marriage is a reasonable requirement in a democratic society.
How reasonable is it to expect a certificate of no marriage to be produced before a marriage can be allowed?