Promoting human rights and transcending partisan politics

economic empowerment” advocated and made a national priority the consolidation of the indigenisation of Zimbabwe’s economy.
Again, Zanu-PF has come out as the only party within the inclusive government committed to ensuring that the multitude of Zimbabwe’s historically disadvantaged people can now dispose of their wealth and natural resources to meet their own exclusive interests, including guaranteeing their socio-economic rights.

Zimbabwe’s majority indigenous people, transcending political orientations and persuasions, have, despite independence in 1980, continued to be denied an equitable share in the wealth of their national economy, having been so deprived by the colonial legacy of racial discrimination. Yet despite advocating that a 51 percent share of Zimbabwe’s national wealth be reserved for its indigenous people Zimbabwe’s indigenisation and economic empowerment programme is being maliciously undermined by myths deliberately formulated to alienate the black majority from a programme that seeks to affirmatively correct their socio-economic deprivation and guarantee their socio-economic rights.

One such myth is that indigenisation is simply a means to a political end, a “politicking” and insincere endeavour by Zanu-PF to use the economic empowerment of Zimbabweans to emerge as victor from within the incumbent inclusive government come next elections, following which indigenisation will be made to die a silent death. This myth has blurred the otherwise clear distinction between a party policy which is partisan in its nature and implementation and one which, though formulated by a single political party, becomes a legitimate government and national policy to achieve broad based and non-partisan economic empowerment.

We only need to look to the precedent of Zimbabwe’s land reform to see that though this land policy was formulated and implemented by Zanu-PF it has been a government policy and national endeavour benefiting all Zimbabweans, transcending political divides.
Indeed, an audit may well expose the many beneficiaries from within the erstwhile opposition parties which had dismissed such land reform as mere politicking, yet today are beginning to enjoy the harvest from ancestral lands restored upon them.

Such is the very nature of indigenisation, that while it has been conceived in the bowels of Zanu-PF’s liberation ethos, it is open to, indeed aspires for all Zimbabweans to benefit including those represented by those political parties that are against it.
With elections dawning upon the inclusive government Zimbabweans must now decide which political party’s “partisan” policies will be transformed into national policies and pursuit benefiting their socio-economic rights once such party takes over the seat of governance. Must we be made to believe that Zanu PF’s policy, defining its commitment to and pursuit of indigenisation through government is a political gimmick only to woo the votes of Zimbabwean masses with the appeal of “broad based economic empowerment”.

We need first to dispel the misrepresentation that it is wrong for a political party to seek election from the people through championing policies which are to their benefit, and in return acquire their votes to sit in government and implement the same pro-people policies. The nature of politics, moreso within a democracy, is that political parties formulate policies and present them to the electorate for their approval and adoption.
Hence, while it is within the rights of MDC-T to pursue and present a jobs policy prioritising Zimbabweans as labourers of the economy, so too can Zanu PF formulate an indigenisation policy which prioritises ownership and control of the national economy.

It is for us to choose, between being labourers or becoming the entrepreneurs and owners of our economy. Given that both Zanu-PF and the MDC-T sit in the incumbent inclusive government, why have we selectively castigated Zanu-PF for influencing and directing such government to implement an indigenisation policy that is so far proving to be broad based and is transcending partisan beneficiation?
Is it not expected and politically correct that a party whose flagship is broad based economic empowerment will pursue such a policy while in government?
Rather, should we not be asking the MDC-T, which has dedicated all it’s time and energies toward alleging the politicisation of indigenisation, to give its own account of what pro-people policies it has so far pursued and championed during its tenure in the inclusive government. The purpose of this article is, however, to demystify the misperception that indigenisation is merely a political gimmick by Zanu-PF. In so doing we need to reflect upon two realities.

Firstly; there is a historical record revealing Zanu-PF as a party birthed from and committed to the total liberation of its people. It is Zanu-PF that led indigenous Zimbabweans to secure their independence and civil and political rights in 1980. Such a commitment benefited every indigenous Zimbabwean including even those that served and worked for the interests of the colonial power. Today, the same Zanu-PF has taken the lead in pursuing socio-economic freedom and rights through indigenisation and economic empowerment.
Likewise, the indigenisation policy, while birthed within Zanu-PF, is broad based in its nature so as to benefit all Zimbabweans. It is our own political prejudices that are making us shy away from acknowledging and claiming the economic benefits from indigenisation simply because it emanated from Zanu-PF.

We have allowed ourselves to come much like the classical hungry and emaciated man that refuses water and food freely offered him because he has been ill-advised that to take it would be to assume the identity of the vilified giver. The sad irony is that today those that were misled into shunning land reform as a Zanu-PF electioneering gimmick silently envy those Zimbabweans, including many within the MDC’s ranks, who embraced the opportunity presented to them by Zanu PF and are beginning to reap wealth from the land.
During the just ended Zanu-PF conference in Bulawayo President Mugabe, and Zanu-PF’s First Secretary, heartily expressed the burden left upon his shoulders by those now departed, with whom he fought for

Zimbabwe’s liberation, to bring to fruition the total liberation of Zimbabwe.
Indeed he expressed his and his party’s stand and unwavering commitment to ensuring the liberation of Zimbabwe’s economy and natural resources to usher greater benefit by long deprived indigenous Zimbabweans. We must understand then that the emergence of MDC in 1999 was never the catalyst for Zanu-PF to pursue land reform and to now seek the economic empowerment of Zimbabwe’s majority indigenous Zimbabweans.

Rather, these struggles seeking to claim and guarantee the socio-economic rights of Zimbabweans have long been infused within Zanu-PF’s DNA, inspired by events dating back as far the first liberation struggle and embraced as early as the Second Chimurenga.
The MDC might only lay claim to having hastened and reinvigorated Zanu-PF’s socio-economic rights resolve after the hand of western interests sought to remove Zanu-PF from government to bring an abrupt end to its pro-people policies that are a threat to long held and monopolising western economic interests over Zimbabwe natural resources.

In fairness, we cannot now seek to alienate Zanu-PF from laying claim to a government policy and law which would most likely not have seen the light of day had the same Zanu-PF party not been in Government.
Why do we now raise dust and demand that Zanu-PF deny what it stands for, its belief and commitment to ensure economic empowerment of the majority.
That indigenisation and economic empowerment have found voice and purpose in government through Zanu-PF is a reality we must live with.

We can, however, be reflecting upon whether indigenisation, though being a policy emanating from Zanu-PF party, has been evolved into a national policy which guarantees broad based economic empowerment for all indigenous Zimbabweans.
Already, the record over the past six months will show that indigenisation and economic empowerment is far divorced from the partisan nature it has been maliciously associated with. To date, indigenisation has reflected its broad based nature that has begun to ensure economic benefit to all Zimbabweans irrespective of their political persuasions.

Such broad based empowerment is being facilitated through empowerment vehicles such as the community share ownership schemes/trusts and employee share ownership schemes/trusts. These vehicles have guaranteed at least 10 percent, to as much as 30 percent holding in foreign businesses to Zimbabweans residing in communities whose mineral resources are being mined by non-indigenous businesses and to employees working in non-indigenous businesses.

The reality is that a community granted 10 percent shareholding in a mining company, whose dividends will be used for socio-economic development, will guarantee such development to all of its residents irrespective of their political persuasions.
Hence, it is impossible and impractical that the Mhondoro-Ngezi, Chegutu, Zvimba Trust established from Zimplats mine or the Tongogara Trust established from Unki mine will cause the building of bridges,

hospitals, dams and schools preserved only for Zanu-PF supporters and denied to MDC supporters living together within those communities.

Already the mining companies have committed US$10 million to rural communities to enable them to begin pursuing developmental projects to the benefit of all their residents. Those non-indigenous companies resisting indigenisation or the MDC-T’s criticisms that are alleging the partisan nature of community trusts are merely seeking to derail a policy that, though transforming the socio-economic lives of all Zimbabweans, does not serve their own personal and individual interests.

For those Zimbabweans, whether Zanu-PF or MDC, without mineral resources within their areas of residence other empowerment mechanisms have been established and are being capacitated to ensure their socio-economic benefit. One such mechanism is the National Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Fund which is a designated entity which will receive shares from mining companies and undertake investments and developmental projects across Zimbabwe.

NIEEF will not confine its developmental and economic empowerment initiatives only to those areas said to be resident to Zanu-PF supporters only, if ever indeed there was any place in Zimbabwe reserved for one political party. Whatever economic development will be achieved will benefit all Zimbabweans, even those that are today being misinformed to go against indigenisation.