By Brian
Maregedze
The
Family & Religious Studies advanced levels paper one (November-December, 2021) has an interesting
question which reads, ‘To what extent do traditional leaders uphold good
governance?.’ The three keywords are, ‘upholding good governance’ since framing
of good governance is contested in legal, religious, and political spaces. The
first decade of Zimbabwe’s independence had the state mild, if not hostile to
traditional leaders due to colonial rule experiences, where some chiefs were
labelled collaborators in favour of the oppressive settler regime. However, the
Robert Mugabe led administration warmed up to traditional leaders around the
late 199os and this coincides with the rise of a formidable opposition, civil
society, and trade unionism critical of the government.
In the
early 1980s, traditional leaders were perceived as anti-nationalists since some
of them were arguably beneficiaries of the oppressive settler regime. Lazarus Nzarayebani,
then MP for Mutare South cited by Ranger (2001:47), said:
“At
Independence in 1980, we did revolutionarily so well. Ours was change; change
in administration of our public affairs and public lives… Some institutions
where necessary must simply be allowed to wither away. One of these
institutions might be chieftainship.”
Ironically,
the government, led by Robert Mugabe went on to pursue the same strategies of
incentivising traditional leaders, buying luxurious cars, making sure they have
access to electricity in their rural homes, among other ‘luxuries.’
Key
functions of traditional leaders as outlined by the constitution of Zimbabwe,
section 282 (1) are;
1.
promoting
and upholding the cultural values of their communities,
2.
facilitating development,
3.
administering communal lands.
4.
They are also charged with protecting the
environment,
5.
resolving disputes in their communities, and
exercising any other functions conferred or imposed on them by an act of
Parliament.
On the
other hand, traditional leaders are prohibited from doubling in partisan
politics by the constitution of the land, furthering interests of any political
party or cause.
In 1997,
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) listed characteristics of good
governance as including participation of citizens, rule of law, transparency,
responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity, accountability, and strategic
vision. Jeffrey Kurebwa uses three main lenses to account for good governance
by traditional leaders, that is;
1.
Advisory role to government and participation in the administrations of rural areas.
2.
Developmental role, complementing government’s efforts in mobilizing rural communities
in implementing developmental projects, sensitizing them on health issues such
as HIV/AIDS, promoting education, encouraging economic enterprises, inspiring
respect for the law and urging participation in the electoral process.
3.
Conflict resolution.
Some of
the traditional leaders who in the past have been on the spotlight for publicly
declaring their political party allegiance include Chief Fortune Charumbira.
More notable is a study undertaken by Rukuni (2015) in Bikita District confirming
that 94 percent of traditional leaders in the district were politically
aligned to the ruling ZANU-PF and were using their positions to punish those
who belonged to opposition political parties. Chief Serima from Gutu is also
known to have been critical of the constitution of Zimbabwe in regard to the
rights of chiefs in choosing a political leader of their choice. Chief
Serima believes it violates their individual rights. Therefore, it
remains a contested topic since constitutionally; it is prohibited for chiefs to
be partisan while they are some who have the full conviction that it is in
violation of their rights like any other citizen in Zimbabwe.
Image: Chief Fortune CharumbiraZimbabwe’s highly polarised political environment exacerbates the situation of traditional leaders with those who question government policies as they are
conveniently labelled opposition party mouth-pieces, sell-outs, traitors and,
in some cases, viewed as threats to national security. Chief Nhlanhlayemangwe
Ndiweni of Ntabazinduna belongs to those who are labelled negatively in state
narratives. To his supporters, he is viewed as a victim of the state for being
apolitical.
On another
note, traditional leaders also play a crucial role as custodians of culture by promoting the adherence of sacred days in rural areas, enforcing
matters relating to environmental and civic regulations. The Emmerson Mnangagwa
led administration has also faced criticisms from ‘fearless’ chiefs, such as
Chief Murinye for arguably not arresting corrupt politicians. However, the same Chief
Murinye arguably doubles in partisan politics, which shows that some chiefs
support ruling regimes. All in all, the extent to which traditional chiefs
uphold good governance becomes complex, especially in a polarised political
environment such as Zimbabwe.
For feedback,
email; bmaregedze@gmail.com
