Online Reporter
Gibson Mhaka, Zimpapers Politics Hub
ALTHOUGH the walls of Khami Remand Prison, west of Bulawayo, convey an illusion of isolation and separation from the wider community, and visits are usually marked by a solemnity born from the detention of those awaiting trial, Cell 44 in “B” Hall offers a contrasting experience.
Despite the surrounding atmosphere, this cell resonates with historical weight, having served as a site of imprisonment, banishment and isolation, notably for political activists during the colonial period.
Initially, Ian Smith’s colonial regime used this cell to detain both convicted criminals and political prisoners.
It was here that President Mnangagwa, now Zimbabwe’s first citizen, endured 10 years of detention as a teenager.
He was 18 years old when he was imprisoned for contravening Section 37(1)(b) of the notorious Law and Order Maintenance Act.
His prison number was 841/66, and he was bundled into Cell 44 of “B” Hall.
This period of imprisonment is said to have played a significant role in shaping his political views and his eventual rise to power.
President Mnangagwa’s imprisonment, along with that of many other brave individuals, transformed the cell into a symbol of resistance and hope.
This very cell, once a place of solitary confinement for political activists during the colonial era, now stands as a symbol of the relentless fight against oppression and the quest for freedom.
Its history serves as a stark reminder of the injustices of the Smith regime and the resilience of those who dared to challenge it.
As Zimbabwe celebrates 45 years of independence, it’s important to note that during the liberation struggle, Khami Prison, like other colonial prisons — such as Whawha, Chikurubi and Harare Maximum prisons — symbolised the oppressive nature of the Rhodesian regime. Prisons served as significant sites of Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle.
Vice-President Kembo Mohadi, Cde Moffat Hadebe, Cde Xaviers Muchemwa and Cde John Maluzo are among the surviving former political prisoners who were detained at Khami Prison.
These former liberation war detainees recounted experiencing horrors such as excessive hard labour, torture, general ill-treatment, hunger and persistent disease outbreaks during their time at Khami.
As the nation prepares to celebrate Independence Day in the Midlands Province’s Gokwe District, it is crucial to acknowledge the broader historical context of Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle.
Beyond Khami Prison, another significant yet often overlooked site stands as a testament to the era’s oppressive nature. Whawha Prison, a colonial-era institution, played a pivotal role in the struggle, mirroring the experiences of detainees at Khami.
Just as Khami Prison served as a symbol of Rhodesian repression, Whawha Prison became a key site of detention and political struggle during the liberation war.
Many nationalist leaders and activists were imprisoned there, including the late former President, Robert Mugabe.
The late Cde Ruth Chinamano and her late husband were imprisoned at Whawha Prison, where they remained until 1970.
Upon their release, they were confined to an eight-kilometre radius restriction before being re-arrested and subsequently released in 1974.
Additionally, the late nationalist and liberation stalwart Cde Jane Lungile Ngwenya, was also a notable political prisoner incarcerated at Whawha. From 1964 to 1971, she and other top Zapu leaders were detained at Whawha Prison.
Initially, the prisoners refused to take up studies while incarcerated. However, the Red Cross Society persuaded them, advising that as future leaders of a free Zimbabwe, they required the necessary education.
Consequently, Cde Ngwenya and many of her comrades enrolled in various courses.
Cde Ngwenya herself pursued studies in Social Sciences and Administration. Their Zapu group at Whawha functioned as a government-in-waiting, maintaining party structures and practicing good governance within the prison.
They would receive the latest information from relatives visiting them in prison, which enabled them to develop strategic plans that were approved by the relevant party structures within the prison walls.
This highlights that Whawha Prison, like many others during the Rhodesian era, stood as a stark symbol of the regime’s oppressive nature.
Its walls held not only individuals but also the stories of countless struggles against colonial injustice.
This reinforces the understanding that prisons throughout Zimbabwe, including Whawha, Khami, Chikurubi and Harare Maximum, were not merely places of confinement but critical arenas of resistance and struggle for the nation’s freedom.
In his paper titled Suffering for the Nation: The Prison as a Site of Struggle during Zimbabwe’s Liberation War, author Munyaradzi B Munochiveyi, posited that although Rhodesian prisons were spaces of racialised abuse, curtailed freedoms and heightened repression, they were also spaces of struggle, subversion and negotiation.
Prisoners told stories of how they struggled, coped and creatively adapted to the harsh prison regimes.
“Political prisoners are important historical subjects in the telling of the struggle for liberation in Zimbabwe — prisoners’ life stories and writings demonstrate how political prisoners confronted the colonial regime.
“As political prisoners, they were important symbols of the struggle for liberation and were also producers of powerful critiques of the colonial regime through their writings.
“The prison has long functioned in Zimbabwe’s official post-colonial history as a symbolic, ideologised, and often politicised mnemonic of colonial injustice.
“By describing the Rhodesian prison as a terrain of struggle, we mean that the prison was doubly a space of repression and subversion, and that political prisoners were capable of challenging and negotiating their incarceration,” noted Munochiveyi.
Munochiveyi further noted that although Rhodesian prisons were centres of brutality, political detainees were not passive recipients of state penal terror.
Instead, they actively negotiated, challenged, and subverted oppressive penal regulations.
Munochiveyi further noted that although the Rhodesian prisons were centres of brutality, political detainees were not passive recipients of state penal terror as they actively negotiated, challenged, and subverted oppressive penal regulations. Based on Munochiveyi’s observation, it is clear that as political hostages of the Rhodesian regime, detainees played a crucial role in dismantling colonial rule.
They produced powerful critiques of the regime from within prison confines and served as symbols of African resistance. In fact, prisons became battlefields in their own right.
