Mbeki remains silent while Mugabe bashes lawyers and opposition

By Tererai Karimakwenda
09, May, 2007

As the point man appointed by African heads of State to mediate in the Zimbabwe crisis, the president of South Africa Thabo Mbeki is expected to be speaking strongly against the gross human rights violations of the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe. The special role he agreed to in Tanzania obliges him to at least criticise the ongoing brutal and lawless incidents, like the severe beating of lawyers by the police on Tuesday, when armed truckloads of police violently broke up a planned march by lawyers in Harare. But Mbeki has continued with his policy of “silent diplomacy” against mounting criticism at home and around the world.

Mbeki met with the Ghanaian president and current chairman of the African Union John Kufour on Tuesday in South Africa. Kufour talked about Zimbabwe, but Mbeki was mum as usual. This time critics say his silence after Tuesday’s events is not a continuation of “silent diplomacy”, but a loud declaration that such brutal acts against the legal profession in Zimbabwe are not enough to force even the slightest criticism of the Mugabe regime. Can such a man be expected to be neutral or fair in his approach to a solution for the problems next door? And are critics right to question his credibility?

Zimbabwean lawyer Sternford Moyo, who now heads the SADC Lawyers Association, believes there are several important reasons why Mbeki is obligated to speak out on the human rights abuses next door. He said it would have not have been possible to end apartheid in South Africa without pressure from the international community. Many countries spoke out against the system and South Africa benefited substantially from that. Moyo explained that SADC and the African Union both have charters that require member states to respect the rule of law. And Mbeki as the president of South Africa, which is signatory to these agreements, is obliged to ensure that other member states comply.

Moyo said Mbeki’s additional responsibility as the SADC mediator requires him to remain neutral, but stressed that there are situations which are repugnant and inimical to any resolution of a problem. The abuses in Zimbabwe are one such repugnant situation.