Demolitions are not the answer

Kowanai Mhlanga
THE Sunday News of 27 December 2015 had a headline, “Clash over houses demolition”, wherein it was alleged that “A Storm was brewing between the Government and the Bulawayo City Council after the latter vowed to fight a directive for all structures built within 70 metres and 45 metres on either side of railway lines and roads to be demolished within 90 days.”

When the directive was given in the Sunday Mail of 20 December 2015, the directive was not specific to Bulawayo City Council only. I surmised that the directive would impact even on rural local authorities and their residents, and other arms of Government such as Ministry of lands and Rural Resettlement.

In a glance, I envisage demolitions of huts as well, along the roads and railway lines in our rural areas. Residents of such areas are at risk of mishaps such as road accidents, oil spillages, rail derailments and so forth.

I also saw the house of a Member of Parliament for Chipinge South Cde Enock Porusingazi as being vulnerable to demolition as it is clear that it was built below a high voltage pylon at Checheche, in Chipinge District unless the law is blind to elected officials.

I had many questions in my mind, one of which touches on how old are the houses that should go under demolition? If for instance, as per the argument by the Mayor of Bulawayo that, “Houses in Entumbane and Mpopoma are over 60 years old now, so people staying in those areas cannot be affected today because when we originally built their houses there they were approved and all by-laws were religiously followed,” is the minister implying that even Operation Murambatsvina was not implemented to its logical conclusion?

Granted, as a country, we are used to maintaining standards. Though the obtaining laws such as the Regional, Town & Country Planning Act of 1996 (Chapter 29:12) and the Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15) seem draconian, but they have been retained to control haphazard erection of structures in local authority areas. This Act is a “development control measure” which local authorities and other arms of government should be familiar with.

But I am surprised to see villagers’ houses mushrooming along the railway lines and roads. Could it be that the fast track land reform was so fast-tracked to a point where reasoning was thrown into a “blair toilet”? Are we now revisiting the law, and do we have enough gloves, because a bare hand cannot dare touch it.

Indeed, uncontrolled development is a recipe for disaster and sprawling unplanned settlements/slums that develop are associated with criminal adventures, stockpiles of stench garbage that breed the spread of water borne diseases such as cholera and typhoid in urban areas, but are our local authorities doing enough to collect garbage? Are urban residents not paying levies that should be used for service delivery?

What I would advise the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Development is that there is need to engage various stakeholders to investigate circumstances around development of such “illegal buildings”, rather than punishing the innocent citizens. Other ministries should be engaged, and local authorities.

True, Government regulations and standards have to be adhered to but I think by-laws with respect to local authorities were not crafted in Britain nor China but in Zimbabwe, and were approved by Central Government, but to wake up and say they are operating parallel to the country’s laws and stipulated regulations, I think we are missing the point. Yes, standards need to be maintained, laws have to be obeyed, but where there is transgression from the law, better approaches should be adopted. We risk to be renamed a “Country of Demolitions”.

The serious subject that the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Development, as an MP and as our ministers should debate and find answers on is how to tame corruption.

As ministers, ask yourselves, what happened to the leadership code of 1984? Who shredded those otherwise brilliant initiatives?

Demolitions are not the answer to illegal constructions. Rather as a country we are merely grappling with the symptoms. By shredding the leadership code into pieces, we entrenched the root causes of corruption into the societies. No matter how much we load our education curriculum with the subject of ubuntu as a way of stemming corruption, if as leaders the talk is not walked, teachers will teach in vain.

Demolitions are retrogressive, as they plunge the poor to worse situations. The poor have rights, not to build anywhere but to be listened to. It is not a question of who is more powerful — Government or local authorities. The council is not the mayor, but it serves the people. The minister is not the Government, but serves the people. The tiff between the minister and the mayor should take cognisance of the citizens of this country who for a long time have had their houses demolished and blazed without compensation.

The law should descend heavily on people who sanctioned construction along the roads and railway lines. What, as deterrent measure has been done on land barons? As long as they can go away with murder, corruption in this country will remain a talk show.

The Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission should be empowered to do its work. Criminal elements that authorised construction along the roads and railway lines should be prosecuted without fear or favour. The education and publicity department of the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission can enlighten citizens of this country, especially urban shelter seekers on what to do and not when it comes to stand acquisition.

Otherwise, the demolitions that have occurred in Zimbabwe, and that continue to occur and that shall occur are a clear warped response to pervasive corruption in this country. Could the honourable minister take heed? People are tired of demolitions.

Kowanai Mhlanga writes in his own capacity and can be contacted on [email protected]