ZANU-PF Is Failing Its Children : When Parents Cannot Afford Education and Hospitals Cannot Provide Healthcare

 By Andrew Tinashe Masuka

10^th November 2026

There is something deeply painful about a country where parents have dreams for their children but cannot afford to educate them, where qualified graduates walk the streets without employment, and where ordinary citizens struggle to access basic healthcare.

This is the reality facing many Zimbabweans today. And after decades of ZANU-PF rule, the country must confront some difficult questions about leadership, accountability and the future of its people.

Education: A privilege instead of a basic right

Education should be the foundation of every child’s future. Unfortunately, for many Zimbabwean families, keeping a child in school has become a financial struggle.

Parents are expected to cover school fees, uniforms, books, examination fees, transport, and other educational expenses. But how can a parent meet these responsibilities when they cannot find a stable, paying job?

How do we expect a mother or father earning an unreliable income, surviving on informal trading, or relying on relatives abroad to educate their children?

The World Bank has highlighted the financial barriers affecting children’s education, particularly among girls. Its 2026 analysis also identifies significant funding shortfalls in the Basic Education Assistance Module (BEAM), the programme intended to support vulnerable children.

UNICEF has further highlighted shortages of learning materials, inadequate resources and teacher attrition.

The consequences are bigger than unpaid school fees. It is children losing opportunities, families being pushed into poverty and an entire generation being denied the chance to fulfil its potential.

Healthcare: What happens when citizens cannot afford to get sick?

Healthcare is another area where ordinary Zimbabweans face serious difficulties.

A person should not have to choose between buying food and purchasing medication. A mother should not have to worry about whether a hospital has the necessary equipment to deliver her baby safely.

Yet Zimbabwe’s public healthcare system continues to face serious challenges.

UNICEF has reported declining health financing, shortages of medical equipment, medicine stockouts and shortages of healthcare workers.

The 2022 national census recorded a maternal mortality ratio of 363 deaths per 100,000 live births.

These are not merely statistics. Behind every number is a family, a community and potentially a life that could have been saved.

Healthcare should never become a privilege reserved for those who can afford private hospitals.

Unemployment: The missing link between poverty, education and healthcare

Perhaps one of Zimbabwe’s greatest challenges is the lack of reliable employment and decent wages.

The World Bank’s September 2026 Zimbabwe Growth and Jobs Report found that approximately 80% of Zimbabweans work in the informal sector, with median earnings of around US$130 per month.

This tells us something important: economic growth does not automatically translate into better living conditions for ordinary citizens.

Parents cannot pay school fees without income. Families cannot consistently afford medication without income. Young people cannot build independent lives without opportunities.

A country cannot claim meaningful development when its people are struggling to secure the most basic necessities.

Twenty-six years of the same governing party: Where is the accountability?

ZANU-PF has governed Zimbabwe since independence in 1980. That long period in power comes with a responsibility to answer for the country’s development record.

It would be unfair to suggest that every problem Zimbabwe faces has one cause. Economic sanctions, droughts, global economic pressures and other external factors have also affected the country.

However, these challenges do not remove the responsibility of government to manage public resources, create an environment for employment, strengthen public institutions and ensure that education and healthcare are accessible.

Zimbabwe has talented teachers, doctors, nurses, engineers, entrepreneurs and young people with extraordinary potential.

Why should so many of them have to look beyond their country’s borders to find opportunities?

Why should parents who want nothing more than to educate their children be forced to watch those opportunities disappear because they cannot afford school fees?

And why should ordinary citizens continue to carry the burden of a struggling public system?

Zimbabwe deserves more than promises

The people of Zimbabwe do not need endless political speeches promising prosperity. They need functioning hospitals, properly funded schools, decent employment, affordable education and accountable leadership.

They need a government that understands that development is not measured by buildings, political slogans or announcements about economic growth.

It is measured by whether a child can attend school, whether a patient can receive treatment, whether a graduate can find employment and whether a working parent can afford to feed their family.

ZANU-PF must be held accountable for its record of governance and the conditions that ordinary Zimbabweans continue to experience.

Zimbabwe belongs to its people, not to any political party.

The question is no longer simply what Zimbabwe could become. The question is how many more generations must sacrifice their future before meaningful change reaches the lives of ordinary citizens?

About the author
Andrew Tinashe Masuka is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is in the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe. He is also active with the Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) and Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation (ZHRO). He can be contacted by email at druemasuka@gmail.com

 

ZANU-PF: 46 YEARS IN POWER, BUT WHERE IS THE PROMISE OF A BETTER ZIMBABWE?

By Andrew Tinashe Masuka

4^th November 2026

A nation rich in resources, yet its people continue to struggle.

Zimbabwe is not a poor country. It is a country blessed with gold, diamonds, platinum, lithium, fertile land and intelligent people. Yet millions of its citizens continue to struggle with unemployment, poverty, poor public services and economic instability.

Since independence in 1980, ZANU-PF has dominated the country’s political leadership. After 46 years, it is only fair to ask: What has the party done with the responsibility entrusted to it by the people?

How can a country so rich in natural resources have citizens struggling to afford basic necessities? Why are graduates leaving university without employment? Why are families being separated because parents must travel abroad to provide for their children?

These are not simply economic questions. They are questions about leadership, accountability and the management of a nation’s wealth.

The people are paying the price.

Corruption is not just about money disappearing from government accounts. It is about hospitals without adequate medicines, schools without sufficient resources, unfinished infrastructure and opportunities that never reach ordinary citizens.

ZANU-PF cannot govern for decades and blame every failure on sanctions, foreign interference or previous governments. External challenges exist, but they do not absolve those who have held power for so long of responsibility.

The liberation struggle brought Zimbabwe independence, but independence was supposed to bring more than a flag and a national anthem. It was supposed to bring freedom, dignity, opportunity and a better life.

The sacrifices of the liberation struggle should never be used as an excuse to avoid accountability today.

A generation forced to leave home.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is the number of Zimbabweans who have had to leave their homeland to find opportunities elsewhere.

Parents are separated from children. Families depend on relatives abroad for school fees, food and medical expenses. Young people with qualifications are building careers in countries other than the one they call home.

Zimbabweans abroad have become an economic lifeline for countless families.

But why should a country with so much natural wealth depend so heavily on money sent home by its own citizens working thousands of kilometres away?

A nation should create opportunities for its people, not force them to search for a future elsewhere.

Zimbabwe belongs to its people, not a political party

ZANU-PF played a significant role in Zimbabwe’s liberation history, and that history deserves recognition. But political history cannot be used to justify decades of unanswered questions.

Criticising the government is not betraying Zimbabwe. Demanding accountability is not disrespecting the liberation struggle. Wanting better leadership is not hating your country.

No political party owns Zimbabwe. No president is above accountability, and no individual should be more important than the welfare of millions of citizens.

Zimbabwe needs transparent leadership, independent institutions, genuine economic opportunities, and a system in which public resources benefit the public.

The question ZANU-PF must answer

After 46 years in power, Zimbabweans deserve more than political slogans and promises of a brighter future.

They deserve to know where their country’s wealth goes, why corruption remains a concern, and why ordinary people continue to carry the burden of economic hardship.

How many more generations must leave Zimbabwe before the country becomes a place where its own people can build successful lives?

How much longer must citizens wait for the opportunities they were promised?

ZANU-PF did not inherit Zimbabwe to own it. It inherited a responsibility to serve its people.

Zimbabwe is bigger than ZANU-PF. It is bigger than any president, politician or political party.

The country belongs to its people, and its natural wealth should create opportunities for its people.

A country should not be judged by how wealthy its leaders become, but by how well its people live.

Zimbabweans deserve to enjoy their own country.

About the author
Andrew Tinashe Masuka is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is in the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe. He is also active with the Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) and Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation (ZHRO). He can be contacted by email at druemasuka@gmail.com

Zviriko Is Not a Strategy

How a jobless economy is pushing Zimbabwe's youth toward drugs and despair, and why industrialisation is the answer

By Narshon Kohlo, Chairperson, CDF Zimbabwe Youth, and Blessing Tariro Makeyi, Chairperson, Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) UK Federation

3^rd November, 2026

There is a word Zimbabweans say when life breaks us. Zviriko. It happens.

It has carried millions through hunger, blackouts, bank queues and burials. Social media now calls it a statement that has saved many from a mental breakdown. I understand why. When the system gives you nothing, you learn to carry everything yourself.

But let us be honest. A people should not need a slogan to survive their own government.

Zviriko is not a strategy. It is a symptom.

The graduate with nowhere to go

Every year, young Zimbabweans finish school, college and university. They have degrees, certificates and dreams. And every year they walk into an economy with no door for them.

Reported ZimStat figures have put youth unemployment above 85 per cent. Even where the numbers are argued over, the reality on the street is not. Factories have closed. Industries have shrunk. Vending and cross-border trade have become the national career path.

Who built this economy? Who has governed it for over four decades? Do we need to ask who destroyed it? Who promised jobs and delivered a hustle?

When a young person wakes up with an empty stomach and a jobless future, that is not laziness. That is policy failure.

What do the young people of Zimbabwe ask of their government? It is simple. Jobs. Jobs. Jobs. Yet the ZANU-PF-led government has failed to deliver on this most basic responsibility.

For nearly two decades, our parents have poured thousands of dollars into our education. They made enormous personal and financial sacrifices. They believed their children would graduate, find decent work, earn a fair salary and live with dignity. Then the graduation gown comes off, and the economy offers nothing. Years of study. Years of sacrifice. For what?

From despair to the bottle, the pipe and the pill

Harare's high-density suburbs tell the story. Young men and women, many of them educated, gather openly to consume crystal meth, known as mutoriro, along with illicit alcohol, marijuana, codeine syrups and abused prescription drugs. Researchers in Harare have documented the toll of mutoriro on the mental health of the youths who use it. Reporting from earlier in the crisis, they found a single gram selling for about twelve dollars, roughly a week's rent for a township room.

Drugs have become both a business and a refuge. A refuge from hunger. A refuge from shame. A refuge from a future that has been cancelled.

And where is the help? A 2020 Mental Health Zimbabwe survey found that about 70 per cent of respondents had no access to formal mental health services. Public rehabilitation is almost non-existent. Private rehab is out of reach. Stigma finishes the job. So, the young person who needs a nurse instead meets a police baton.

Why are the poor and the addicted arrested, while the suppliers seem to operate in daylight? Who is protecting the pipeline?

Depression with a political address

We talk about depression as if it falls from the sky. It does not. When a state fails to create work, fails to fund clinics, fails to deal with corruption and fails to protect its young, the despair that follows has a political address.

Call it what it is: governance-induced depression.

And the three vices that follow unemployment are no secret. Substance abuse. Crime. The sale of young bodies just to eat. Each of them is a bill, and our children are paying it.

The excuses are running out.

Government has now launched a National Youth Policy for 2026 to 2030 that names drug abuse and mental health care as priorities. Good. Then let us hold it to its word.

We have heard of youth funds that never reach the youth. We have heard of empowerment banks and empowerment speeches. What we have not seen is a generation put to work.

Meanwhile, political energy is poured into rewriting the rules to protect those in power, while the young are left to rewrite their own coping. Which one will history record as the priority?

Industrialise, or lose a generation

Since independence in 1980, ZANU-PF has had decades to build an industrialised economy capable of employing its people. Zimbabwe was once among the most industrialised countries in sub-Saharan Africa. What happened?

The Industry minister now says that manufacturing capacity utilisation reached 63.2 per cent by the third quarter of 2026. That is an improvement on last year. But it also means more than a third of our productive capacity sits idle. Independent analysts warn that much of the machinery is outdated, and the Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries has itself warned of a drift toward de-industrialisation. Asked how many jobs the recovery has created, the ministry said it has not tabulated them.

A recovery that cannot count its jobs is not a recovery for the youth.

The solution is neither complicated nor beyond our reach. Industrialise the country. Revive our productive sectors. Support local enterprises. Attract productive investment. Create decent, sustainable jobs.

And while the government fails us, our brightest leave. Many young Zimbabweans are driven abroad, not because they want to abandon their country, but because their country has failed to give them a future at home. The diaspora is not a choice. It is an indictment.

What accountability looks like

* Jobs, not slogans: real investment in industry, agriculture, skills and youth enterprise, with funds audited and published.

* Treatment, not handcuffs: public rehabilitation and community mental health services in every province.

* Prosecute the pipeline: go after the networks that supply the drugs, not just the young people who use them.

* End the stigma: mental health is health.

* Transparent leadership: officials named and answerable when youth money disappears.

A message to our young people

You are not broken. You are not lazy. You were failed.

Some of us choose to fight because the alternative is watching a generation disappear. It is painful. We will do it anyway.

We do not want handouts. We want opportunities.

We do not want political rhetoric. We want tangible economic transformation.

We do not want to be reduced to campaign mobilisers and political spectators. We want to be active participants in building the economy and shaping the future of our country.

Employment is not a political favour. It is an urgent national priority. A country that educates its young people but cannot employ them is wasting its greatest resource.

To the diaspora: do not look away. Support the clinics. Support the youth projects. Raise your voice in every forum you can reach.

Zviriko is how we survive. Accountability is how we win.

Mobilize. Educate. Defend.

About the authors
Narshon Kohlo is the Chairperson, CDF Zimbabwe Youth, and Blessing Tariro Makeyi is the Chairperson, Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) UK Federation. Blessing is also a member of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe.

ZIMBABWE’S UNFINISHED LIBERATION: A NATION HELD HOSTAGE BY FEAR, CORRUPTION AND POLITICAL REPRESSION

By Samuel Jambaya

3rd November 2026

Zimbabwe attained independence in 1980 after a painful and bloody struggle against colonial oppression, with thousands of lives sacrificed in the hope that future generations would enjoy freedom, dignity, equality and justice. The people believed that independence would mark the end of oppression, that no citizen would again be forced to live in fear of those exercising political power, and that the nation’s wealth would finally serve its own people. Yet, decades later, a fundamental question remains: what is the meaning of independence when citizens are afraid to speak, when political disagreement can expose a person to intimidation and violence, when public institutions appear incapable of protecting ordinary people, and when the population that fought for liberation continues to struggle for the most necessities of life? ZANU-PF has governed Zimbabwe since independence, but the passage of time in power must never be confused with the achievement of freedom. A liberation movement does not acquire permanent ownership of a nation simply because it participated in the struggle for independence. Zimbabwe belongs to its citizens, not to a political party, a ruling elite or individuals who believe that questioning their leadership is an act of treason. True independence means that the people possess the freedom to choose their leaders, criticise their government, demand accountability and live without fear of political retaliation. When these freedoms are threatened, the promise of liberation remains incomplete.

The most disturbing feature of Zimbabwe’s political environment is the fear surrounding the exercise of fundamental human rights. Freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and political participation are not privileges granted by a ruling party; they are fundamental rights that governments are obliged to respect and protect. Nevertheless, reports by Amnesty International have repeatedly documented arbitrary arrests, harassment of perceived opponents, intimidation of activists and restrictions on peaceful dissent in Zimbabwe. In its report on the country’s human rights situation in 2025, Amnesty International documented arrests of opposition supporters and activists, including the arrest of journalist Blessed Mhlanga in February 2025 and the detention of journalists covering demonstrations on 31 March 2025. The organisation also reported that more than 90 activists opposing proposed constitutional changes were arrested on 31 March 2025. These are not imaginary political concerns; they are documented incidents that demand public scrutiny and accountability. Amnesty International, Zimbabwe 2025 report. When citizens come to believe that their safety depends on political silence, democracy is reduced to a performance in which the population is permitted to vote but discouraged from questioning those who govern.

The disappearance of journalist and pro-democracy activist Itai Dzamara remains one of the most painful examples of the consequences of political activism in Zimbabwe. On 9 March 2015, five men abducted Dzamara from a barber shop in Harare’s Glen View suburb. He had previously called for political change and criticised the government. Despite a High Court order directing the authorities to search for him and report on their progress, his whereabouts remained unknown ten years later. In March 2025, Amnesty International renewed its demand for an independent investigation into his disappearance, criticising the authorities’ failure to establish what happened to him. Amnesty International, 7 March 2025. The question Zimbabweans must ask is simple: how can citizens have confidence in the justice system when someone can disappear after engaging in political activism, and the truth remains elusive for a decade? A government cannot credibly claim to protect its citizens while such cases remain unresolved. Justice delayed for a decade is not merely a legal failure; it is a continuing source of suffering for families and a warning to others who may wish to speak out.

The concerns surrounding Kelvin Bhonzo’s death have added another painful dimension to this crisis. According to reporting by CITE, the Zimbabwe Peace Project condemned his death in July 2026 after he reportedly succumbed to injuries sustained in an alleged politically motivated assault in Chitungwiza. The organisation said the assault had been documented in its June 2026 human rights monitoring report and that suspected ZANU-PF supporters had allegedly attacked him because of his association with opposition to Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3, subsequently enacted as Constitutional Amendment Act No. 3. CITE, 28 July 2026. These allegations must be investigated independently, and those responsible must be brought to justice if the evidence establishes their guilt. However, the wider political question cannot be ignored: why should anyone face the possibility of violence for opposing a constitutional amendment? Why should a citizen’s political opinion become a threat to personal safety? A constitution should protect the people from the abuse of power, not become a battleground where the interests of political officeholders take precedence over citizens’ rights. The death of any individual in circumstances allegedly connected to political disagreement deserves a transparent investigation, not silence, intimidation or the dismissal of public concern. No political party has the right to determine whose life matters and whose suffering can be ignored.

The controversy surrounding Constitutional Amendment No. 3 also raises serious questions about the future of democratic accountability in Zimbabwe. In October 2025, Amnesty International reported that ZANU-PF had adopted a proposal to amend the Constitution to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure by two years, from its scheduled end in 2028 to 2030. Opposition figures challenged the proposal, while human rights concerns grew over the treatment of those resisting it. Amnesty International subsequently reported attacks on constitutional lawyer Professor Lovemore Madhuku and other political activists on 1 March 2026. According to the organisation, armed men attacked participants at a meeting in Harare while uniformed police officers were present. Amnesty called for an independent investigation and an end to the crackdown on peaceful dissent. Amnesty International, 2 March 2026. These events raise a fundamental democratic concern: a constitution should not be manipulated to protect individuals' political futures at the expense of the people’s right to periodic, meaningful elections. Political leaders are temporary custodians of public office, not permanent owners of the state. The legitimacy of any constitutional change depends not merely on whether it can be passed through formal procedures, but also on whether citizens can freely debate it, oppose it and participate in the process without intimidation. A government that claims to represent the people must be prepared to listen to them, even when their demands threaten the comfort or ambitions of those in power.

The allegations surrounding the Gold Mafia investigations provide another troubling example of the questions surrounding the management of Zimbabwe’s national wealth. In March and April 2023, Al Jazeera published an investigative series examining alleged gold smuggling and money laundering involving individuals connected to Zimbabwe’s gold trade, including prominent figures and a diplomat serving as ambassador-at-large. The investigation featured undercover recordings in which individuals discussed arrangements to move gold and launder money. The Zimbabwean government subsequently announced that it would investigate the allegations, stating that anyone found to have committed criminal acts would face the law. The individuals and entities featured in the investigation did not all accept the allegations, and the claims must be distinguished from criminal findings established by a court.

Nevertheless, the investigation raised legitimate questions about the integrity of institutions responsible for regulating the gold trade and protecting public revenue. Al Jazeera, 5 April 2023. Zimbabwe is rich in mineral resources, yet this natural wealth has not translated into reliable public services and economic security for millions of citizens. Gold should help finance hospitals, schools, roads, employment and national development. It should not become a source of enrichment for a privileged few while ordinary families struggle to afford food, medication and transport. The issue is not whether Zimbabwe should benefit from its gold; it is whether Zimbabweans are receiving the benefits of their own resources. Every unresolved allegation involving public officials, politically connected individuals or state-linked institutions must be examined through independent investigations, transparent financial records and fair legal proceedings. National wealth belongs to the nation, and citizens have every right to demand an explanation when they believe it is being lost through corruption or illicit activity.

Perhaps nowhere is the failure of public accountability felt more directly than in the healthcare system. For many ordinary Zimbabweans, going to a public hospital no longer brings the reassurance that medical care is available when life is at risk. Instead, it can bring fear, uncertainty and the terrifying possibility that a treatable condition may become fatal because essential medicines, equipment, trained personnel or emergency services are unavailable. For many desperate families, going to the hospital feels like being handed a death sentence rather than being given a chance to live. I use this expression to describe the fear and despair created by a healthcare system in which patients may arrive seeking treatment only to encounter shortages, delays and inadequate facilities. No patient should have to wonder whether entering a hospital will be the beginning of recovery or the start of a tragedy. A hospital should be a place where life is protected, pain is relieved, and families are given hope. It must never become an institution where poverty determines whether someone receives treatment in time.

This concern is supported by evidence of serious healthcare challenges. In March 2025, the news agency EFE reported that Zimbabwe’s health minister had announced at least 300 newborn deaths and 54 maternal deaths since January amid a crisis involving shortages of essential medical equipment, life-saving medication and experienced healthcare professionals. The reported figures included 111 neonatal deaths and 19 maternal deaths in Harare. EFE, 6 March 2025. UNICEF’s 2024 annual report also identified inadequate or obsolete equipment, medicine stockouts, dwindling financing and an insufficient health workforce as continuing challenges to healthcare delivery in Zimbabwe. UNICEF Zimbabwe, 2024 Annual Report. These findings demonstrate that the crisis is not simply a matter of political rhetoric. They point to structural problems affecting patients, families and medical professionals. When essential equipment is unavailable, medical supplies run out, and hospitals cannot consistently provide the services people need, the consequences can be devastating. My own family has experienced the burden of this situation. When my younger sister broke her arm, we had to obtain certain medication ourselves to facilitate her treatment. That experience showed me how distressing it is for a family to seek medical help and then discover that obtaining the necessary supplies becomes an additional responsibility. A patient’s access to treatment should not depend on whether their family has enough money to purchase what a public hospital cannot provide.

The situation becomes even more troubling when reports describe medical procedures conducted under inadequate lighting, including the alleged use of candles or mobile phone torches, or patients being required to purchase supplies before treatment can proceed. Such individual incidents should be documented and investigated, but the principle is beyond dispute: safe surgery requires appropriate equipment, lighting, sterilisation, medicines and trained professionals. Patients should not be exposed to avoidable risks due to public facilities lacking the resources to operate safely. Healthcare workers also deserve fair pay, adequate supplies and working conditions that allow them to perform their duties professionally. Underpaid nurses and doctors, shortages of experienced personnel and deteriorating facilities are symptoms of a system that requires urgent reform. It is unjust to expect medical professionals to preserve lives while denying them the resources they need to do their jobs. Equally, ordinary citizens should not bear the consequences of failures in public administration and financing. The government must explain how healthcare budgets are allocated, how medical supplies are procured and distributed, and what concrete steps are being taken to restore the capacity of public hospitals. The right to life means little in practice if a citizen cannot obtain timely, affordable and safe medical treatment.

It is especially difficult for ordinary Zimbabweans to understand these hardships when individuals with considerable financial resources can seek treatment abroad while the majority struggle to obtain care at home. The point is not that anyone should be denied medical treatment outside Zimbabwe. Every person has the right to seek appropriate care. The real question is why the national healthcare system is unable to offer ordinary citizens the same confidence in accessing essential treatment. If public hospitals are sufficiently reliable for everyone, why do so many families fear using them? If the nation’s resources are being managed in the interests of the people, why must patients search for medicines, pay for supplies or travel long distances for services that should be accessible locally? These questions demand answers rooted in budgets, procurement records, staffing figures and measurable improvements, not political speeches. The government must be judged not by the promises it makes but by the lives it protects.

The same principle applies to emergency services. An ambulance is not a luxury; it can be the difference between life and death. When a patient suffers a medical emergency, there may be no time for a family to search for transport, negotiate costs or appeal to politically connected individuals for assistance. Every community requires dependable emergency response systems, functioning ambulances, trained personnel and accessible medical facilities. Where ambulances are unavailable because of shortages or resource constraints, the causes must be investigated and addressed. If public funds have been diverted or mismanaged, the evidence must be established, and those responsible held accountable through due process. Citizens should never have to question whether their survival depends on their political affiliation, financial status or connections to the ruling party. Public services exist to serve the public. Their purpose is defeated when access to essential assistance becomes a privilege rather than a basic component of citizenship.

Zimbabwe’s political and economic problems are also reflected in the treatment of citizens forced to leave the country in search of safety or economic opportunity. Zimbabweans living in South Africa and elsewhere have faced difficult circumstances, including xenophobic hostility, economic insecurity and, in some cases, forced or assisted returns. Whenever citizens return home under distressing circumstances, the government has a responsibility to ensure that they receive humane treatment, emergency assistance and support with reintegration. Reports that returnees have experienced shortages of food, shelter or transportation deserve serious scrutiny. People who have already endured hardship should not be abandoned upon reaching their own country. Their circumstances should prompt questions about employment, economic opportunity, public assistance and the conditions that forced so many people to seek livelihoods beyond Zimbabwe’s borders in the first place. A government cannot celebrate national sovereignty while failing to address the circumstances that leave its citizens struggling to survive abroad. Nor should the suffering of returning citizens be treated as less important than political ceremonies, luxury travel or the interests of those with access to public resources. Every Zimbabwean deserves dignity, regardless of where they have lived or the circumstances under which they return.

The concerns about political repression extend beyond Zimbabwe’s borders, particularly among activists in the diaspora who continue to campaign for democratic reform. Zimbabweans abroad retain the right to express their political opinions, organise peaceful demonstrations and call for accountability. Their geographical location should not deprive them of their dignity or legitimate democratic freedoms. Concerns about intimidation, surveillance and possible retaliation against activists who criticise the government must be taken seriously and investigated where credible evidence exists. The law commonly referred to as the Patriot Act has also attracted criticism from those who fear that broad restrictions on engagement with foreign governments could be used to discourage dissent. Such concerns must be assessed in light of the law’s actual provisions and their implementation. Still, the underlying democratic principle is clear: patriotism cannot be reduced to unquestioning loyalty to a political party. A citizen who exposes corruption, condemns violence or campaigns for constitutional accountability is not automatically an enemy of the nation. Indeed, peaceful criticism can be an expression of profound commitment to the country’s future. Zimbabwe needs citizens who are free to ask difficult questions, journalists who can investigate wrongdoing, civil society organisations that can monitor public institutions, and a diaspora that can contribute ideas and resources without fear. A government confident in its legitimacy should welcome peaceful scrutiny rather than treat criticism as a threat to its survival.

The central tragedy of Zimbabwe is that the people who fought for political liberation should not have to fight another generation-long battle for the freedoms that independence was supposed to secure. Political independence without effective accountability can leave citizens feeling powerless. Elections without a safe environment for political participation cannot fully satisfy the promise of democracy. Natural resources without transparent management cannot guarantee national prosperity. Hospitals without adequate equipment cannot provide the security that the right to health demands. And a justice system that fails to resolve serious allegations of political violence cannot reassure citizens that the law protects them equally. These are not isolated questions. They are interconnected tests of whether the state is fulfilling its responsibilities to the people.

I would rather face a life sentence for standing by my convictions than live in constant fear of being tortured, abducted or killed for expressing my political views. This is not because imprisonment is something to celebrate, nor because I wish harm upon anyone. It is because a life without freedom, dignity and the ability to speak the truth is one in which fear has been allowed to overpower citizenship. No Zimbabwean should be forced to make such a choice. No parent should fear that a child will be attacked for holding a political opinion. No activist should have to consider disappearance or violence as a possible consequence of peaceful opposition. No journalist should be intimidated for reporting on matters of public interest. No patient should fear that entering a hospital is equivalent to receiving a death sentence. No family should be left without answers when a loved one dies in circumstances that raise legitimate questions. And no individual or political organisation should be permitted to place itself above the law.

I therefore call for independent investigations into reported cases of political violence, including Kelvin Bhonzo’s death; meaningful accountability for those responsible for abuses established through credible evidence; the protection of journalists, activists and peaceful protesters; transparent investigations into allegations arising from the Gold Mafia exposé; stronger judicial independence; and urgent, measurable investment in healthcare, emergency services and essential public infrastructure. Zimbabwe also needs transparent constitutional processes, credible democratic competition and public institutions that serve every citizen without discrimination. These demands are not an attack on Zimbabwe. They are a call for the country to fulfil the promises upon which its independence was built. Criticising a government's failures is not the same as hating one’s country. In many circumstances, it is precisely because people love their country that they refuse to remain silent while its institutions struggle and its citizens suffer.

The bloodshed during the liberation struggle must not be used to justify permanent political entitlement. The sacrifices of those who fought for independence should be honoured by protecting the freedoms for which they struggled, not by demanding that future generations accept fear and silence in their name. No political party is greater than the nation, no leader is greater than the Constitution, and no officeholder is entitled to treat public resources as personal property. Zimbabwe’s future must be determined by its people through peaceful, free and credible democratic processes. Its hospitals must preserve life, its courts must deliver justice, its resources must serve the public, and its citizens must be free to speak without fear.

The question that remains is this: when will Zimbabwe experience its second independence? Not independence from another nation, but freedom from fear, political intimidation, corruption, impunity and the denial of fundamental human rights. Independence means that a child can enter a hospital and expect treatment, a citizen can criticise the president without fear of retaliation, an activist can organise a peaceful demonstration without being attacked, and a family can demand justice without being ignored. It means that the wealth beneath Zimbabwean soil is reflected in the wellbeing of the people who live upon it, and that political leadership is a public responsibility rather than a permanent entitlement. Until Zimbabweans can enjoy these freedoms in practice, the promise of 1980 remains unfinished. Zimbabwe does not need another liberation struggle fought in blood; it needs a democratic renewal built on truth, accountability, justice and the protection of human life. The people must never again be forced to choose between their political convictions and their right to live. The struggle for Zimbabwe’s second independence must continue until freedom belongs to every Zimbabwean, not merely to those who hold power.

About the author: -
Samuel Jambaya is a Zimbabwean human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is a member of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe and is also active with the Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF). He can be contacted via email at jomueljambaya@gmail.com.

 

Human Rights Abuses Under the ZANU PF Government: Has the Second Republic Betrayed the Hopes of Ordinary Zimbabweans?

 by Tafadzwa Chivaura (Chairperson - ROHR Midlands Branch – UK Chapter)
2^nd November 2026

For decades, Zimbabweans endured numerous human rights violations, political repression and economic hardships during the First Republic under the nearly four-decade rule of Robert Mugabe. When Operation Restore Legacy took place in November 2017, many Zimbabweans welcomed it with renewed hope and optimism. We believed that the dawn of the Second Republic would usher in a new era of political tolerance, economic prosperity, respect for human rights and equal opportunities for all citizens.

There was a widespread expectation that Zimbabwe was finally turning a new page in its history. We anticipated a government that would prioritise the welfare of ordinary people, protect their constitutional rights and create an environment in which everyone could prosper. Unfortunately, the reality has proved considerably different from those expectations.

One of the most disturbing developments has been the increasing frequency of house demolitions across the country. Families who have invested their lifetime savings in constructing homes are suddenly confronted with the devastating reality of having their properties destroyed. In many instances, people purchase residential stands from developers who present themselves as legitimate landowners, only for the authorities to declare those developments illegal after permanent structures have already been erected.

The question that must be asked is: Where is the protection of ordinary citizens? Why should innocent homebuyers bear the full burden of corruption, fraudulent land dealings and failures in government oversight? How can authorities allow questionable land developments to proceed, collect rates and other payments, and only intervene when people have invested substantial resources in building their homes?

Even more concerning is the apparent absence of adequate compensation and meaningful remedies for affected families. Government must not simply demolish people's homes and walk away from the consequences. Those responsible for fraudulent land transactions must be identified and held accountable. Equally, there must be due process, transparency and humane solutions that protect the rights and dignity of affected families.

The plight of informal traders presents another example of the growing disconnect between government promises and the lived experiences of ordinary Zimbabweans. ZANU PF assured vendors they would be allowed to continue operating while designated trading spaces were being identified. Many traders relied on these assurances, hoping that their livelihoods would be protected during the transition. However, subsequent enforcement measures and restrictions have left many struggling to sustain their businesses and provide for their families.

For thousands of Zimbabweans, vending is not a luxury; it is a means of survival in an economy where formal employment opportunities remain limited. Removing people from their trading spaces without providing viable and accessible alternatives only deepens poverty and economic vulnerability. Government policies should empower citizens to earn an honest living rather than push them further into desperation.

There is also a growing public concern about economic inequality and the apparent concentration of opportunities and wealth among politically connected elites. Ordinary citizens continue to struggle to access basic economic opportunities, while allegations of preferential treatment and elite enrichment persist. The national wealth and economic opportunities of Zimbabwe should benefit the broader population, not a privileged minority with connections to those occupying influential positions of power.

A country cannot achieve meaningful development when access to opportunities, protection and economic advancement appears to depend more on political connections than on merit, hard work and equal citizenship. The national economic cake must be shared fairly, and every Zimbabwean should have a reasonable opportunity to participate in the country's economic development.

Perhaps one of the most unfortunate developments is the growing perception that political loyalty, hero worship, and bootlicking have become necessary survival strategies. Instead of institutions serving citizens impartially, people increasingly feel compelled to demonstrate allegiance to powerful political figures to access opportunities, secure protection, or avoid victimisation. This undermines accountability, weakens democratic institutions and erodes the principles of equality before the law.

The Second Republic must understand that political slogans, promises and declarations of a new dispensation are meaningless if they are not reflected in the everyday lives of ordinary Zimbabweans. A new republic should be measured not by the speeches of its leaders but by the extent to which it protects human dignity, respects constitutional freedoms, safeguards property rights and creates equal economic opportunities.

Zimbabweans did not hope for a change of leadership merely to experience different versions of the same challenges. They hoped for a genuine transformation in governance and the protection of fundamental human rights. The fundamental question remains: What exactly has changed for the ordinary Zimbabwean under the Second Republic? A government that promises prosperity must demonstrate it through policies and actions. A government that promises freedom must respect the rights of its citizens. And a government that claims to represent the people must be accountable to all citizens, not merely those who occupy the corridors of power.

Zimbabwe belongs to all Zimbabweans, not to a politically connected minority. Its resources, opportunities and national wealth should serve the interests of the entire population. The people deserve more than promises. They deserve dignity, justice, accountability, equal opportunities and a government that respects their constitutional rights.

About the author
Tafadzwa Chivaura is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is the Chairperson of the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe.  He can be contacted by email at tafadzwachivaura@yahoo.com OR at Tafadzwa.chivaura@rohr-zimbabwe.org

 

Zimbabwe Deserves Truth, Not Manufactured Support: Questions Raised by the Al Jazeera Investigation

 By Munyaradzi Masaka

24^th October 2026

As Zimbabwe continues to grapple with severe economic and social hardship, matters of government accountability, public‑resource stewardship, and the nation’s international standing demand urgent public scrutiny.

A recent Al Jazeera investigation titled “Murder For Hire & The UK's Far Right” has raised concerning questions surrounding alleged efforts to manufacture political support in the United Kingdom — including a reported plan to stage a rally calling for the removal of sanctions against Zimbabwe.

According to the report, Jack Ross, an associate of Turning Point UK, was allegedly involved in organising what is described as a contrived political rally. These allegations prompt important considerations regarding political integrity, transparency, and the tactics used to shape international public opinion. Those named in the investigation have contested parts of its findings, and all claims require fair, evidence‑based assessment.

If British citizens were recruited or remunerated to create the appearance of genuine grassroots backing for the Zimbabwean government, Zimbabweans are entitled to know who authorised these arrangements, who funded them, and what objectives they were intended to serve.

Legitimate political support is earned through sound governance, respect for human rights, democratic accountability, and policies that improve citizens’ livelihoods — it should not be manufactured to persuade the international community that a government enjoys popular backing.

Zimbabweans both at home and overseas have good reason to question whether their country’s global standing is being strengthened through authentic diplomatic outreach, or through questionable political manoeuvring.

At a time when many citizens face mounting unemployment, poverty, inadequate public services, and rising living costs, any alleged use of public funds for political publicity merits close examination. Where public money may have been deployed, the government should clarify the source of those funds and the legal authority under which they were spent.

This is not an argument against sanctions relief or improved relations between Zimbabwe and the United Kingdom. On the contrary, constructive bilateral ties could deliver tangible benefits to ordinary people, businesses, and future generations in both nations. Yet such progress must be built on credible dialogue, economic reform, respect for human rights, and mutual trust.

Nor should it be assumed that every British citizen who expresses support for Zimbabwe has been paid or is acting in bad faith. Many people genuinely stand in solidarity with Zimbabweans and their right to prosperity, dignity, and self‑determination.

The core concern is whether any parties deliberately sought to misrepresent public sentiment for political gain.

In my view, accountability must apply irrespective of political allegiance or diplomatic standing. No government should be exempt from legitimate questions about how it spends public funds or how it represents its citizens abroad.

The Zimbabwean government should provide a transparent response to the allegations set out in the Al Jazeera report. Where supporting evidence exists, relevant bodies should conduct independent investigations to establish the full facts.

Zimbabwe’s international reputation should not rest on staged events or manufactured acclaim. It should be built on the well‑being of its people, the strength of its democratic institutions, and the confidence citizens place in their leadership.

Zimbabwe deserves genuine international respect — not an illusion of support. Its people deserve answers, transparency, and leadership that places national interest above political image.

About the author
Munyaradzi Masaka is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is in the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe. He is also active with the Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) and Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation (ZHRO). He can be contacted by email at masakamunya8219@gmail.com

Zimbabwe under the So-Called Second Republic: A Human Rights Crisis and the Erosion of Democratic Freedoms.

By Tafadzwa Chivaura (Chairperson - ROHR Zimbabwe Midlands Branch - UK Chapter)

25th October 2026

It deeply troubles me that the future of Zimbabwe and its people continue to be held hostage by the prolonged rule of ZANU-PF. Under the so-called Second Republic, concerns about human rights violations, the erosion of democratic principles, and the concentration of political power have continued to raise serious questions about the country's commitment to constitutionalism, accountability, and the rule of law. The very people who should be enjoying the freedoms and protections guaranteed by the Constitution are increasingly concerned about their ability to exercise their rights without fear of intimidation, persecution, or political victimisation.

Vision 2030 was initially presented as a national development agenda promising economic transformation and prosperity. However, the introduction of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Bill, 2026, popularly known as CAB3, and its reported enactment into law in July 2026, raises profound concerns about the future of democracy and constitutional governance in Zimbabwe. When constitutional changes are perceived as serving the interests of those in power rather than the will of the people, the very foundation of democratic governance is placed at risk. Any attempt to extend presidential tenure or alter the constitutional framework in ways that weaken meaningful electoral accountability must be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny and constitutional safeguards.

The greatest danger is the possibility that citizens who oppose the extension of presidential terms or question government policies may be treated as enemies of the state. In a democratic society, dissent is not a crime, criticism is not treason, and demanding accountability is not an act of disloyalty. Every Zimbabwean has the fundamental right to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, association, and political participation. When citizens fear intimidation, arbitrary arrest, harassment, or persecution for expressing their political views, these freedoms become meaningless in practice. A government that claims to represent its people must protect the rights of its critics, not seek to silence them.

What saddens me most is the apparent imbalance of power between ordinary Zimbabweans and the political elite. The rights, freedoms, and future of millions should never be determined by the narrow interests of a few individuals. Human rights are universal; they are not privileges to be granted or withdrawn at the discretion of those who hold political office. Every Zimbabwean, regardless of political affiliation, social status, or economic standing, deserves equal protection under the law, equal access to opportunities, and the freedom to participate in shaping the nation's future.

This leaves me with a fundamental question: What can the people of Zimbabwe do to defend their constitutional rights and challenge political decisions that they believe undermine democracy? The answer must begin with public awareness, peaceful civic engagement, constitutional accountability, independent institutions, and solidarity among citizens. Zimbabweans must be able to question government decisions, organise peacefully, demand transparency, and participate freely in national debates without fear of retaliation. Civil society organisations, independent journalists, legal practitioners, and democratic institutions all have an important role to play in safeguarding fundamental freedoms and ensuring that those in positions of authority remain accountable to the people.

Meanwhile, the country's economic circumstances continue to raise serious concerns. Many Zimbabweans struggle to find stable employment, access reliable public services, and secure a dignified standard of living. The limited opportunities available to ordinary citizens stand in stark contrast to claims that the Second Republic has transformed the country for the better. While some may point to particular development projects or economic achievements, such claims must be assessed against the lived experiences of the wider population. Development cannot be measured by political slogans alone; it must be reflected in jobs, functioning industries, affordable basic necessities, reliable public services, and improved living standards for ordinary families.

A nation cannot claim meaningful progress when its citizens are unable to exercise their rights freely, earn a decent livelihood, or hold their leaders accountable without fear. Economic hardship and restrictions on civil liberties can reinforce one another, leaving vulnerable communities with fewer opportunities to challenge decisions that affect their lives. The people of Zimbabwe deserve more than promises of prosperity under Vision 2030. They deserve tangible economic opportunities, respect for human dignity, and institutions that serve the public interest rather than narrow political or personal interests.

Equally troubling are concerns about constitutional changes and the extent to which the public has been afforded a genuine opportunity to participate in decisions affecting the country's democratic future. The Constitution is not the property of any political party, president, or group of officeholders. It is the supreme legal framework through which the rights of citizens are protected and the powers of government are limited. Any proposed amendment must comply with the applicable constitutional procedures, including referendum requirements where legally required. Constitutional legitimacy depends not merely on the formal passage of legislation but also on respect for the law, transparency, public participation, and the democratic principles underpinning the constitutional order.

The political environment also raises concerns about patronage, corruption, and the use of public resources. When access to opportunities appears to depend on political loyalty rather than merit, fairness, or equal treatment, public institutions risk losing the confidence of the people they are meant to serve. Government resources belong to the nation, not to individual officeholders or their political allies. Public funds must be managed transparently and accountably, with corruption investigated impartially and those responsible held to account through lawful processes. Zimbabweans should not have to demonstrate loyalty to political leaders to access opportunities, services, or the benefits of their country's resources.

At the heart of this debate is the right to vote. Voting is not merely an exercise conducted during election periods; it is a fundamental instrument through which citizens participate in public affairs, choose their representatives, and hold political leaders accountable. For this right to have genuine meaning, elections must take place within a framework that protects political freedoms, allows citizens to make informed choices, and ensures that opposition voices can participate without intimidation or discrimination. The people's mandate must never be treated as the personal property of those elected to serve them.

The future of Zimbabwe should not be determined by fear, political patronage, or constitutional arrangements that place the interests of those in power above the rights of citizens. It should be shaped by respect for human dignity, the rule of law, democratic accountability, and the equal participation of every Zimbabwean.

Ultimately, the question is not simply whether the Second Republic claims to have delivered development. The more important question is whether Zimbabweans can live freely, express themselves without fear, participate meaningfully in public affairs, access economic opportunities, and hold their leaders accountable under the law.

No political party is greater than the Constitution, no president is above the law, and no government has the right to treat the fundamental freedoms of its citizens as a political favour. Zimbabwe belongs to its people, and its future must be determined through lawful, inclusive, and democratic processes that respect their rights and aspirations. The struggle for a democratic Zimbabwe is, at its core, a struggle to protect human dignity, restore public accountability, and ensure that the freedoms promised by the Constitution are enjoyed by all, not merely proclaimed in words.

About the author
Tafadzwa Chivaura is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is the Chairperson of the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe.  He can be contacted by email at tafadzwachivaura@yahoo.com OR at Tafadzwa.chivaura@rohr-zimbabwe.org

Zimbabwe’s Government Must Lead by Example: You Cannot Demand What You Fail to Deliver

By Munyaradzi Masaka

22^nd October 2026

The Government of Zimbabwe recently issued a directive requiring property owners across the country to repair, refurbish, repaint and maintain dilapidated buildings and their surrounding environments, warning that those who fail to comply may face legal penalties, including a Level Five fine or imprisonment of up to six months.

According to reports, the directive applies to landlords, homeowners, churches, shopping centres, business complexes, industrial properties and office buildings. Nobody should oppose efforts to ensure that buildings are structurally sound, public spaces are clean, and neighbourhoods are safe for residents.

However, an important question must be asked: What about the Government's own buildings, public institutions and infrastructure that have been neglected for years?

If private property owners are expected to take responsibility for their buildings, should the Government not be the first to demonstrate that responsibility?

The Government Must Practise What It Preaches

Across Zimbabwe, citizens have witnessed the deterioration of public infrastructure, including government offices, public housing, hospitals, schools and other state-owned facilities. Some buildings have visibly fallen into disrepair, raising concerns about maintenance, public safety and the responsible use of taxpayers' money.

In April 2026, The Herald reported that the Government had acknowledged the deteriorating condition of its housing stock. The Minister of National Housing and Social Amenities, Professor Paul Mavima, attributed the situation partly to years of inadequate funding for repairs and maintenance.

This raises a fundamental question about priorities. If the Government acknowledges that its own properties have suffered from years of underfunding, what concrete measures are being taken to restore them to acceptable standards?

The Government cannot reasonably demand accountability from citizens while appearing unwilling or unable to demonstrate the same level of accountability in managing public assets.

A government building is not merely a structure. It represents a public institution, an essential service and the resources entrusted to the state by the people. When such buildings deteriorate, it is legitimate for citizens to ask those responsible how maintenance budgets are being spent and what plans exist to address the problem.

Will the Law Apply Equally to Everyone?

The reported penalties raise another important concern about equality before the law.

An ordinary landlord who fails to comply with a lawful order may face financial penalties or imprisonment. A church leader responsible for a neglected building may also face enforcement action. Homeowners and business operators are similarly expected to comply with applicable regulations.

But what happens when a government-owned building is neglected? Who is held accountable when a public institution fails to maintain its premises? Will the responsible department face meaningful consequences? Will officials be required to explain why public property has been allowed to deteriorate?

These are not unreasonable questions. They are essential questions in any society that values transparency, good governance and the rule of law.

The issue is not whether property owners should maintain their buildings. They should. The issue is whether the same principles of responsibility and accountability will be applied consistently, regardless of who owns the property.

The Government must clarify how the requirements will apply to public buildings and what mechanisms will ensure compliance by government departments and state institutions.

The law must not become a burden imposed primarily on ordinary citizens while public authorities escape scrutiny.

Beautification Must Not Become a Substitute for Service Delivery

Zimbabwe's urban challenges go beyond the appearance of buildings.

Residents in various communities continue to raise concerns about unreliable water supplies, deteriorating roads, inadequate drainage, waste collection, sewage problems and other essential services. These problems affect public health, economic activity and the everyday lives of citizens.

A freshly painted building may improve the appearance of a street, but paint alone will not repair a broken sewer system, provide clean drinking water or restore a damaged road.

Likewise, a government office may look attractive from the outside while the institution inside struggles to deliver the services citizens need.

The National Clean-Up Campaign and efforts to improve the built environment should therefore be accompanied by a comprehensive programme of public infrastructure maintenance, reliable service delivery and responsible financial management.

Beautification must be part of national development, not a substitute for it.

Where Is the Accountability for Public Money?

Government buildings and public infrastructure are maintained using resources that ultimately belong to the people. Citizens contribute through taxes, fees and other forms of public revenue, and they have a legitimate interest in knowing whether those resources are being used effectively.

Zimbabwe's 2026 national budget includes a programme specifically concerned with the construction, maintenance and management of government buildings. The budget also sets targets for the number of public buildings to be maintained. <Link url="https://zimtreasury.co.zw/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Approved-2026-Estimates-of-Expenditure.pdf" title="See Zimbabwe's 2026 national budget estimates"/>.

This makes it reasonable to ask for public reporting on the condition of government properties, the maintenance work completed, the resources allocated and the results achieved.

How many government buildings require urgent repairs? How many have been refurbished? Which institutions are responsible for neglected properties? What timelines have been established to address unsafe structures?

These questions deserve clear answers supported by published information rather than political promises.

Parliament, local authorities, the Auditor-General and other relevant oversight institutions should help ensure that public assets are properly managed and that failures are investigated.

Where negligence, misuse of public funds or misconduct is established, the responsible individuals should be held accountable through lawful and fair procedures.

We Deserve Fair Treatment, Not Selective Enforcement

It is important to recognise that some property owners may struggle financially to undertake extensive renovations. While the law must be respected, local authorities should communicate requirements clearly, provide reasonable compliance periods where the law permits and distinguish between cosmetic improvements and repairs necessary to address genuine safety risks.

A building with a dangerous structure presents a different concern from a property that simply needs repainting.

Enforcement should therefore be proportionate, transparent and focused on legitimate public interests, especially the protection of human life and public health.

The same approach should apply to public institutions. Where a government building poses a safety risk, the authorities should take prompt action to protect occupants and members of the public, arrange necessary repairs and disclose how the problem will be resolved.

Accountability must be practical, not merely rhetorical.

Leadership Begins at the Top

A government that wants cleaner cities, safer buildings and better-maintained neighbourhoods must demonstrate those standards through its own conduct.

If the state expects landlords to refurbish their properties, it must maintain its own buildings. If it demands cleanliness from churches and businesses, government premises must meet the same expectations. If it insists on compliance with the law, public institutions must respect the law and accept scrutiny when they fail.

Zimbabwe does not need policies that simply transfer responsibility to citizens. It needs leadership that accepts responsibility alongside the people.

The Government should publish a nationwide assessment of dilapidated public buildings, establish clear maintenance targets, disclose the resources allocated to repairs and report regularly on progress. Local authorities should also make enforcement decisions transparent and apply the law fairly. These measures would demonstrate that the campaign is genuinely about improving the country rather than merely threatening property owners with punishments and jail terms,

We deserve safe homes, clean streets, reliable public services and well-maintained public institutions. We also deserve a government that recognises its own responsibilities before demanding compliance from everyone else. There is nothing wrong with asking citizens to maintain their properties. There is, however, something fundamentally wrong if the authorities enforce standards against private owners while failing to address comparable neglect in public buildings. Before demanding that every landlord, church, business and homeowner beautify their property, the Government must demonstrate that it can properly maintain the buildings and infrastructure entrusted to it. Leadership is not measured by the severity of the penalties imposed on ordinary citizens. It is measured by the standards leaders set, the services they deliver and the accountability they accept.

Zimbabwe belongs to its people, and public resources must be managed in the public interest. Citizens should not have to ask why the law is strict with them but seemingly less demanding of those in authority. If the Government wants a cleaner, safer and more beautiful Zimbabwe, it must begin with itself. You cannot demand excellence from the people while excusing failure within your own institutions. Lead by example, practise what you preach, and let accountability begin at the top.

About the author
Munyaradzi Masaka is a human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He is in the Midlands Branch of the UK Chapter of Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR) Zimbabwe. He is also active with the Constitution Defenders Forum (CDF) and Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation (ZHRO). He can be contacted by email at masakamunya8219@gmail.com