Online Reporter
THE alleged kidnapping of two-year-old Asanda Ndhlovu has understandably shocked the public and stirred intense emotion. Such cases provoke fear, anger and disbelief — particularly when the accused is said to be a 14-year-old girl. Yet moments like this demand more than outrage; they demand clarity, restraint and a firm insistence on the rule of law.
The teenager at the centre of this case remains, first and foremost, a child. Whatever the allegations, whatever the circumstances, she is entitled to the full protection afforded to minors under Zimbabwean law and international child rights conventions. Her age does not erase the seriousness of the charge, but it absolutely requires that the State, the justice system and the public treat her as a child in conflict with the law — not as a spectacle.
It is deeply troubling that the minor was displayed before the media and interviewed by journalists. This was neither ethical nor lawful. Children accused of crimes may never be publicly identified, exposed or paraded. The law is unequivocal on this point: their dignity, privacy and psychological safety must be safeguarded at every stage. Media houses, too, have a duty to exercise restraint, avoid sensationalism and ensure that no child — victim or accused — is placed at risk.
The teenager deserves a fair process, conducted quietly and professionally through the courts, not in the glare of social media or the heat of public opinion. Trial by media not only undermines due process but risks inflicting further harm on a child whose circumstances are still unknown and whose vulnerability is unquestionable.
Justice for Asanda requires justice for everyone involved — and justice is never achieved through public shaming, prejudice or disregard for legal protections. The correct place to establish facts is a protected courtroom, guided by qualified professionals, not an online comment thread.
Our society must be able to hold two truths at once: that the safety of children like Asanda is sacred, and that the rights of child offenders are equally inviolable. Protecting one does not require violating the other. In fact, a system that safeguards the rights of accused minors is the very system most capable of protecting victims as well.
This case is a sobering reminder of why child protection protocols exist and why they must be followed without fail. The teenager must receive psychological support, legal representation, privacy and a child-friendly judicial process. Anything less would be an injustice — not only to her, but to the principles we claim to uphold as a nation.
Justice must be done. But it must be done properly. And it must be done with humanity.
Child protection doesn’t work anymore with the advent of social media. By the time the formal mainline media took centre stage, social media has already spread the news to a wider audience. It is absolutely a waste of time and energy to hype over children’s rights in these circumstances.
Child protection doesn’t work anymore with the advent of social media. By the time the formal mainline media takes centre stage, social media has already spread the news to a wider audience. It is absolutely a waste of time and energy to hype over children’s rights in these circumstances.