THIS is the last of a two-part series in which BISHOP TREVOR E. C. MANHANGA, Presiding Bishop of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Zimbabwe, writing in his personal capacity, looks at the role of religion and culture in constitution-making and why the process should be owned and controlled by Zimbabweans.
RELIGION plays a very important role in shaping our ideas on democracy and human rights. Vinoth Ramchandra, speaking of the role of religion in shaping democracy and human rights contrasts the different outcomes of the French Revolution and the American Revolution.
He relates how Alexis de Tocqueville, a young French aristocrat, sent by his government in 1831 to investigate the prison system in the US, travelled for seven months across America with this research question: Why had the French Revolution led to the reign of terror and the rise of Napoleon, while the American Revolution led to constitutional democracy?
His conclusion: "The simple answer is that in the small townships and church congregations of Puritan settlements in New England, respect for individual freedom, supported by social and economic equality, nurtured the roots of what we now know as democracy. It was not democracy that paved the way for the freedom of worship, but freedom of worship that made democracy possible."
Thus it is clear that religion plays a pivotal role in many societies and as such this role should be acknowledged and leveraged to contribute to nation building, unity and harmony.
Dr Maggay Melba Padilla, president and CEO of the Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture states: "Religion is important not mainly because it contributes to the common good or fosters respect for law and order or can support the nation-building projects of the state. More critically it relativises Caesar. There is a Lord higher than Caesar. That the Vatican for instance is a sovereign state stands as a sign that there exists a realm outside the rule of temporal powers. There is the sphere of individual conscience, where the human spirit, against all constraints asserts its will to be free."
The importance of religion in the constitution-making discourse therefore cannot be overstated. While there will be many who see religion as part of the problem rather than part of the solution, the fact is, the world over, the positive role played by religion is not only being recognised but harnessed.
Take the fields of health and education as an example. In sub-Saharan Africa, faith-based organisations provide more than 50 percent of all health and education services, including care for the HIV and Aids infected. Where the state fails, religious organisations pick the pieces. It can be seen therefore that religious organisations are capable of mobilising society in a way that the state is not.
Religious organisations have done sterling work in the education and health sectors in Zimbabwe.
The organisations have also used their influence in mediating in armed conflicts. The civil war in the Sudan in 1972 saw the World Council of Churches and the All Africa Council of Churches broker a ceasefire between the feuding parties.
The British Quakers worked between the warring parties in the Nigerian civil war of 1967 - 1970. So while we must be aware of, and take cognisant of the negatives that have been done in the name of religion, it is clear that the positive aspects by far outweigh the negatives.
Most religions have at their core a concern for the people. For this reason religious communities in Zimbabwe must speak on the issue of economic empowerment.
As we consider the welfare and wellbeing of the people in this constitutional discourse, we must of necessity address poverty alleviation, and there can be no escaping economic empowerment.
One cannot talk about the economic empowerment of the people without discussing the "Twin Towers" of land reform and the indigenisation of the economy, two policies enacted by the Government to address economic empowerment of previously disadvantaged Zimbabweans.
In this regard we must recognise that the eradication of poverty is a key component of the redemptive message preached by so many religious groups. Central to this message for many religious orders is the rearranging of the economic fabric of society, whereby some people are doomed to perpetual poverty, while others are blessed with lives of prosperity and opulence.
The religious community in Zimbabwe must therefore take the lead and advocate support of these two very important policies undertaken by Government to address the economic realities of so many Zimbabweans.
I will be the first to state that mistakes were made in the carrying out of the land reform exercise. The fact that mistakes were made, in no way renders this morally and socially just programme a failure. On the contrary, if we are able as a nation, to honestly take stock of our mistakes, take corrective measures where necessary, there is nothing to stop us from taking off and seeing this programme play a pivotal role in empowering previously marginalised people, while at the same time playing a key role in enhancing food security in the nation and in the region.
The same can be said of the recently gazetted law, which seeks to bring indigenous people into the mainstream economy. We must avoid the tendency to consistently throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water.
When Government embarked on the land reform exercise, rather than constructively engage each other as Zimbabweans we soon degenerated into rival camps and soon were unable to differentiate the wood from the trees.
We are not the first nation that enacts legislation to cater for the needs of its citizens and we will not be the last. For this reason let us not get caught up in the unhelpful downward spiral of self deprecation which serves the interest of no one else but those who are among us to serve their own interests.
While there can be heard a cacophony of voices in support of the protection of foreign direct investment and the rights of foreign investors, there must be an even greater crescendo of voices speaking in favour of the rights of indigenous Zimbabweans to economic empowerment.
One only needs to ask Zimbabweans based in the UK how the citizens of the UK, when faced with job layoffs due to the world economic meltdown in the past two years, did not bat an eyelid as they collectively said in unambiguous terms, "British jobs for British people".
One does not need to be a rocket scientist to deduce that the British people they were talking about are in actual fact the white British people, not the immigrants.
So, let us lay to rest the bogeyman that a law enacted by a sovereign nation to economically empower its previously disadvantaged indigenous people will lead to catastrophic flight of capital.
Just like any other nation on earth, we have a right to look after the interests of our people.
It would do us well therefore, to take a short trip down memory lane and consider something that was stated at the onset of the land reform programme here in Zimbabwe. While at the time it may have seemed to be just a propaganda slogan, the truth in the emancipating statement, "Land is the economy and the economy is land," cannot be overstated.
In fact, that statement should be embellished to state that not only is land the economy, but its contents as well!
The Constitution must forever entrench the rights of Zimbabweans to their land and the contents of the land (its mineral and natural resources).
The empowerment of the people therefore, through the land reform program and the indigenisation of the economy must not simply be enacted by way of an act of Parliament. It must be entrenched in the constitution. We cannot continue to show more concern for foreign capital while showing scant regard for the economic emancipation of the indigenous people of our nation. Yes, we need investment, but not at the expense of the empowerment of our people.
I firmly believe that we can have both, and the debate should therefore centre around how we can achieve this, not on whether we should be taking this step. We should be clear of the fact that, it is only outside interests who fear an intellectually astute, ideologically sound, and economically empowered Zimbabwe, who will continue to peddle the lie that by demanding control of land and our resources we run the risk of scaring away investors?
Why is it that these same people find no problem in investing in Libya (where there is no Western-style, multi-party democracy?) or in Saudi Arabia (where the Saudis are firmly in control of their oil resources?); in China (where the Chinese Communist Party is firmly in control, with no opposition parties represented at any level of government?)
Why is it that these same people raise merely a whimper, if that, when it comes to matters of human rights, the rule of law, freedom of expression in many of the countries into which they are currently pouring millions of dollars, yet when it comes to Zimbabwe suddenly there are, "bench marks" we must attain before they can invest?
How is it that millions of dollars can be found to pay for the Taliban in Afghanistan to stop fighting, and yet very little, if any, can be found for Zimbabweans who have decided to stop bickering and work together to develop their nation?
The double standards are so obviously glaring, and you need to be a fool not to see them.
It is against this backdrop that we must tell ourselves that there can be no better time than now, as we attain our 30th year of independence, to begin to act like a 30-year-old, and refuse to be treated like a child.
The sad truth is that we have what it takes to be assertive, but sadly too many times have shot ourselves in the foot. Do we need to still be failing to make full use of the diamonds in the Chiadzwa diamond fields, reported to be the richest diamond fields in the world?
Just look at what oil money has done for the Middle East, and you realise what a tragedy we have in our midst. Hopefully our political leaders will do what is right, what is moral, and bring order to this tragedy, so that in this our 30 years of independence we stop talking ad infinitum about turning around, but begin to take off.
Then it will not matter what hypocrites and those who practices double standards say or do -- we will be masters of our own destiny, and carry out programmes in the best interests of ourselves. We will go to the table no longer as beggars, bowl in hand, but equal partners, full of dignity, patriotism and national pride. It is possible, very possible.
The successful conclusion of the constitutional reform process will be the holding of a national referendum, followed by the holding of elections.
It is my hope that this time we will all have a sense of ownership and unity, and that the constitution presented to the people, reflecting their ideals and dreams, will be accepted by the vast majority.
It would be catastrophic if we arrived at this point only for the people to reject the draft as was done in 2000. For this reason the importance of the outreach programme and the collation of the views of the people must be done with the utmost integrity, to ensure the buy-in of the people.
Following a successful constitutional reform process, the acceptance of that draft by the people and its enactment by the legislature, we will then be faced with the prospect of conducting elections as a nation under a new constitutional dispensation.
Those elections will go a long way in determining our future as a nation, and we must all play our part to ensure that those elections will not divide us again. We need to hold elections whose results we will all accept and move on.
In this regard, we must not allow ourselves to think that the only elections that will be acceptable to all are "internationally supervised" elections.
Those who hold on to this totally erroneous view should only look at the debacle of the internationally arranged, sponsored and supervised elections in Afghanistan to realise that stolen and indeed fraudulent elections are not the preserve of African countries alone.
If the absolutely disgraceful election process witnessed in Afghanistan and carried out under the watchful eyes and involvement of the United Nations is anything to go by, then no right thinking person around the world, would be hoodwinked into allowing the United Nations to show their biasand penchant for a preferred outcome, and supervise any electoral process in their nation.
The deafening silence that followed the fraudulent Afghanistan elections on the part of those who feel it is their right to police the world under the pretext of ensuring democracy, good governance, the rule of law and the upholding of human rights is ample evidence of their down-right double standards.
Of necessity the next elections must be characterised by the robust contestation of ideas and ideologies, not merely the attacking of personalities or parties. The days of political mudslinging and protest as a means of getting elected must be over.
It is quite clear by now that many of our political leaders have nothing to offer the people by way of ideas.
This period following the elections of 2008 and the subsequent formation of the inclusive Government in 2009, have afforded the people of Zimbabwe a wonderful opportunity to see the capabilities of many of our political leaders, and test the policies of their respective parties.
In hindsight this period has been just what the doctor ordered for Zimbabweans. It has afforded the people an opportunity to see what some of these aspiring leaders are really like.
Some have blossomed and have shown that they have the welfare of the people at heart, and given their time and given adequate resources, they will play their part in building the Zimbabwe we all can be proud of.
Others have shown that they are mere charlatans waiting for the first available opportunity to enrich themselves at the expense of the people they are supposed to represent.
The electorate therefore, must be very circumspect in making sure they do not reward failures, truants, and those who clearly are boxing above their weight, by returning them into office.
All Africa 03-03-10
