The myth of a police state

over the social, economic and political life of the population.
According to authoritative sources, a police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.
Zimbabwe in no way falls into this category, given the Press and political freedom that the citizens enjoy.
Civil society organisations have led the onslaught on the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP), together with the intelligence service and the Zimbabwe National Army in trying to ascribe Zimbabwe as a police state.
The most recent “research” was recently released by Sokwanele, an obscure outfit projecting itself as a human rights defender, in July 2012, entitled “I Can Arrest You: The Zimbabwe Republic Police and Your Rights.”
This purported research was preceded by others which include: “Zimbabwe is a Police State” (Sokwanele July 2011); “Perpetual Fear — Impunity and Cycles of Violence in Zimbabwe” (Human Rights Watch March 2011) HRW World Report 2007; “Diamonds in the Rough” (HRW 2009); “Policing the State; an Evaluation of 1 981 political arrests in Zimbabwe; 2000-05” (Solidarity Peace Trust and the Institute of Justice and Reconciliation December 2006); Amnesty International Violence Report of April 2008; “Police and Democracy” (Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2010); and “Zimbabwe’s Security Sector — Who Controls the Shots?” (Research and Advocacy Unit July 2011).
It would be instructive to first contextualise the foregoing before unpacking the contents of the most recent Sokwanele release. There has been a concerted and sustained onslaught on the security services sector in Zimbabwe by the MDC-T, in conjunction with the CSOs, to politicise the sector as pro-Zanu-PF.
The onslaught has ranged from attacking the service chiefs and the institutions they head.
They stand accused of presiding over alleged State sponsored violence, torture, arbitrary arrests, murder, rape, corruption and rigging elections among other allegations. The onslaught is motivated by the desire of the opposition to dismantle the security sector hierarchy and recruitment policy, with an intention to infiltrate it as part of the regime change agenda, via the so-called pre-electoral reforms.
The impetus for the foregoing emanates from a belief by the opposition that Zimbabwe is in transition, hence the assumed need for transformation of the security sector and the incessant calls for transitional justice.
However, transitional countries are the ones that are transforming from one political system to another, albeit with no prolonged conflict having occurred.
Security sector reform is projected as the panacea to improving the state’s performance in the security sector, in order to rebuild or to reorganise security institutions. There is a deliberate move to neutralise this sector in order to pave the highway for regime change as the security sector is seen as the last line of defence of the liberation war values which ironically Zanu-PF stands for.
The foregoing is part of a cocktail of pre-electoral conditions which the MDC-T wants implemented ahead of any election in Zimbabwe.
The Sokwanele report makes a plethora of unsubstantiated allegations of rape, torture, beatings of the public by police as well as recruits in police training camps and favouritism towards Zanu-PF in applying the law, among others.
The Sokwanele research is devoid of merit other than references to a gamut of researches and articles done by like-minded organisations, online websites and private media outlets, which are used to back up the alleged unsubstantiated findings. What is baffling is that the findings are not backed by statistics from the police, courts or hospitals with imaginary case studies of purported activists masquerading as victims.
The presumed meticulous referencing and foot noting in these “researches” is meant to mask the treachery that is inherent.
The question in academia is, “What are you referencing?” Surely it would be fraud of the highest order to have a whole research premised on news articles, blogs and administrative researches done by organisations that push some agendas, then have the cheek to label such “research” scientific.
The “statistics” foisted on the reader are a figment of the desk researcher.
While it is not a secret that there are pockets of violent conduct among supporters of the two main political actors, Zanu-PF and MDC-T, which have resulted in the unfortunate and regrettable deaths of Mutedza and Cephas Magura, it would be mischievous for any sane person to conclude that there is need for security sector reform on account of these.
What then would one say about Nigeria where Boko Haram has been killing people at will?
Make no mistake: this is not to condone murder, let alone any violent conduct, but just an analogy to show that Zimbabwe is neither in anarchy nor a police state.