Chronicle Editor
Micheal Mhlanga
IN times where governments in Africa are battling with the debacle of peace and security, strong security institutions are paramount to ensure a balance in constitutional exercises. It should be the role of security institutions to conscientise the public in their right to register dissent responsibly as much as it should be their role to curb any criminal activity during demonstrations. With such security, we would avoid disturbing and unfortunate instances of unnecessary casaulities where those who are not part of destructive mobiles are the casualties of such a right exercised irresponsibly.
Today, with a population whose social, economic and political consciousness is enabled by extensive education, media and interaction exposure, quarters of difference are multiple hence you will not find normally “binary-homogenous” groups dissenting. The level of consciousness has bred conscientiousness that has created strata that do not agree with those dissenting or those supporting; it is both groups, together with those agreeing with the status quo who should be protected by strong security institutions. Equally, those intending to exercise their right to demonstrate, should be protected by the same security institutions. Perhaps, it is time we establish dialogue on security, protection and limitations of civil rights in a modern society, methods of security reaction in highly emotive times.
I reflect on 1945, 1956, 1992 and 1996 deliberately to show the connection of the monumental protests. The first common thing amongst the actions is that they are class identical, meaning, it is the same social class (working/poor/lower) that is found challenging state actions, in a bid to secure their survival.
This historical analysis is living proof that the lower class of the society is mostly affected by economic changes in society, accompanied by many social defects such as unbalanced population, limited access to resources, limited access to avenues of prosperity because of quality of education and social background and more susceptible to hunger in times of drought and low to no household income.
Because of its character, the strata is the most insecure in volatile times and because of its economic desperation most of the times, its members are susceptible of many manipulations that put them at the jaws’ end of criminal activity and in the line of casualties.
The same demographic was found exercising its democratic right under the new constitution in 2016 during the Evan Mawarire announced shutdown, however, in a different circumstance. In all this, influences on the demographic thought process and reactions to its distressing conditions keep on changing whilst it’s still insecure and they still are battling a class struggle. In 2016, roads were barricaded, private property was damaged, albeit minimal compared to 2019 but the concerns of the lower class remained persistent.
What John Lunn, a notable historian, describes as “a watershed decade in the evolution of African labour’ was marked by 20 October 1945, recorded to be the first major protest by railway workers, who for nine days, staged a protest that spilt to Broken Hill in Northern Rhodesia and involved approximately 10 000 workers.
This historical strike only ended when government promised to set up a commission of inquiry to investigate workers’ grievances and related matters such as rising inflation and stagnant wages that were eroding the workers’ living standards as well as poor and overcrowded accommodation.
On that occasion, 74 years ago, private property was not destroyed, protestors were not coerced, general citizens did not feel unsafe at the hands of the protestors, at least there is no such record. What makes 1945 favourable and probably a point in history to ponder on is what it yielded thereafter, a significant change in law and well-being of the worker to the extent of expanding the advocacy net in 1948.
A decade later, in 1956, back home, led by the City Youth league that had the brains of young activists namely George Nyandoro, James Chikerema, Edson Sithole and Duduza Chisiza, the Bus Boycott was successfully staged. The youth’s used the increase in bus fares as a microcosm agent of registering dissent against an organism of structural violence meted on Africans in Rhodesia.
It is reported that this well organised boycott, which encompassed most of Harare’s townships, became violent and led to the unfortunate incident in which several women were raped at Carter House in Mbare, as retribution for breaking the boycott by riding on buses. Reading through various analyses of that “shutdown’ in 1956, some historians such as Scholar AS Mlambo, writing in 2008 argue that it is more likely that unruly elements took advantage of the boycott to pursue their own ends to the possible embarrassment of the leadership; there is no evidence that City Youth league leaders sanctioned violence, especially sexual violence.
It is with no doubt that the 1956 bus boycott after incidence happened because the colonial security focused on how to thwart African dissent instead of balancing between protecting property, citizens and allowing citizens to register their discontent. Of course, back then, democracy was a reserve for a few racially privileged, but lessons should be drawn from then.
A reading of the two strikes in that decade teaches that the 1945 strike signalled the determination of workers to improve their lot through organised action and, more importantly, had a “demonstration effect”, showing the potential power of violent-free organised workers as scholar AS Mlambo would put it.
It is from that strike that the subsequent two years, new workers’ organisations were established: the Federation of Bulawayo African Workers’ Union (FBAWU) under Jasper Savanhu; the African Workers’ Voice Association the Voice) led by Benjamin Burombo, and the Salisbury-based Reformed Industrial and Commercial workers’ Unions (RICU) led by the able Charles Mzingeli. History records that three years later (1948), after another major strike, the workers’ unions expanded their mandate to envelope a broader lower/poor class’ aspirations.
About 36 years later, June 1992, after the scourges of drought and ESAP, Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions called for a strike which was poorly attended. It is at this point that contemporary Zimbabwean history alludes to contestations of security and the citizens’ rights where the response by the state was under scrutiny for allegedly being heavy-handed, yet on the other hand, issues of pre-emptive response to violence were justified in some quarters.
With the standard of living getting more complex over the years, 1996, recorded what historians state to be the largest strike organised by civil servants in post-independence Zimbabwe. An eight week wildcat strike by teachers, doctors, nurses, and other government workers, supported by student groups, human rights organisations and churches. Whilst that strike almost paralysed the country, it equally was not peaceful in both ends.
Of interest to me in all these demonstrations is the character of the strikes, their transformation and their symbiosis to 14 January 2019. I am drawn to 1956, where after successes of 1945 and 1948, suddenly in 1956, there is room for rogue elements to punish those who did not buy into the movement, despairingly, women, who had free choice, but are brutally punished for exercising their free choice.
In 1956, even with the existence of repressive colonial laws, strides had been made to dismantle the Industrial Conciliation Act of 1932 which excluded Africans from the definition of worker and thus prevented them from forming trade unions and engaging in collective bargaining. It would be suffice to compare 1945 strike to the 1956 and the succeeding ones. In 1945, the Rhodesian government denied the poor from protesting, but none to minimal casualties are recorded. When the law permits, suddenly, it is an equally suffering citizen who becomes victim of the agitated protestors.
In 1956 it was women, in 1996 and 2016 it was the economy. In 2019, indiscriminately, private property, officers of the law, shops that serve the lower class, police stations meant to protect the lower class, public transport for the lower class and even non-affiliate and silent men are victims of active protestors. After what obtained last week, I would want to argue that there is need for establishing strong security institutions that allow citizens to exercise their right to demonstration as enshrined by the constitution but equally protect private and public property as well as the safety of those who want to exercise their freedom not to be part of anything. The state has to be vigilant now more than ever.
Online Reporter