Farai Dziva|MDC A leader Nelson Chamisa has vowed to deal with rampant indiscipline in the party.

Chamisa on Monday expressed disappointment at the party’s loss to ZANU PF in a local government by-election in Cowdray Park, Bulawayo two weeks ago.

In an interview with Southern Eye on Tuesday, MDC deputy spokesperson Edwin Ndlovu said:” The president condemned indiscipline in our structures, all forms of violence, confusion and intolerance resulting in needless expulsions of some members from the party.

He was not happy about this since it impacts on the party’s growth in Bulawayo, particularly when looking at election statistics.

On Cowdray Park, our president was clear that indiscipline also contributed to the loss.

He was clear that the contestants were supposed to show maturity and reach an agreement that would have seen one of them stepping aside.

He condemned the selfishness of the candidates and said they were supposed to put the interests of the party first before individual interests for positions.

The president was clear that this kind of indiscipline prevailing in Bulawayo is a thing of the past, and that will not be tolerated.”

BY DR MASIMBA MAVAZA| Julius Malema this week came out on eNCA TV news calling for President Mnangagwa a sell out and urging him to step down. This was because Zimbabwe has started compensate white farmers.

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and resettlement must be an Act of Parliament that regulates land acquisition and lays down the procedure and rules for granting compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement to the affected persons in Zimbabwe. The government must provide fair compensation to those whose land is taken away, bring transparency to the process of acquisition of land to set up farming infrastructural projects and assures
rehabilitation of those affected. This should establish regulations for land acquisition as a part of Zimbabwe’s agricultural drive driven by public-private partnership.

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement must be set aside as law.
An Act to ensure, in consultation with institutions of local self-government and established under the Constitution, a humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land compensation and development of essential infrastructural facilities and urbanisation with the least disturbance to the new owners of the land and other affected families and provide just and fair compensation to the affected families whose land has been acquired or proposed to be acquired or are affected by such acquisition, and make adequate provisions for such affected persons for their rehabilitation and resettlement and for ensuring that the cumulative outcome of compensation should be that affected persons become partners in development leading to an improvement in our agricultural sector.

Compensation is the prerogative of government to pay for developments done on land taken without the willing consent of its occupant in order to benefit society. It is a power possessed in one form or another by governments of all modern nations. This power is often necessary for social and economic development and the protection of the natural environment. Land must be provided for investments such as roads, railways, harbours and airports; for hospitals and schools; for electricity, water and sewage facilities; and for the protection against flooding and the protection of water courses and environmentally fragile areas.

A government cannot rely on land markets alone to ensure that land is acquired when and where it is needed. However, a number of encourage land grab alone without plans to rehouse the displaced. Justice require that the government should compensate the taken land in good faith after it uses its power of compulsory acquisition. This action is only fair and just.

We should remember that Compulsory acquisition requires finding the balance between the public need for land on the one hand, and the provision of land tenure security and the protection of private property rights on the other hand. In seeking this balance, zimbabwe should apply principles that ensure that the use of this power is limited, to the use for the benefit of society for public use, public purpose, or in the public interest. Legislation should define the basis of compensation for the land, and guarantee the procedural rights of people who are affected, including the right of notice, the right to be heard, and the right to appeal. It should provide for fair and transparent procedures and equivalent compensation.

The point Malema misses is that we are not buying back our land neither are we bribing the former occupants. We are reaching out to the pool of justice. We are being Zimbabweans. Zimbabweans are naturally fair and just.

We do mot approach the land issue as Black against white. We look at the issue of our land as Zimbabweans. Zimbabwe is the only country we can call ours in the whole world.

Mnangagwa is not only the president of Zimbabwe. He is a lawyer and his blood oozes for justice. By compensating the former occupiers Mnangagwa is setting a ground of fairness and justice. This can not be treated as a sign of betrayal. Malema gets it wrong when he said a position of fairness is a position of traitor-ship. This thinking is flawed and tainted with insults which are not called for.

Zimbabwe is not reneging on the gains of our land. It was the land which made Zimbabweans to pick up arms and fo to a war. The wars for our freedom was to free the blacks and white alike. It was not a racist war. The whites were allowed to stay in the great reconciliations championed by Mugabe and Mnangagwa.

What Malema failed to understand is that compensation is not buying back our land. We took our land and we are holding fast to it. We will not in any way give the land back to our colonisers. But if among those who had occupied our land before is some one who wishes to use the land for the benefit of Zimbabwe surely we will embrace him or her. Malema should know that there are some principles for legislation on compulsory acquisition. It is not dog eat dog or a confusion best explained as dog’s breakfast. It is a well thought idea which drips from natural justice to act fairly on every one hence compensating who ever deserves compensation.

Malema in his dreams puts himself as the master of land reform. He must take his seat in the classroom of patience and he must learn. Malema needs total treatment for his big mouth and brains which shows he suffers from a serious verbal and brain malfunctioning.

While Malema is respected in some areas he has been surrounded by a serious ego and he now sees himself as a leader of Africa. He forgets that he only leads EEF. His utterances about our president Mnangagwa are seriously misplaced and they have exposed his lunacy and idiocy. Malema wishes to take a hardline stance and wants Zimbabwe to be his partner in insanity.

2Compulsory acquisition is inherently disruptive and Zimbabwe has learnt from that. Even when compensation is generous and procedures are generally fair and efficient, the displacement of people from established homes, businesses and communities will still entail significant human costs. Where the process is designed or implemented poorly, the economic, social and political costs may be enormous. We have learnt our mistakes as a country and we are correcting it. Make no mistake we are not giving back land we are simply compensating for developments and hope to cove some loses encountered by the former occupants.

Principles for legislation on compulsory acquisition should include:
• Protection of due process and fair procedure. Rules that place reasonable constraints on the power of the government to compulsorily acquire land strengthen the confidence of people in the justice system, empower people to protect their land rights, and increase the perception of tenure security. Rules should provide for appropriate advance consultation, participatory planning and accessible mechanisms for appeals, and
should limit the discretion of officials. Good governance. Agencies that compulsorily acquire land should be accountable
for the good faith compensation scheme. Laws that are not observed undermine the legitimacy of compulsory acquisition.

Good governance reduces the abuse of power and opportunities for corruption. Good governance is seen in coming back and seek justice for even those who suffered under a good cause.

Claimants should be paid compensation which is no more or no less than the loss resulting from the compulsory acquisition of their land. We should ensure that affected owners and occupants receive equivalent compensation, whether in money or alternative land. Mnangagwa has set out clear and consistent valuation bases for achieving this.

Problems may arise when compulsory acquisition is not done well so compensation might look like it is bribing.
Zimbabwe has come up with policies and legislation that strengthen land rights of individuals and communities. This must never be interpreted as selling out. People may believe they lack tenure security if the government can acquire rights in private land without following defined procedures,band/or without offering adequate compensation.
To avoid Resuced investments in the economy: Insecure tenure, with the threat of
the arbitrary loss of land and associated income, discourages domestic and
foreign investment.

• Weakened land markets: Threats to tenure security so by compensating we are showing the world that we are a fair community.
We are not having transactions, to reduce the acceptability of land as collateral, this will discourage people from investing or maintaining their property, and depress land values. To avoid this in his wisdom Mnangagwa has made a decision which is in the best interest of Zimbabweans. Mnangagwa is aware of Opportunities created for corruption and the abuse of power: The lack of protection and transparency can result in injustices which anger citizens and undermine the legitimacy of government. So Mnangagwa has extended a hand of compensation which is powered by the dictates of natural justice. It is very true that Inadequate compensation paid to owners and occupants causes mayhem and distrust. Financial awards may be inadequate to allow people to enjoy sustainable livelihoods after land is acquired. People may feel that they are not compensated for the loss of cultural, religious or emotional aspects of the land.But compensation is for the developments done on the acquired land.

The constitutions of many countries provide for both the protection of private property rights and the power of the government to acquire land without the willing consent of the owner. There is, however, great variation. Some countries have broadly defined provisions for compulsory acquisition, while those of other countries are more specific.Constitutional frameworks that have broadly defined provisions concentrate on basic principles and often simply assert the power to compulsorily acquire land as the single exception to fully protected private property rights. For example, the constitution of the United States of America mandates that: “No person…shall be deprived of…property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” (Article V). Similarly, Rwanda’s constitution states: “Private property, whether individual or collective, shall be inviolable. No infringement shall take place except for the reason of public utility, in the cases and manner established by the law, and in return for fair and prior compensation.” (Title II, Article 23). Such constitutions leave the details of compulsory acquisition to other legislation and, in some instances, to the interpretation of the courts.

Other constitutional frameworks specify in detail the mechanisms by which the government can compulsorily acquire land. They tend to include a specific list of the purposes for which land may be acquired. For example, Ghana’s constitution includes provisions detailing exactly what kinds of projects allow the government to use its power of compulsory acquisition, and specifies that displaced inhabitants should be resettled on suitable alternative land (Chapter Five, Article 20). Malema obviously is mot aware that land grab is not peculiar to Zimbabwe only. It is done everywhere. The sanity of the programme is defined by the compensation programme. How Zimbabwe compensates it farmer is not a guilty plea. It is simply a gesture of unity.
Never ever mistake our forgiveness and understanding as a sign of weakness.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 17) provides that “everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others” and that “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property”. The only problem is that Zimbabwe has not taken land from the owners. It took land from the illegal occupiers for the good interests of the public
Several regional conventions on human rights also protect rights to property,Everyone has the right to the use and enjoyment of his property. The law may subordinate such use and enjoyment to the interest of society. No one shall be deprived of his property except upon payment of just compensation, for reasons of public utility or social interest, and in the cases and according to the forms established by law.”

• The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1986: “Article 14. The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws.” “Article 21. 1. All peoples shall freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources. This right shall be exercised in the exclusive interest of the people. In no case shall a people be deprived of it. 2. In case of spoilation, the dispossessed people shall have the right to the lawful recovery of its property as well as to an adequate compensation.”

• The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950, (Article 8, First Protocol): “1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” This right is expanded by Article 1, First Protocol: “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.”

So Malema did not have a chance to look at these provisions. He should understand that compensation does not mean selling out. It is human to do so and the humane thing to do is as what president Mnangagwa has done.

Besides land for agriculture government may take land for undertaking improvements to roadways, sewer and power lines, communications, and other systems, the government must often secure or acquire access to private land. Without the government’s power to do so, the size and capabilities of our public infrastructure would become inadequate to serve the needs of society. The right of the government to obtain private land for public purposes is known as eminent domain, and this right derives from federal and state constitutions and related laws.

The power of eminent domain allows the government to take private land for public purposes only if the government provides fair compensation to the property owner. The process through which the government acquires private property for public benefit is known as condemnation.

How the Government Takes Private Property
As the government makes its plans for expansion and improvement of publicly maintained roads and utilities, it determines which private parcels will be affected. Once it makes that determination, the government will work with its own appraisers to determine the appropriate price for the necessary property interests. When the government has established its estimation of the property value, it may offer the landowner a particular price for the property.

Malema has wondered way offline in his spits. He suffers from a mental disorder which makes him like he is the referee.

Malema is the man who has failed to put his mouth where his mind is. He has the mind of a fly and fame of an elephant.

It is a shame that Malema rushed to comment before he understands what is happening. He has a loose mouth and needs some mouthwash to cleanse his unguided speech.

Mnangagwa can never be classified as a traitor as far as land issue is concerned.
It is a shame that such brilliance in Malema has a lunatic as a master.

Mnangagwa can never be called a traitor. He has actually become a double hero since he championed land invasion and land compensation

Vazet2000@yahoo.co.uk

VIDEO LOADING BELOW…

Farmers in Insiza District of Matabeleland South say they can not enter into open partnerships in farming because of the huge disputes in the land they were settled in.

The farmers also indicate that some of their collegues are having secret partnership arrangements with former white farmers in fear of victimisation.

According to the farmers, most farmers in Insiza North were settled there “illegally” by a powerful politician in the area during the land resettlement exercise for political expediency.

This anomaly was highlighted by farmers from the area in an on going Zimbabwe Land and Agrarian Network, ZILAN, workshop taking place in Bulawayo.

Watch video below:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2336686259725892&id=150154425045764

British officials repeatedly downplayed the massacre of thousands of innocent civilians by Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe in the 1980s to protect the UK’s interests in southern Africa and their relationship with the former colony’s new ruler, new research has claimed.

According to thousands of documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Dr Hazel Cameron, a lecturer in international relations at the University of St Andrews in Scotland, British officials in London and Zimbabwewere “intimately aware” of the atrocities but consistently minimised their scale.Advertisement

Cameron described the policy as one of “wilful blindness”.

“The British government could have influenced authorities in Zimbabwe but put political and economic interests first … There were steps they could have taken and they chose not to,” she said.

Mugabe took power in elections held in 1980 following a gruelling and brutal guerilla struggle against white minority rule in what was known as Rhodesia. His Zanu-PF party won more than 60% of the vote.

In 1983 the new leader launched a massive security clampdown in parts of Matabeleland, the heartland of the Ndebele ethnic minority and a stronghold of his political rival, Joshua Nkomo. The operation, prompted by scattered murders and attacks on property allegedly by members of Nkomo’s political party, was spearheaded by the Fifth Brigade of the new Zimbabwean national army and portrayed as directed against “bandits”. The unit had been trained by North Korean military specialists and was fanatically loyal to Mugabe.

Over a nine-month period the Fifth Brigade killed, tortured and raped tens of thousands of unarmed civilians. In all, historians of the period believe, between 10,000 and 20,000 died in the atrocities, and many more suffered severe physical or psychological harm.Advertisement

The new documents include hundreds of cables exchanged by Robin Byatt, the British high commissioner in Harare, with officials in London. These, Cameron says, reveal the British official attitude towards Zimbabwe in the first months of the massacres.

In one cable, sent on 24 June 1983, Byatt explained how “Zimbabwe is important to us primarily because of major British and western economic and strategic interests in southern Africa, and Zimbabwe’s pivotal position there. Other important interests are investment and trade … prestige, and the need to avoid a mass white exodus. Zimbabwe … [also] is a bulwark against Soviet inroads”.

When Jeremy Paxman arrived in Zimbabwe in March 1983 to make a documentary for the BBC’s Panorama, Byatt complained that the journalist was taking an “unreservedly gloomy and sensational view of events”.

When Britain’s then foreign secretary, Geoffrey Howe, asked for the diplomat’s reaction to an article in Newsweek graphically describing the Fifth Brigade’s violence, Byatt said its author had “a reputation for sensational reporting”.

“The behaviour of the Fifth Brigade has certainly been brutal but it is [the] impression [of senior British military officials] that they are not out of control,” the high commissioner wrote.

As the violence in Matabeleland intensified, Byatt relayed the allegations of killings made by opposition politicians in Zimbabwe and told London he had received reports indicating widespread acts of brutality including murder, rape and torture.

With concern growing among western diplomats in Harare, the high commissioner told London “he was sure that our best tactic is to continue to try to proffer sympathetic and constructive, rather than simply critical, advice if we wish to influence Zimbabwean decisions”.

The policy of engaging with Mugabe was supported by Foreign Office mandarins. The campaign of violence – known as Gukurahundi, a local word for the wind which separates chaff from grain – continued into 1984.

Jilly Byatt, the wife of the former high commissioner, said criticism of her husband, who is ill, was misplaced and that the decision to opt for engagement with Mugabe rather than confrontation had saved lives.

“It was very important to keep good relations … Aggressive criticism would have got us nowhere. It would just not have worked,” she said.

“Mugabe had just begun to trust the British again … and nothing would have been gained by losing that trust. The slaughter would just have worsened. It is unthinkable that we could have helped in any way in the activities of the Fifth Brigade.”

Experts said the influence of foreigners in Zimbabwe at the time was more limited than sometimes suggested.

Stuart Doran, a historian and author of a forthcoming book on the atrocities, said: “The Gukurahundi was driven by Mugabe and Zanu-PF from start to finish. This was a domestic issue [but] there’s no doubt that serious misjudgments were made by the British … By 1983, when the massacres began, members of the high commission were swallowing much of Mugabe’s propaganda without adequate reflection. It had become a habit … and they weren’t alone. Plenty of other western diplomats were in the same place.”

None of the perpetrators have been held accountable for the atrocities of the 1980s. Those implicated include many who are now senior political figures in Zimbabwe. Mugabe recently celebrated his 93rd birthday and has been in power for 36 years.

Emerson Mnangagwa, the 70-year-old vice-president, is mentioned in the new documents in a letter from tycoon Roland “Tiny” Rowland to the US ambassador.

Rowland, whose Lonrho conglomerate had major investments in Zimbabwe, wrote that he was “absolutely convinced” that Mugabe knew about the atrocities and claimed that Mnangagwa, then secretary of state for security, was “fully aware”.

Mnangagwa, who denies any responsibility for the killings in Matabeleland, is tipped by many observers to succeed Mugabe on his death.

“The alleged main perpetrators are still in charge of the political and military infrastructure in Zimbabwe. It is still very difficult for survivors and their relatives to have any form of justice,” Cameron said.

Thembani Dube, a survivor of the massacres and a human rights activist, said the research “unravels the complicit role of the British government of Margaret Thatcher”.

The reaction of British officials and the government sometimes contrasted with that of US diplomats and policymakers, even if official policy may not have differed greatly.

George Shultz, the then US secretary of state, noted “the Fifth Brigade military operations in Matabeleland have succeeded in terrorising, intimidating and alienating the people of Matabeleland”. The “mailed fist policy of the government of Zimbabwe was directed not only against dissidents themselves but against the sea in which the enemy fish swim”, he added.

US diplomats reported that the Foreign Office prioritised “bilateral relations” with Zimbabwe and complained that British officials were “excessively defensive about what has been going on in Matabeleland”, describing one as “almost an apologist for the [government of Zimbabwe]”.

In a recently published academic article detailing her research, which was self-funded, Cameron quotes a cable from Byatt in which the diplomat points out that “the white farming community (a substantial portion of which is British or dual [nationality]) are being treated scrupulously correctly by the Fifth Brigade and, while they dislike the methods being used, are relieved that their own security has improved very considerably as a result of Fifth Brigade deployment”.

This, Byatt said, was “the other side of the coin” to the alleged atrocities.

One of the Foreign Office’s deepest concerns, other than the wellbeing of British citizens in newly independent Zimbabwe, was the effect on public opinion in the UK of reports of atrocities.

Senior ministers who visited Zimbabwe while the Gukurahundi offensive was ongoing failed to mention the atrocities in parliamentary reports on their return.

When Prince Charles met Peter Preston, then editor of the Guardian and Donald Trelford, then editor of the Observer, who had published his own eyewitness account of the atrocities, shortly after a 1984 visit to Zimbabwe, the prince said the Foreign Office had told him that “those massacres in Matabeleland [were] all exaggerated”.

• This article was amended on 19 May 2017 to remove references to dissidents.

The Guardian UK

Mberengwa farmers claim that ZESA and ZINWA charges are driving them out of farming.

The farmers indicate that the two government bodies normally disconnect them just before harvest time affecting their crop heavily.

The cries from the farmers come at a time when ZESA has been taking several senior government officials to court for failing to settle their electricity bills at their farmers over a long period of time.

Watch video below:

Mberengwa farmers claim that ZESA and ZINWA charges are driving them out of farming.

The farmers indicate that the two government bodies normally disconnect them just before harvest time affecting their crop heavily.

The cries from the farmers come at a time when ZESA has been taking several senior government officials to court for failing to settle their electricity bills at their farmers over a long period of time.

Watch video below:

Sudanese demonstrators who have been holding protests against the deposed President Bashar Al-Bashir have rejected the setting up of a transitional military council to run the country for two years. They have pledged to continue with the protests until a civilian government is put in place.

Reuters reports that the protestors have called for mass Friday prayers outside the defence ministry compound, a focal point for protests.

The activists, clad in yellow vests, were reportedly controlling traffic around the Ministry of Defence compound on Friday morning and managed foot traffic to and from the sit-in. They also blocked a major bridge in central Khartoum, the Capital City.

The country’s Defence Minister Awad Mohamed Ahmed Ibn Auf said elections would be held at the end of the two-year interim period. He further announced a curfew from 10 pm to 4 am.

Ibn Auf is expected to meet journalists later on Friday today (today).

Bashir’s fall follows hot on the heels of another Arab leader who was forced out of office through a popular uprising.

Algeria’s Abdelaziz Bouteflika, in power since 1999, stepped down on April 2 after six weeks of protests. Protests erupted after he had announced that he will seek another term whilst he was bedridden.

Meanwhile, world powers, including the United States and Britain, said they supported a peaceful and democratic transition sooner than two years.- Reuters

ZANU PF President Emmerson Mnangagwa has warned retailers and companies against what he called unjustified price increases.

Mnangagwa was addressing the Zanu PF youth assembly at the party’s headquarters in the capital Harare on Wednesday.

Mnangagwa said, “the government notes the present wanton, upsurge and ever-escalating unjustified increase in prices.

” We urge compatriots in industry, business and commerce to desist from this inhumane trend which has brought untold suffering and misery to our people.

“We cannot have the continued exploitation of our people by those who exhibit rent-seeking behaviour.”

However, retailers argue that the rise in prices is linked to the recent hike in grain producer prices and the surging illegal foreign currency rates.

Confederation Retailers of Zimbabwe (CZR) board member Alois Burutsa said:

Basically, the suppliers are increasing their prices in relation to the movement of the foreign currency black market…even distributors who import finished products.

Confederation of Zimbabwe (CZI) president Sifelani Jabangwe said that retailers will not suffer is their pricing does not reflect the exchange rate. Said Jabangwe:

Instability is not good for all of us and business is concerned about the movement in prices… and the concerns are related to the past.

If the rate moves and you are pricing wrongly you actually then suffer from inadequate working capital. This is a genuine fear that is in business and we need to see how we can address this.

A United Nations Report says 740 000 young women in Zimbabwe are living with HIV, the third highest figure in the SADC region.

This was revealed in a UNAIDS HIV and Women report released this week. The report further said that South Africa tops the list with 4.4 million followed by Mozambique at 1.3 million.

Young women are those whose ages fall between the ages of 15-24.

The report attributed the high numbers to the existence of high levels of transactional sex and age-disparity sexual relationships that are blamed for the HIV vulnerability of young women. The report says in part:

An estimated 740,000 women were living with HIV in Zimbabwe in 2017.

Gender inequality is present within relationships and marriages and drives HIV infections.

Although knowledge among young people is improving, only 37% of young women and 41% of young men have comprehensive and correct knowledge of HIV prevention.

Only 46% of young women and 47% of young men have comprehensive knowledge about HIV, limiting their ability to take control of their sexual health.

… In addition, only 29% of adolescent women (aged 15-19), at high risk of HIV infection used a condom the last time they had sex, compared to 44% of their male counterparts.

By Own Correspondent| A man from Matobo has appeared before Bulawayo Regional Magistrate, Sibonginkosi Mnkandla on allegations of raping his own daughters.

The accused person was remanded in custody to April 26 for trial commencement.

It is alleged that the accused forcefully retrieved his two daughters aged 9 and 7 years from their mother’s place on the 31st of December.

He allegedly claimed that he had New Year presents for them.

The prosecutor, Concilia Ncube stated that the accused violated his two girls that same night.

Ncube said:

“On the same day, during the night the accused person took his children to his bedroom and instructed them to sleep on his bed.”

The accused is alleged to have raped his nine-year-old and rubbed his privates on the thighs of the seven-year-old minor as the children jumped off the bed. He further threatened to kill them with a knife if they ever reported the matter to anyone.

The victims ran away on the 1st of January to narrate their unpleasant story to their grandmother. 

The matter was reported leading to the arrest of the accused.

What started as a casual visit to a sangoma for help turned out to be a nightmare at the hands of a l_usty p_ervert.

A 19-year-old man from Lupane’s Jibajiba area approached a well-known sangoma in the area because he had an e_rectile d_ysfunction.

The sangoma promised to deal with the issue because it was his specialty. The treatment came in the form of anal s_x. The sangoma would instruct the patient to touch his p_enis and in turn the sangoma would do the same to him. When the sangoma’s p_enis got erect all the time he would then sleep with his patient.

After every session the sangoma would reassure his patient that he was going to be alright and all the signs of improvement were there.

The patient could not keep the treatment a secret and he confided in his father who reported the matter to the police leading to the sangoma’s arrest. Appearing before Lupane resident magistrate Ndumo Masuku facing an aggravated indecent assault charge the sangoma pleaded not guilty.

The court heard that the sangoma allegedly had a_nal s_x three times with his victim on different occasions.

He was remanded in custody to next week on Tuesday for routine remand and was advised to apply for bail at the High Court.

By Own Correspondent| A prominent Bulawayo-based lawyer, Blessing Mabusiso Bhala has been served with divorce summons by his wife Senele Bhala (nee Dhlomo).

Senele is also demanding custody of their daughter, Culolethu Ludo Bhala and $300 in monthly maintenance. Part of the shortened summons read:

An order for custody of the minor child, Culolethu Ludo Bhala; a minor girl born on August 28, 2013, be awarded to the plaintiff, subject to the defendant’s rights of reasonable access upon prior consultation with the plaintiff if anything on alternative weekends and school holidays.

An order that the defendant pays maintenance of the aforesaid minor child in the sum of $300 every month until the minor child turns the age of 18 or becomes self-supporting, whichever shall occur first.

An order that each party retains his or her sole and absolute all the property in his/her possession at the time of issuing the summons.

Dhlomo is seeking an order for both parties to retain ownership of property under their possession.

However, the summons did not cite the reasons for the divorce.

By Own Correspondent| Higher and Tertiary Education, Science and Technology Development minister Professor Amon Murwira has announced government’s plans to revise regulations governing tertiary institutions for enhanced performance and development.

Murwira was presenting proposals for the Amendment of the Manpower and Development Act at the Bulawayo Polytechnic College recently.

He said:

The Ministry requires that all tertiary education institution employees be transferred from being Public Service Commission employees to state granted employees so that they are just like State University employees.

This, he argued, is essential for the purposes of ensuring compliance with international best practices in relation to academic freedom and academic integrity for industrialisation, modernisation, and attainment of Vision 2030.

The professor indicated that the transformation was aimed at government attraction and retention of best skills to facilitate the industrialisation and mordenisation of Zimbabwe.

He claimed that the Act also needed amendments on the Zimdef part so that it incorporates principles of good governance.

He also stated that the alignment of the Manpower Planning and Development Act was fundamental for skills development.

Own Correspondent|Popular and otherwise pleasant white Parsons family of Ntabazinduna in Umguza Matabeleland North just outside Bulawayo has received an order evicting them from their family farm of years.

The family which is so much adored by the local community because of their general good relations with the community has been living in the area since around 1940s.

News of the eviction of the family from the farm was broken on social media by Kevin David Parsons one of the sons of the late Peter Parsons a man whose name remains highly valued amongst the community in the area over twenty five years after his death.

“My sister and brother in law received a court order yesterday evicting them from our family farm, Ntabazinduna, Matabeleland with effect from Monday 15th April 2019,” said Kevin.

“This is fifteen years after losing our own farm, Sunnyside, Mashonaland. So very sad,” he added.

The news of the eviction of the family has not been well received by people from the area and Matabeleland region as a whole with radical members from Mthwakazi Restoration groups threatening to block the evictions.

In 2015 people from Matabeleland united and resisted government efforts to evict another popular white farmer Peter Cunningham from his Ebenezer Farm in Matobo district.

The community could not even listen to then Vice President Phelekezela Mphoko until Cunningham was retained to the farm.

Several members of the community were arrested including Mthwakazi Republic Party leaders for resisting the eviction.