A majority of Bulawayo residents who attended a public hearing on the Death Penalty Abolition Bill have called for its scraping, citing reasons such as inadequate investigative capabilities, gender discrimination, and its colonial origins.
The joint Portfolio Committee on Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, along with the Thematic Committee on Human Rights conducted public hearings on three bills including the death penalty abolition bill (H.B 5. 2023), Administration of Estate Amendment Bill (H.B .3, 2024) and Criminal Laws Amendment (Protection of Children and Young Persons) (H.B.4, 2024) at Selborne Hotel in Bulawayo on Wednesday.
The hearings were led by the chairman of the thematic committee on human rights, Robson Mavenyengwa.
The death penalty abolition bill (HB5 2023) is a private members bill that was introduced in parliament seeking to abolish the death penalty for all crimes in Zimbabwe.
Death penalty, also known as capital punishment is a process of putting a person to death as a punishment for a crime. The use of the death penalty in Zimbabwe dates back to the colonial era and until the enactment of the Constitution of Zimbabwe amendment number 20 of 2013, the death sentence could be imposed for serious criminal offences like murder, attempted murder, and incitement to commit murder, treason, genocide and terrorism acts.
Speaking during the public hearing, a resident Themba Chiveya said the death penalty bill should be abolished highlighting the potential for miscarriages of justice and its colonial legacy.
“From what has been read, we realise that the death penalty was a colonial kind of sentence which was meant to silence political opponents, so it has its roots in the colonial era. Let’s abolish this death penalty,” he said.
“My second submission is that the judicial system or the justice system can miss certain points in sentencing or hearing a case of a person who is being brought before the court maybe for murder or something, they might miss certain points and end up sentencing a person to death, the person would be hanged and later on find out that the person was innocent, the court missed certain facts about the case but if it is a life sentence along the passage of life if we realise that the court had missed certain facts about the case then that person can get justice, I am strongly underlining and putting it in bold that lets abolish the death penalty,” said Chiveya.
Another Participant, Witness Tavarwisa highlighted cultural perspectives and the lack of social sustainability brought by the execution.
“In our culture, we had our ways in which we did things when looking at someone who would have committed a crime. Secondly, it is difficult to define the term aggravated, this is a borrowed word that even compromises the sentence. The death penalty should be abolished as it does not bring social sustainability to the family of the victims,” said Tavarwisa.
He said executing the murderer doesn’t bring back the deceased relative.
In addition, another participant, Thembelihle Ndlovu from Ward 19 said the death sentence should be abolished saying individuals must be allowed the opportunity to rectify their actions.
“What will happen if after five years they discover that it was a false accusation we would have deprived them of their right to life and deprived him to take care of his family, so I think let us abolish it,” said Ndlovu.
Concerns about gender and age discrimination were also raised by participants, who called for the abolition of the death penalty on these grounds.
“It says men from 21-70, which implies that women cannot also commit such crimes also do they mean they are not capable of doing the same, so it should be removed as it’s discriminating targeting men only,” she said.
Her sentiments were also echoed by another participant who said the death penalty bill discriminates against age groups.
“It says 21-70 years only males not females, so it gives an advantage to Juveniles less than 21 years to murder knowing they won’t get the death penalty and those above 70 can murder too, even those with money will use the Juveniles, women kill men with hot water but they are not given the death sentence, so let’s abolish the death penalty,” he said.
Beauty Thebe from Emganwini said those who killed people during Gukurahundi were never persecuted despite committing heinous crimes.
“The death penalty should be removed as death is painful to everyone, I also lost four people at the same time in rural areas, villagers kept quiet, they were even scared to pick up dead bodies because of fear of the person who had sent people to kill, those people who were sent were not killed. I am talking about things that happened around 1985, people were killed, those people who killed people are still alive today because they have money, those of us who don’t have if we strangle someone and they die, we are given a death penalty, what about them, so better abolish it because those who kill for a benefit are not killed,” said Thebe.
Another participant Lebohanga expressed concerns about Zimbabwe’s investigative capabilities and the potential for wrongful convictions due to economic disparities.
“Not everyone can afford forensic studies so in some cases we have people being found at a crime scene being arrested because they cannot afford good lawyers, as our economy is not stable so I don’t think the death penalty should continue,” she said.
However, some participants voiced support for retaining the death penalty, arguing that it serves as a deterrent against crime and ensures justice for victims.
“If it is there it makes people fear committing crimes, there are a lot of painful experiences happening to women by people knowing they will eat free beans in jail for life. what will happen, if someone kills someone he should also be killed as they knew it was not allowed, the death sentence should not be abolished as they would be now free,” said one participant.
In addition, another participant who identified himself as Gwebu cited rising crime rates in countries that have abolished the death penalty, advocating for its retention as a means of deterring criminal behaviour.
“Look at the crime rate of countries who abolished this law, in our neighbouring country people are dying every day, so let’s look at it this way, if someone killed someone who also wanted to live, it should also be their end, some people who want to be defended here are known, they want this law to be removed,” he said.
