Murmures

The Zimbabwean Government closed the country’s leading and most popular
>newspaper, the privately owned Daily News, on Friday, September 12, 2003,
>for failing to register with the country’s Media and Information Commission
>(MIC) under the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).
>Section 66 of AIPPA says that all media houses must register with the MIC.
>
>The ban follows a Supreme Court ruling on Thursday, September 11, 2003, that
>the paper was operating illegally.

———

>This is a message from Derek Smail, shareholder in ANZ, publisher of
>the Daily News.

>15 September 2003
>
>As you will have heard by now, last Friday the Zimbabwe authorities closed
>down Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd (ANZ), publishers of the
>Daily News, Zimbabwe’s only independent daily newspaper.
>
>The action, was carried out at 8.00 pm by armed members of the Zimbabwe
>Republic Police, who ordered staff out of the head office building and the
>factory.
>
>The shutdown followed the decision of the Supreme Court not to accept ANZ’s
>legal challenge to the Access to Information and Privacy Act (AIPPA), the
>draconian new media law until ANZ had registered with the Media Commission
>formed to regulate the media. AIPPA was introduced by the Mugabe regime and
>is widely recognised by all independent observers, including the
>Commonwealth, to fly in the face of the Zimbabwe Constitution itself, and
>destroys any claim by the regime that it supports a free and independent
>press in Zimbabwe.
>
>The Supreme Court’s ruling that ANZ had first to register before it could
>challenge the law, has been likened to expecting turkeys to vote for
>Christmas or a condemned man being allowed to appeal against the death
>penalty, but only when he is hanging!
>
>However, staff were allowed into the premises over the weekend for the
>purpose of preparing an application to the Media Commission, which ANZ told
>the Supreme Court on Friday that it would do following the judgement.
>
>ANZ today applied for registration with the Media Commission, although it
>still maintains that the AIPPA legislation is in breach of the Zimbabwe
>constitution. The following from AIPPA should ensure a speedy return to
>normal publishing:
>
> »Section 8 (2) (a)
>An applicantSSshall, during the consideration of his application, be
>permitted to continue to carry on the activities of the mass media service
>until his application is determined. »
>
>Meanwhile, the CEO was charged with operating an illegal business in
>violation of AIPPA and is due to appear in court on Tuesday.
>
>Needless to say there has been a speedy and spontaneous worldwide reaction
>from journalist organisations and civil rights groups, as well as the
>Commonwealth and several governments. All have expressed their grave
>concerns that the action of closing down ANZ flies in the face of the
>democratic process, and provides another clear sign of the Zimbabwean regime
>’s determination to ignore all democratic norms.


———

>From Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights
> and
>
>17.09.03
>
>ANZ SAGA:
>FURTHER ASSAULTS ON THE RIGHTS TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.
>THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: A FRESH CASUALTY
>
>Further to our preliminary statement issued on 13 September 2003 on
>developments relating to the Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe (ANZ) and the
>forced closure of the Daily News, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR)
>has been monitoring the legal and human rights aspects of the crisis over
>the past two days and is in a position to comment on various issues.
>
>Seizure of ANZ equipment
>On 16 September 2003 around 30 members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP)
>and other non-uniformed law enforcement agents under the command of Chief
>Superintendent Madzinga entered the premises of ANZ without a warrant and
>forcibly searched the offices and Daily News newsroom for undisclosed
>material. They continued barring ANZ employees and executives from entering
>their offices. At the same time the premises containing a printing press
>belonging to a separate company were sealed off by police details.
>The police proceeded to arbitrarily seize equipment from the premises
>without the consent of the owners. This process of seizure or confiscation
>of property without warrant took a number of hours and remains ongoing at
>the time of this statement.
>Vociferous suggestions from lawyers acting on behalf of the ANZ and members
>of ZLHR that the police conduct was unlawful and a violation of
>constitutional and universally recognised human rights and fundamental
>freedoms regrettably made no impact on the law enforcement agents.
>Amongst other things, ZLHR observed with great alarm the following aspects
>of the conduct on the part of police:
>- The search of the premises was effected without a warrant;
>- The seizure of equipment and property was effected without a warrant and
>included material unrelated to the preferred criminal charges;
>- The police did not fully cooperate with the team of lawyers who had
>attended the scene on the instructions of the ANZ. They in fact denied that
>ANZ had a constitutional right to engage as many lawyers to handle their
>matter as they felt were necessary, and argued that there was no need for « a
>battalion of lawyers » when one would suffice. This was despite the fact that
>the police were combing every office in different areas of the building.
>Eventually they were prevailed upon to allow two lawyers to remain and
>observe the proceedings.
>- Despite undertakings to lawyers that the property would remain locked in
>the premises overnight, police returned to the offices after 2000 hours and
>unlawfully removed property without the presence of representatives from the
>ANZ and their legal counsel.
>
>
>
>Delays in the hearing of the urgent court application by ANZ
>ZLHR notes with alarm that despite being served with an urgent court
>application to prevent the removal of equipment, the police have recklessly
>continued with their conduct, unconcerned as to the outcome of the court
>proceedings. In view of the intransigence of the police, ZLHR is concerned
>that the case for the interdict has not been dealt with as urgently as the
>circumstances dictate. The urgent application was filed on 16 September
>2003, and has not been dealt with at the time of this statement. It is
>regrettable that this seems to have become the modus operandi of the courts
>when dealing with matters involving universally recognised human rights and
>fundamental freedoms.
>
>Arbitrary arrests and detentions of journalists
>ZLHR has also learnt with deep concern that two journalists, Tsvangirai
>Mukwazhi and Paul Cadenhead, who were attempting to photograph the police
>action outside the ANZ offices and report on the unfolding events, were
>summarily arrested at around 1000 hours on 16 September 2003 and taken to
>Harare Central police station. Despite the deployment of a legal
>practitioner the two were only released after being detained and questioned
>for seven hours.
>
>Arbitrary arrests and detentions of NCA leadership and members
>We have also received complaints that around 120 members of the National
>Constitutional Assembly (NCA) including the chairman, Dr Lovemore Madhuku,
>were arrested by the police for exercising their right to freedom of
>expression and assembly in protest against the government action of
>summarily closing the Daily News and confiscating the equipment without an
>order of court. The attending legal practitioner has been denied access by
>the police to his clients. The police conduct is in violation of the
>Constitution of Zimbabwe and international law. Sadly, such conduct by the
>police has become endemic when it comes to cases involving human rights
>defenders.
>
>Recommendations
>We call upon the government to comply with its obligations in terms of both
>domestic and international law to allow the citizens of Zimbabwe to enjoy
>their right to freedom of expression without undue interference. In
>particular we demand that the government act:
>1. To immediately ensure that the property of ANZ is restored to their
>possession until such time as the urgent court application has been
>finalised;
>2. To ensure that the police cease their conduct of arbitrary search and
>seizure without warrants or court orders in matters where there is no
>evidence that an offence is being committed;
>3. To allow citizens to freely express themselves without harassment in
>their quest for alternative sources of news and other information.
>Further, we reiterate that the police must allow lawyers unimpeded access to
>their clients and desist from arbitrary arrest and detention of citizens of
>Zimbabwe, in particular human rights defenders.
>ZLHR is afraid that if the government fails to address the above concerns as
>a matter of urgency, then there is a real danger of the country sliding into
>complete anarchy and lawlessness, which would in turn worsen the political
>and humanitarian crisis that Zimbabwe currently faces.
>
>
>17 September 2003
>ZIMBABWE LAWYERS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS