Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi ignited outrage after dismissing Gukurahundi as merely a “conflict” and insisting there was “never a deliberate Government policy” to exterminate a tribe, remarks which critics have said amount to historical revisionism and show Zanu PF’s enduring refusal to acknowledge one of Zimbabwe’s darkest periods as genocide.
Ziyambi made the remarks in the Senate on Wednesday while responding to debate on the Constitutional Amendment Bill 3 (CAB3), after Senator Sengezo Tshabangu, who supported the bill said there was a need for legislation to continue the work of national healing beyond the lifespan of the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC).
Tshabangu, told senators that “truth, justice, reconciliation and compensation cannot wait” and urged Parliament to enact legislation within 12 months to decisively deal with atrocities committed between 1983 and 1987.
“There was a genocide in 1983 to 1987, we are still lagging behind and we want to be like Rwanda. As long as this is not done, we are foreigners in our own land,” Tshabangu said.
On this topic
While thanking Tshabangu for his contribution, Ziyambi moved to “correct the record.”
“I do not believe there was genocide in Zimbabwe. In fact, there was no genocide,” Ziyambi claimed.
“There was a conflict, but there was never a deliberate Government policy at any one time to eliminate one tribe against the other. I come from an area where all tribes live; not a single tribe has been eliminated. So, I believe that when we try to express our feelings, we sometimes become animated and are misquoted. I think that statement was in overexcitement; there was no genocide.”
The minister argued Zimbabwe was not a tribal society and said people from different ethnic backgrounds coexisted and participated in politics without discrimination.
“…If you may allow me to give this example, I have a chairlady and we call her muNdebele and she never loses an election in Zvimba. What I am saying is correct and true; she never loses an election in Zvimba. So, I believe we must not rewrite history or stoke emotions; let us unite our people,” he claimed.
The exchange unfolded as the Senate overwhelmingly passed CAB3 by 75 votes to four, with one abstention.
Ziyambi’s comments immediately provoked anger, particularly among survivors, descendants of victims and social media users who accused the justice minister of trivialising atrocities that killed over 20 000 lives in Matabeleland and parts of the Midlands between 1982 and 1987.
Commentators asked: “a conflict between who and who? He must explain to us,” as they noted, “conflict happens between armed people or between people with the ability to actively defend themselves. Those people were defenceless civilians.”
Most commentators said Ziyambi’s remarks reflected a familiar pattern of official denial.
Successive Zanu PF administrations have resisted describing Gukurahundi as genocide, preferring terms such as “historical disturbances,” or “moments of madness.”
Scholars, human rights organisations and international law experts have increasingly characterised the campaign carried out by the North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade as genocide.
Between 1982 and 1987, thousands of civilians, predominantly Ndebele-speaking people, were reportedly beaten, tortured, burned alive, executed, sexually abused or forcibly disappeared during the military operation created to stop dissidents.
An international law expert told CITE that the atrocities met the threshold of genocide under international law. Read: https://cite.org.zw/gukurahundi-was-a-genocide/
The controversy surrounding Ziyambi’s comments also comes as President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s administration continues to pursue a community-led Gukurahundi outreach process fronted by traditional chiefs, a mechanism which has been criticised as compromised.
Ziyambi defended the government’s approach, saying President Mnangagwa was committed to resolving the issue conclusively.
“The President is a champion of making sure that the Gukurahundi issues are concluded conclusively,” he said.
“I believe that when he came in, he started engaging traditional leaders and he has even said at one forum where I was, that he wants the chiefs to take charge and tell us how those issues are supposed to be resolved.
“Every chief has their own traditions and customs and whatever they believe will appease the spirits and ensure we become united, the chiefs must take the lead, but we have agreed that, going forward we need a clause that addresses post-conflict resolution and national healing.
However, analysts argued genuine reconciliation cannot occur while senior government officials continue to dispute the nature of the atrocities.
ZAPU Secretary-General, Mthulisi Hanana, accused Ziyambi of parroting a long-established ruling party position.
“The comments by Ziyambi Ziyambi that Gukurahundi was a conflict, is madness, but is consistent,” he said.
“It’s a form of madness that is consistent with Zanu PF, because they have always refused to acknowledge Gukurahundi as a genocide or to acknowledge that Gukurahundi happened and apologise for it.”
Hanana said the remarks amounted to an attempt to erase the experiences of victims and survivors.
“Ziyambi Ziyambi is reading from a Zanu PF script, which is a script of sweeping a genocide under the carpet and revising the history of our people. Then for us to expect that there can ever be reconciliation and healing, I think it;s far-fetched.,” he said.
“The comments by Ziyambi Ziyambi are an insult to the people of Matabeleland, an insult to the grieving families, an insult to ZAPU, in whose name people died and it must not be tolerated.”
Hanana also challenged the minister to produce evidence supporting his assertion that Gukurahundi was “just conflict.”
“Now that Ziyambi Ziyambi has established it was a conflict, he must then give us the documents or the research or findings that made him come to that conclusion,” he said.
“We are expecting him as minister to release the Dumbutshena and Chihambakwe commission findings. Then maybe we will understand him from there.”
“But in the absence of those or any other commission findings, the guy is just waffling.”
Leave a Reply