Editorial Comment: Measures to stop sham marriages noble, but . . .

Tobaiwa Mudede do not meet any of these criteria and to a large extent impinge on the responsibilities of his colleague in the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Director of Immigration Control.
Mr Mudede quite correctly outlined two abuses of marriage. There are foreigners who come to Zimbabwe, pay a Zimbabwean to marry them, use that marriage to gain resident status and then never see their spouse again.
The second problem that worried him, and no doubt some examples have been reported to his office, is of families that arrange a marriage with a dying person with some personal assets so that they can inherit these.
To solve the first problem, the marriage of convenience contracted by a foreigner to gain resident status, Mr Mudede proposes that all foreigners marrying a Zimbabwean woman must produce a certificate from their home country certifying that they have no marriage recorded there and must also produce clearances from the Zimbabwean police and immigration authorities.
For a start, the foreign no-marriage certificate will trap very few. Most of the foreigners marrying in Zimbabwe are young, are unlikely to be married and even if they are hitched, are probably in an unregistered customary union.
So the scheme is far from a cure all. In any case foreigners who do tend to enter such arrangements come from countries where classy forgeries are obtainable or where corrupt officials can be persuaded to issue certificates.
At the same time globalisation means more and more people are marrying citizens of other countries.
Up to five percent of marriages around the world now join two people who were not born in the same country and the percentage can be higher in smaller countries, such as Zimbabwe.
So the Registrar-General’s scheme will trap few of the wrongdoers, since most will be able to get the certificate or evade the requirement, but will make life far more difficult for those many more couples who do enter genuine marriages across borders.
His desire for police and immigration clearance raises interesting legal questions. People are allowed to marry convicted criminals and illegal aliens, so long as both partners are of age and are not already married. The right to marry is pretty absolute.
We agree that it is desirable for a future spouse to know about this sort of thing, but we doubt that a marriage can be barred legally in these circumstances. Where the Registrar General could help tackle marriages of convenience is, for a start, ruling that details of all foreign spouses, including addresses, are sent to Immigration Control promptly. It is that department’s job to find out if a marriage is one of convenience. In other countries facing this problem detailed procedures have been built up by immigration authorities and most of the abusers of marriage laws are caught as a result. We need reform of our immigration law, if this is a serious problem, rather than reform of our marriage law.
The other abuse of marriage laws, that of people latching onto a dying person so they can inherit, is also highly undesirable. But it is very difficult to see what the Registrar General can do about it.
We agree that marriage officers should ensure that a person consenting to marriage is fit to consent, but again the standards laid down in law are not high. You basically have to be in a coma or very mentally ill not to pass them.
We all know of cases where a dying person wants to clean up their life and marry their unwed partner of some years before they go, and there are even cases where a dying person does want to marry someone who has helped them in their last weeks, simply so they can inherit although a change in a will should answer that case. But once again the right to marry is absolute and the decision of a marriage officer over consent has to take into account circumstances.
Honorary marriage officers, almost all of whom are ministers of religion or leading and respected members of a religious community, already have to have supporting letters from their head of denomination. There could be a slight problem with the incredible growth of independent evangelical congregations, since each of these is independent, unlike the older Catholic and Protestant churches where there are defined hierarchies. But we are sure the Evangelical Fellowship of Zimbabwe and the Registrar General’s Office can work out a selection system that weeds out chancers.
The new marriage certificates simply make forgery more difficult. If this is a danger then let us have them and accept them as a good idea.
But the rest of the package seems to be ineffective overkill and needs at least amendment if it is not to impinge on the legal right every Zimbabwean has to marry whom they wish.
And the Registrar-General and the Director of Immigration Control probably need to agree what marriage data immigration officials need to help them combat their problems.