Following the Zimbabwean governments banning of an exhibition focusing on Gukurahundi (a military operation to suppress opposition in the 1980s) by artist Owen Maseko,(Pictured: Perence Shiri Was commander of the 5th Brigade)
Sokwanele discusses the future implications of the case not just for political freedom of expression but also for art, in the face of Zanu (PF)’s efforts to control narratives about the past.
Politics has so infiltrated our lives that the personal, social and cultural are all political, and as always with Zimbabwe, it is impossible to talk about one without referencing the other. What we hope to do is to encourage people to think beyond the minute detail of political immediacies, and to debate who we are as people in this maelstrom.
How do we define ourselves, where do we want to be going, how can we get there, and is there space for this richness of identity to be defined and celebrated in Zimbabwe today???We start by looking at the way freedom of expression is dealt with in the Global Political Agreement (GPA).
We then turn to a discussion of how freedom of expression in Zimbabwe is sharply curtailed by Zanu (PF)s Patriotic History programme. This has serious implications for artists in Zimbabwe, and Owen Masekos case is used to outline what happens to artists and their art when their work dares to challenge Zanu (PF)s Patriotic History.
Masekos recent exhibition now banned from being shown in Zimbabwe focused on the Gukurahundi in Zimbabwe; so we also discuss how the truth of the Gukurahundi has been suppressed for decades and, if Zanu (PF) get their way, will continue to be suppressed for the foreseeable future. We ask whether now is the time to discuss our past. Finally, we consider the future implications for art in Zimbabwe in the light of the Maseko case.??
Freedom of expression and the GPA
The Global Political Agreement (GPA) signed on 15 September 2008 includes a section on Freedom of Expression and Communication, but this all-encompassing title is distilled to a few points.
In essence, it agrees that new radio stations and newspapers need to be allowed to register and operate in Zimbabwe, and that radio stations operating from outside Zimbabwe should be asked to cease their operations and to return home and their external funders asked to stop funding them.
The GPA also agrees that the state-controlled media provides balanced and fair coverage to all political parties for their legitimate political activities and that the public and private media will desist from perpetuating intolerance or hate speech.??
The GPA is the final product of a tensely negotiated agreement, heralding a power-sharing inclusive government for a transition to new elections to resolve the political crisis. Its purpose, as well as the explosive context within which it was drafted, means it is understandably brief when dealing with expansive and important concepts such as freedom of expression.?? The clauses in the GPA for freedom of expression focus on freedom of political expression and political communication.
There are two points to make: first, there is an inherent contradiction in the use of the word freedom alongside a clause that seeks to shut down existing forms of communication (this refers specifically to the agreement to call upon the governments that are hosting and/or funding external radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe to cease such hosting and funding).
Second, that the focus on political freedom of expression, to the exclusion of all other forms, suggests that once people/the media can express themselves freely with regards to politics, that all good things will flow from there. But is this true? Or is it possible that this diminution of freedom of expression perpetuates the type of logic and thinking that has informed and controlled our understanding of freedom of expression for decades, including the pre-Independence era???
Zanus social engineering project
Czeslaw Milosz, a poet writing within the constraints of Polish post-war communism, argues that individuals and human societies grow and discover new dimensions, often unconsciously and unintentionally, by direct experience. This experience, he says, is influenced by the direct pressure of History with a capital H, revealing itself through events and evidence of things that have happened; for example, invasions by foreign armies, or ruined cities.
But experience is also affected by things that are less tangible and sometimes intensely personal; for example, a detail of architecture in the shaping of a landscape.
Individuals, located within a constantly flowing stream of history, are bumped by political, social, cultural and personal experiences, all of which gel together to define their sense of self and identity in a place and time their history. This contributes to who they are in the world and how they function in their unique contexts.?
Zanu (PF), a party obsessed with political dominance and political survival, understands this construction of self identity and experience all too well. Its efforts during the 1980s to establish a one-party state extended a nationalist agenda that had began during the liberation war, and went on to lean heavily on legislation left behind by the Rhodesian Front government.
Shortly after the Rhodesian Fronts Unilateral Declaration of Independence on 11 November 1965, freedom of expression and communication was sharply curtailed with propaganda and censorship; in fact, the Censorship and Entertainments Act still used by the Government of Zimbabwe today dates back to 1967.
This suppressed information in Rhodesia led the Johannesburg Sunday Times to scathingly describe the white Rhodesian population as the most brain-washed group in modern times, but, as Zanu (PF) demonstrates, political brain-washing goes hand in hand with a desire to retain absolute political control.?? Zanu (PF) showed its true colours very early: Perceived threats to Zanu (PF)s political dominance from Joshua Nkomo and ZAPU were brutally dealt with during the Gukurahundi of the 1980s, and misinformation and misperceptions about this time still have currency today.
Shortly after this, Edgar Tekere (Zanu (PF)s former secretary general, cast out of the party in 1988 and lambasted for straying from the revolutionary path) formed the Zimbabwe Unity Movement (ZUM) and challenged Mugabe at the 1990 polls. State television adverts with the same menacing overtones so familiar to Zimbabweans today portrayed the choice between Zanu (PF) and ZUM as a matter of life and death:??
One way to die
In one advert shown on national television, the shattering of glass in a car accident was followed by a voice coldly warning, This is one way to die. Another is to vote ZUM. Don’t commit suicide, vote Zanu (PF) and live.’?? All of these are precursors to the intense social engineering programme that Zanu (PF) sought to refine after its defeat at the constitution referendum polls in 2000. This programme encompasses both the formal visible structures of information and expression (e.g. the media), as well as the less tangible cultural aspects that are equally as critical to achieving the partys primary aims.??
Zanu (PF) has determinedly set out to rewrite and remodel History, with a capital H as patriotic nationalism, what Terence Ranger calls Patriotic History. Patriotic History seeks to proclaim the continuity of the Zimbabwean revolutionary tradition; it resents disloyal questions and considers any history that is not political or useful to the partys main political objectives to be irrelevant.
Raftopolous explains:??In this project the media and selected intellectuals have been used to provide a continuous and repetitive ideological message, in order to set the parameters of a stable national identity conducive to the consolidation of the ruling party.??
Zanu (PF)s domestic agenda has no qualms about resorting to crude measures when rhetoric and propaganda fail: overt intimidation, direct threats, assault, torture and imprisonment. As a result, the Zanu (PF) project has been carefully contextualised for regional audiences within an anti-imperialist narrative, one aimed at securing the support of regional powers, and very importantly, to limit regional criticism of local human rights abuses:??
By doing this, the regime has been able to represent the fundamental human and civic rights questions placed on the Zimbabwean political agenda since the 1990s, as marginal, elite-focused issues, driven by Western interests, and having little relation to urgent problems of economic redistribution. As a result, many radical nationalists in the wider African continent and the diaspora have averted their gaze from Harares repressive domestic policies.??
In 2008, Zanu (PF)s use of political violence was so extreme that it threatened to derail its regional gains: The party was forced to deal with fact that it had undermined its own claims to sovereignty and legitimacy, and faced deeper isolation not only from the West, but in the region if it refused further regional intervention.
That regional intervention led to the power-sharing government we have today, a period of time that will undoubtedly be recorded in future texts as a significant milestone in Zimbabwes History, with a capital H.?? But what of the more intangible social and cultural elements that are equally important in shaping our understanding of our place in history where human societies also grow through their relationship to memory, culture, beauty and experience?
This is the domain of the personal and the creative imagination: in Zimbabwe it is a space where artists, writers, poets and playwrights operate at the interface of culture and politics, sometimes exposing the perhaps less visible and less measurable, yet vital ways in which artists continue to contest culturally specific notions of politics.?? Zanu (PF) has sought to control this space too: its Patriotic History agenda has been solidly backed up by a profound cultural nationalist project where art and culture have been cynically exploited to popularise Patriotic History.
Dissenting voices have been silenced using an arsenal of repressive legislation, including the Rhodesian Censorship and Entertainment Act, to block out any narratives that might undermine or question the veracity and purpose of Patriotic History.??
The case of Owen Maseko
On 25 March 2010, Owen Masekos provocative exhibition of paintings, graffiti and 3-D installations was opened at Bulawayos National Gallery. His work focused primarily on the Gukurahundi era, but also challenged Zanu (PF)s political oppression in recent years.
Both he and Voti Thebi, the gallerys director, were arrested the following day and the exhibition closed to the public. Maseko was charged with violating Section 33 of the Criminal Law and Codification Act, a law that punishes anyone who insults or undermines the authority of the President.
He was also charged with Section 42(2): Causing offence to persons of a particular race, religion, etc.:??Any person who publicly makes any insulting or otherwise grossly provocative statement that causes offence to persons of a particular race, tribe, place of origin, colour, creed or religion, intending to cause such offence or realising there is a real risk or possibility of doing so, shall be guilty of causing offence to persons of a particular race, tribe, place of origin, colour, creed or religion, as the case may be.??
Both these crimes carry a penalty of either a fine or a prison sentence of up to one year in jail.??On 27 August 2010 a special government order was issued formally prohibiting the exhibition. According to the Gazette, Masekos work has been censored for a very specific reason:??(1) The showing of DVD clips showing effigies, words and paintings on the walls of the Bulawayo National Art Gallery by Maseko prohibited.
And?(2) The exhibition at the Bulawayo Art Gallery of effigies, paintings and words written on the walls portraying the Gukurahundi era as a tribal-based event and as such is prohibited. ??It also stated that the art was banned in accordance with Sections 13(1) and (2) of the Censorship and Entertainment Act, which stipulates the different circumstances under which materials can be banned
(2) A publication, picture, statue or record shall be deemed to be undesirable if it or any part thereof?(a) is indecent or obscene or is offensive or harmful to public morals; or?(b) is likely to be contrary to the interests of defence, public safety, public order, the economic interests of the state or public health.??
Windows papered over
There is nothing in the Act that prohibits art that is a tribal-based event. It has to be noted that the Board of Censors is allied to the Ministry of Home Affairs, and it is a point of intense concern that this bizarre censorship instruction was issued under the inclusive government from within the Ministry of Home Affairs co-chaired by Theresa Makoni (MDC-T).
Makoni subsequently told SW Radio Africa that she was unaware of the order issued by Melusi Matshiya, her permanent secretary, banning the work, but she has said little more on the subject.??Masekos problems did not end there. The state subsequently tried to change their initial charges to Section 31 of the Criminal Law and Codification Act, which prohibits publishing or communicating false statements prejudicial to the State.
Section 31 is far more serious, carrying either a fine or a prison sentence of up to twenty years in jail if Maseko were to be found guilty. On 13 September 2010, the state was forced to drop all the charges against Maseko after his lawyer argued that, there is no procedure which allows the state to substitute a less serious charge for a more serious charge. The matter is not entirely resolved, because the state is still contemplating bringing the new serious charges against Maseko and his art is still banned.
In fact, the National Gallery in Bulawayo has had its main ground floor hall closed to the public, its windows papered over, while the exhibition is held in-situ as evidence in the trial.? Masekos case is a clear illustration of what happens when art and freedom of expression come together to challenge Zanu (PF)s Patriotic History project.
It reveals how the rule of law in Zimbabwe has been crafted and subverted to support the Zanu (PF) partys ideological priorities. The evolution of Masekos case demonstrates that the Zanu (PF) party remains deeply committed to its social engineering programme, regardless of the GPA.??
Gukurahundi, a tribal-based event
Ordinary Zimbabweans outside Matabeleland know very little about what actually happened during the Gukurahundi, and what they do know has been carefully controlled by the Zanu (PF) government that was in power at the time.?? During the conflict, the state-controlled media consistently portrayed the minority ZAPU party as the aggressors, blaming them for instigating an insurgence against the government, supposedly out of anger that they lost the 1980 elections. At the same time, Zanu (PF) and all the government security forces were portrayed as righteous defenders of independence, democracy, and law and order.
The state-controlled media categorised The Enemy in sweeping generalised terms, leading to a dangerous perception amongst Zimbabweans outside Matabeleland that part of the responsibility for the troubles in this region rested with a troublesome civilian population. Although such representations rarely explicitly alluded to ethnicity; they were underlain by an implicit ethnic explanation due to the association between the Matabeleland region, ZAPU and ZIPRA.
The Zanu government and state-controlled media blurred distinctions between the armed dissidents, the civilians among whom they lived, and ZAPU supporters. All these groups were marked subversive and dangerous, and all of them were concentrated within the Ndebele region of Matabeleland.
The frequent blurring of political, ethnic, regional and insurgent categories in the media played an important role in the popular understandings of the violence as tribal in regions outside Matabeleland.? – To be continued next week.
This article was originally published on www.sokwanele.com.
Post published in: Opinions