“THE ZIMBABWE WE WANT – Towards a National Vision for Zimbabwe”

.uk”>editor@thezimbabwean.co.uk
The following is a response from In Touch Jesuit Communications: The document demands “respect for democratic freedoms” (3.2.4). An earlier version spelled out what this means: freedom of association (“Nobody should in any way be victimized by reason of their party belonging by being denied developmental or relief assistance, denied a job or promotion or by having his/her freedom of movement restricted.”) and freedom of speech and expression (“This is so essential that its absence undermines the whole democratic process”).
The “official” version now in circulation leaves out these two essential paragraphs. This is unacceptable. At least in the official teaching of the Catholic Church freedom of expression is recognized as essential for a functioning democracy, even a functioning church.
“At all times and in all places the Church should have true freedom … to pass judgment even in matters relating to politics, whenever the fundamental rights of man ..requires it” (Vatican Council II, Church in the Modern World, 76).
Pope John Paul II and the African Bishops deplored that “many African nations still labour under authoritarian and oppressive regimes which deny their subjects personal freedom and fundamental human rights, especially the freedom of association and of political expression, as well as the right to choose their governments by free and honest elections.” (The Church in Africa, 112) In the name of the Church, therefore, we protest against the removal from this document of these two crucial freedoms, whoever is responsible for it, and demand their re-instatement.
“It is not acceptable that the exercise of the freedom of communication should depend upon wealth, education or political power. The right to communicate is the right of all. – Where legal and political structures foster the domination of the media by elites, the Church for its part must urge respect for the right to communicate, including its own right of access to media, while at the same time seeking alternative models of communication for its own members and for the people at large.” (Pontifical Council For Social Communication, Pastoral Instruction “Aetatis Novae”, 1992). Surely this means that the Church must demand the abolition in its entirety of AIPPA and all other highly restrictive anti-media legislation.
The Church should also state fearlessly that its “own right of access to media” is violated in this country.
“Alternative models of communication….for the people at large” might be independent community radios which various citizens’ initiatives, with the support of certain church activists, wish to establish.
Pope John Paul II wrote, “The Church values the democratic system inasmuch as it ensures the participation of citizens in making political choices, guarantees to the governed the possibility both of electing and holding accountable those who govern them, and of replacing them through peaceful means when appropriate.” (Centesimus Annus, 1991). Surely the “participation of citizens in making political choices” is only possible if citizens can freely assemble (without having to ask for police permission!) and freely express themselves in media in which they have a stake themselves. – Own correspondent