Chihuri got it all wrong

Biti had, while delivering a lecture in the UK, complained that service chiefs had demonstrated their brazen bias towards Zanu (PF) once again by attending the party’s recent annual conference in Gweru as delegates.

Chihuri then took advantage of a police Christmas church service in Harare to berate Biti for saying so, and lamely tried to justify service chiefs’ presence—which he vowed would continue in the future—on the basis that they had fought for Zimbabwe’s independence.

He said: “We are part and parcel of the revolution. We cannot be divorced from that revolution; those who are thinking of leading this country without respecting those who fought for it must stop dreaming”. He also lamely attempted to have us believe that, as service chiefs, they should go wherever the President goes. The Zanu (PF) conference is a private event and service chiefs have no obligation to be there. They should only attend national events such as Heroes’ Day and Independence Day.

Of course, most of the utterances he made are not new. We have heard these pronouncements from service chiefs since 2002 when Vitalis Zvinavashe, then head of the military, talked of Zimbabwean leadership being a straight-jacket, albeit with different versions.

But Chihuri, just like the other generals, ought to be disabused of this very wrong way of reasoning things out. Nobody has said Chihuri or any other service chief should not defend the revolution. What is wrong is the platform they are using to do it.

As Biti says, they are public servants, and Zimbabwean law makes it criminal for them to be engaged in active politics, or, worse still, to openly back one party. As we move towards the next election, this is very important. Zimbabweans have had enough of the police chief’s selective application of the law.

Chihuri and his colleagues ought to be told in no uncertain terms that respect for the liberation struggle is not their preserve. They should avoid talking as though they are the only ones who contributed towards freeing Zimbabwe.

We are not a mouthpiece of any political party, and do not intend to become one. However, just what is it that makes the likes of Chihuri think that if people vote for any party other than Zanu (PF), they are selling away the country? Who are they to decide what the people of Zimbabwe should do or not do? If they want to be Zanu (PF) activists, people like Chihuri should just quit their jobs and apply to become full-time political commissars. We challenge them to do that and see if anyone will complain.

In this issue we highlight yet another incident of the ZRP’s acute bias. In Masvingo, the MDC-T was recently denied permission to hold a rally on the basis that they had not applied properly, yet Zanu (PF) held a rally without applying. There are several other cases whereby Zanu (PF)’s opponents are denied freedom of association and assembly yet Chihuri’s party enjoys that without restraint.

Zimbabwe is not a one-party state, but even if it was, the office of the Commissioner General should be a neutral one.