What’s ‘illegal’ Minister Biti

elections so as to stave off the unproductive haggling between Government functionaries.
In the article, finance minister Tendai Biti was quoted lambasting the security forces for “illegally” recruiting new personnel without his approval as the head of Treasury.
What was laughable about Biti’s tirade was his use of the word “illegal” to describe the constitutional actions by the country’s forces to recruit new officers in line with the dictates of preserving national security.
The constitutional actions of the security ministries were branded “illegal” by Biti because they ignored his directive for all public service units to freeze any new recruitment. What I failed to understand was why Biti would like to think that his directive has morphed into a law.
All along, I thought that anything becomes “illegal” when it goes against a law, but in this case it was against a mere ministerial directive, Biti’s directive! For the record, the power to make urgent laws resides with the President through the Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act and not through directives of greenhorn ministers like Biti.
With this in mind, it only becomes provocative and highly mischievous for Biti to call constitutional actions by other ministries “illegal”, for he is not the law and neither does he singularly make the law, notwithstanding his legal qualifications.
Besides these legal entanglements, what could be deciphered from this civil service recruitment debacle is that ministries in the same Government are pulling in different directions. What more evidence is needed to show that this Government is dysfunctional?
While the finance ministry is calling for the freezing of posts in the security ministries, the security ministries are recruiting in order to fulfil their constitutional mandate.
There was nothing wrong or illegal about the security service ministries’ periodic recruitment of new personnel because they are legally enjoined by the constitution to maintain a vibrant and revitalised force to safeguard the country’s national security and territorial integrity.
Rather, it would have been illegal and a glaring constitutional failure for the security ministries to neglect maintaining a formidable and well-resourced force. That would have defeated their purpose and mere existence.
However, what caught my attention was minister Biti’s admission that though he is opposed to recruitments in the security ministries he had authorised the recruitment of a whooping 24 000 temporary teachers on top of other recruitments in the civil service.
The respective ministries of Defence and Home Affairs simply recruited a combined force of 5 800 new officers who pale in the shadow of the huge recruitments in the education and the rest of the civil service.
The question is why is Biti heavily opposed to new recruitments in the security sector? Could it be something to do with his MDC-T party’s call for security sector reforms?
Yes, since the inception of the inclusive Government the MDC-T has been vociferously clamouring for what it called the reformation of the security forces. What is not clear though is what the party really means by security sector reforms. But with Biti’s recent outbursts on recruitments in the security forces, it is apparent that these reforms are directed at systematically emasculating the capabilities of our security forces.
Already MDC-T heavyweights like MDC-T treasurer general, Roy Bennett, are trying to pull tricks of dividing and weakening the security forces by agitating for the removal of current service chiefs from their positions. In the same breath, they have indicated that they will reward what they call apolitical and professional security officers through promotions should they assume power.
This conspicuously dovetails with the pro-Western party’s call for military intervention by the West in Zimbabwe so as to conclude the regime change crusade. With a weak security sector, the envisaged West’s military incursions into Zimbabwe will be a stroll in the park. These efforts to weaken the security forces are ongoing and Biti’s calculated opposition to the expansion and renewal of the security sector is, but one of such treasonous attempts.
For the record, Biti should not have said that recruitments by the security forces were illegal since they were not. What he could have possibly said is that these recruitments were unbudgeted for, which is different from being unlawful.
But he should not also have forgotten to mention that he had not budgeted for the maintenance of a formidable security force because he wanted to further his party’s regime change manoeuvres.
The haggling between ministries in the inclusive Government should instruct us to put everything aside and concentrate on urgently organising elections in order to unhinge the political gridlock currently blighting our politics.