Of ZACC and an opposing internal sanctions regime against facts.

I have seen enough of many tools lying idle. I have heard enough of them making chiming noises deliberately away from their optimal work benches. Most must reasonably be tired of this real-work avoidance when the tools are sharp (by their own claims), and the field is not complex (also by the tools’ own claims). How difficult can it be to be at the cutting edge of truth-finding if one has a claim to excellence?  How deeply hidden is this truth we say we are denied daily? What forces compel one to run away here and from such a noble effort? Hope it is not a matter deeper than the tools’ reach.

I hear  court judgements are open to expert critical reviews (we see many such contributions but elsewhere) and integration of some doctrine of Stare Decisis. What I also hear in our cases in Zimbabwe are soundbites on high decibels connotating corruption as being dealt by a claimed to be very flawed judicial system. Most are not hearing the outcomes of expert case reviews on where and how criminals can be said to be getting away with crimes. No loopholes, no technicality aspects that have been identified as facilitating the freedom of alleged criminals. No debates reaching the Legislature with solutions, or white papers that attempt to close any claimed or identified loopholes. Little if not nothing! Probably this is settled by me religiously reading blogs on Saturdays? Do we really have big issues bedevilling this nation that is full of educated experts with friends in high places who give them keys to lock the country away from progress' pantries? There are no cases lodged even for the record at the courts in opposition to non-delivery of justice in ZACC cases, and no real fear of setting dangerous precedents in current cases. This is a worthwhile objective for completion where justice is sought, or where there are loud claims of its non-existence. Without this where we say there is no justice, those who claim they will be better contributors to the judicial pillar seem to be aiming for a chance to arbitrarily pronounce things differently, or to just continue with what they claim to be poor application of the law. Yet some actors are officers of the courts defending those whom ZACC is pursuing. Think about it.

When urban councils start having their office bearers pursued, let us see how many ruling party MPs will take time to be their counsel. We seem to have two options of either agreeing ZACC is pursuing corruption as best as it can, or that corruption is not as big a problem as some claim. Why? Where it is alleged; some even expertly stand for the defendants. Can they be on two sides of the argument especially if they on one represent a people’s hope against corruption and on the other hand, they represent those accused of violating the people’s hopes? Maybe they will claim they know who corruption should pursue besides their clients who concomitantly are part of the political force they oppose. If they will say so, where are the cases they are taking to the courts when they wear their political hats? 

No one exposes, preferably in depth, how poor the judiciary and the prosecutors are besides the loudness of hashtags that are starting to be a symptom of the unhinged Age of Great Denialism in some fact-hating and evidence deficient centres of influence. These centres are quick to claim no rule of law yet frequently seeking recourse and refuge within the law with pleasure. Quick to claim a worsening situation when nowhere in history we have seen as many frequent high-profile investigations of office bearers and those who have vacated. If some know the law so much, yet they too are participants in its crafting and application, and also claim to be excellent future custodians of government, it should always make us go back to the question; how do they not show beyond doubt where and how the law is being ineffective? One cannot be the solution to what they do not show deep understanding on, and as a corollary, one who has deep insight on an issue affecting many should already be showing evidence-based credible solution propositions.

ZACC is working on cases and should be excused from certain quarters' anecdotal narratives that people think are inconsequential by reason of having working fingers and social media accounts. Before demeaning its level of functionality or effectiveness to citizens, we need those that claim its failure to be clear on the where and how. 

I feel some Zimbabweans are being sanctioned internally on facts around institutional performance. Totally held hostage to the superficiality of anecdotes yet prohibited from developing towards seeking the sharpness of valid studies of our circumstances.  

A culture has been imbedded in our conduct to take high volume soundbites of unevidenced crisis to the world ahead of thorough analysis and mitigation proposals. Instant gratification on social media is for the lazy followers of mere voices careless on validity of content!

We need representatives to be clear on their preference. There is pleasure and short myopic mileage being sought through the “Dear World, here is our worse news!” movements. There is little preference to influence and be influenced by messages like “because of X, Y and Z, this is poor by our Zimbabwean standards and what we are aiming for in this country is to improve it through 1, 2 and 3. We therefore will be doing a, b and c now!”. 

It is the preference of the mere catastrophising that compels me to view some amongst Zimbabwean politicians as the lazy high priests in the claimed to be synagogues of excellence. 

Against their high-volume soundbites and hashtags of crises, I have taken a position 'to be very wary of the yeast of these Pharisees’. Mindsets are being fermented and aroused to negate and not acknowledge any progress. 'Round everything down to zero' is the instruction! We then are not even in a position to further sharpen the working tools. At an expense, there is too much degradation of our institutions’ ascendency to powerful common utility due to partisan efforts of gaining a following and refusing competitors any attribution of value. A wise nation’s people will follow the power of finding solutions through the understanding and relationships with deep facts. We do however have a problem! 

The widows and orphans of deep knowledge are being robbed of their last senses! 'Musabvume kuti kune chakanaka kana chimwe hacho'. A lot have decoupled their political currency and modus operandi from facts and resultant solutions formulation. There is now an urgent responsibility for all of us to first seek facts around our beliefs! Solutions and balance should surely then follow!