Law Society of Zimbabwe Under Attack

On August 6 and 20, a high-ranking appointee of the Zimbabwean government published articles defaming the Law Society of Zimbabwe, an independent organization created by Zimbabwean statute to regulate the legal profession. 

Among many inflammatory accusations, the articles claim that certain members of the Society are attempting to bring colonial rule back to Zimbabwe.  This and other false allegations are directed toward the Society’s elected leaders who have been openly critical of the government’s human rights violations.  

The author – the chairman of the Media and Information Commission – was responsible for closing down independent radio stations, television channels, and daily newspapers in Zimbabwe.  Therefore, Human Rights First is concerned that the recent articles signal an imminent legal threat to the existence and independence of the Law Society itself.

Please show your support for the independence of the Zimbabwean legal profession by taking action.

Tell Me More

The following are excerpts from and links to two articles by the chairman of the Zimbabwean Media and Information Commission.  They are followed by an excerpt from and the link to a commentary by the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, as well as a press release by the International Bar Association:

Tafataona P. Mahoso, “Lawyers’ Body Fights for Return of Rhodesia,” The Sunday Mail, August 6, 2006.

Click to read full article

“It is in this context that Zimbabweans who accept the call to reclaim and revalue African society and its assets must also face the fact that the leadership of the LSZ is still fighting either for the restoration of the Rhodesian past or at least for the foreign-sponsored regime change project to reverse the African revolution.”

Tafataona P. Mahoso, “LSZ Leadership Supports, Mimics Western Sponsors,” The Sunday Mail, August 20, 2006.

Click to read full article

“In the last two instalments we implied a number of allegations which still require elaboration and proof: That leaders of the LSZ misrepresent their own views and wishes as those of the majority of practising lawyers in Zimbabwe; that leaders of the LSZ are heavily dominated by white colonial law firms linked to Rhodesian and foreign capital; that the activities of the leaders of the LSZ have tended to support, resemble or mimic those of the Western white sponsors of the regime change politics of the opposition in Zimbabwe; and that because of the link between LSZ leaders and elements of Rhodesian and foreign capital, the LSZ was used as much to oppose the indigenisation of land ownership as it was used to oppose the indigenisation of the judiciary.

In making these observations, it should be born in mind that the question of legality or illegality of the activities of the leaders of the LSZ is not really the issue here since that depends on the nature of the laws Zimbabwe has to govern such activities. The real issue is whether the majority of members of the LSZ really know the full meaning of the activities carried out on their behalf by leaders of the society. The issue is whether the people of Zimbabwe in general know and understand what leaders of the LSZ have been doing in the name of human rights and democracy.”

Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, “Tafataona Mahoso’s Attack on the Law Society of Zimbabwe,” August 12, 2006.

Click to read full commentary

“Dr. Mahoso, in regrettably inciting language but a tired argument, accuses the LSZ of harbouring intentions to bring back Rhodesia or a Western-controlled regime to this country. Many committed lawyers have fought courageous battles against the implementation by this very government of colonial legislation in policies that are dangerous to humanity and negatively affect people’s fundamental rights and freedoms. It is a matter of public record that a glut of colonial statutes were used as a “legal basis” for the implementation of Operation Murambatsvina and resulted in displacements, homelessness and loss of life and livelihoods for millions of innocent people who ordinarily look to the state for protection. Victims of Operation Murambatsvina are still homeless over a year after they were dumped. Dr. Mahoso needs to visit Hopley Farm to see for himself how the implementation of such colonial laws by the state has dehumanised Zimbabweans.

The legal profession is acutely aware of, and not happy with, the drastic deterioration of national well-being and the erosion of fundamental rights and freedoms in Zimbabwe since approximately 1999. The country is in the midst of crisis on almost all fronts, resulting from the collapse of good governance, economic mismanagement and the dramatic deterioration in human rights and the rule of law. ZLHR supports and stands together with the LSZ and the majority of its members in the legal profession in Zimbabwe in continuing to provide an important voice and conscience in the defence of the rule of law, constitutionalism, the independence of the judiciary and the promotion and protection of human rights. ZLHR further remains confident that Dr. Mahoso’s strategy to stir disharmony and disaffection in, and hatred for, the independent legal profession to achieve the chaos he has unleashed and achieved on the media profession will not work.”

International Bar Association, “IBA Voices Concern at Attack on the Law Society of Zimbabwe,” August 23, 2006.

Click here to read full press release

“Justice Richard Goldstone, Co-Chair IBA Human Rights Institute, and retired South African Constitutional Court Judge said today that,
‘The Law Society of Zimbabwe is a democratic and independent institution performing a very necessary role in a particularly difficult period in Zimbabwe’s history. He added, ‘The LSZ should be completely separate from the Executive, accountable to the law, and above all else to the nation’s Constitution. For a law society to face criticism from a government-appointed official for carrying out this essential role in this environment carries all the outcomes of a threat.’”

Sample Letter:

Robert Mugabe
President of Zimbabwe

Tafataona P. Mafoso
Chairman, Media and Information Commission

Jonathan Moyo
Ministry of State for Information and Publicity

c/o H.E. Machivenyika Tobias Mapuranga
Ambassador of Zimbabwe to the United States
1608 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009

President Mugabe:

I am deeply troubled by the recent attacks against independent lawyers launched by a member of your government, Tafataona Mahoso, the chairman of the Media and Information Commission.   On August 6 and 20, Mr. Mahoso published articles attacking the reputation of the Law Society of Zimbabwe, the organization created by Zimbabwean law to regulate the legal profession. 

Among many inflammatory accusations, the articles claim that certain members of the Society are attempting to bring colonial rule back to Zimbabwe.  This and other false allegations are directed toward the Society’s elected leaders who have been openly critical of the government’s human rights violations.  

Mr. Mahoso has been responsible for closing down all independent radio stations, television channels, and daily newspapers in Zimbabwe.  Therefore, I am concerned that the recent articles may signal an imminent legal threat to the existence and independence of the Law Society itself.

The 1990 U.N. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provides, in Article 24, that:  “Lawyers shall be entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote their continuing education and training and protect their professional integrity.  The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and shall exercise its functions without external interference.”

The Basic Principles also uphold lawyers’ freedom of expression: “In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights…”  It is precisely these legitimate activities that Mr. Mahoso appears to condemn.
  
In his articles, Mr. Mahoso mentions by name several well known champions for human rights, rule of law, and democracy in Zimbabwe.  This appears to be an attempt to tarnish their reputations in the eyes of the Zimbabwean public and to pressure them to stop their peaceful and legitimate legal activities. 

The Zimbabwean government should support the work of lawyers and human rights advocates like those named in the articles.  I urge your government to make clear its support for the legal profession in Zimbabwe, and for its rights to regulate its own professional association which may speak freely on matters of public policy, including engaging in public criticism of government policies.

The 1998 U.N. Declaration on Human Rights Defenders states that: “The State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration.”

In addition, the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights and the Resolution on Human Rights Defenders in Africa by the African Commission, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights require that the government guarantee respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the country.  This includes the freedom to form, operate, and participate in independent associations.  Supporting the work of independent lawyers and human rights defenders is essential if your government is to begin fulfilling its international obligations in this regard.