JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 2 Mar 2005

Human Rights in Zimbabwe: Presentation

Chairman

The next item on the agenda is human rights in Zimbabwe and the related Commission document COM (2005)18 which was forwarded to the joint committee by the Sub-Committee on EU Scrutiny for information. Approximately three weeks ago we had a discussion with the Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs and for some reason that discussion centred on Zimbabwe. I was struck by the interest of so many of our members in the issue and, therefore, when this came across our desk we felt the committee should explore the issue.

Before I ask the members of the delegation to commence their presentation, I draw their attention to the fact that while members of this committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not extend to them. Committee members are reminded of the parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I welcome Mr. Furlong to the committee. Our format is simple. Mr. Furlong may make his presentation and that will be followed by questions from members of the committee.

Mr. Andrew Furlong

Thank you on behalf of this delegation from both the Irish section of Amnesty International and, in particular, the Zimbabwe group within the Irish section. The Zimbabwe group was founded two years ago and is made up of people like myself, Irish citizens born and bred in Ireland but who worked for a sustained period in Zimbabwe, 11 years in my case, and Zimbabwean nationals some of whom have come to Ireland as asylum seekers and others under other categories. We also have in our delegation a full-time employee of the Irish section of Amnesty International. We sincerely thank the committee for the opportunity to join it today to discuss what can be done in a practical way to make a difference within Zimbabwe and in terms of Zimbabwe's relationship with the European Union.

With me today is Lloyd Mudiwa, a journalist who has been in Ireland for two years. He had to flee Zimbabwe because of intimidation and the closure of the Daily News, an independent newspaper for which he worked and which was closed by the Zimbabwean Government. Neltah Chadamoyo is a Zimbabwean citizen who has been pursuing academic studies in Ireland for the past two years approximately. Michael Hanly is an Irish citizen who worked in Zimbabwe as a teacher and in training and development for approximately three and a half years. Kieran Clifford is the activism and outreach officer of the Irish section of Amnesty International and has been in Ireland for approximately two years. She is an Irish citizen. I worked as an Anglican priest in Zimbabwe for 11 years.

An apology has been received from the Brian O'Driscoll or D. J. Carey of our team, Anne Marlborough, who has been unable to come. She served Amnesty International as a lobbyist during the period of the Irish Presidency of the European Union and would be the most qualified of all of us. We regret her absence today.

Amnesty International is a little over 40 years old. Seán McBride was its chairman for many years in the early days. The association has two million members in 140 countries. In Ireland we have 23,000 members who look to people such as those on this committee for courageous leadership.

Amnesty's vision is for human rights for the whole world within a moral universe underpinned by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. I noted on the European Union website that the most recent update on Zimbabwe was on 20 December 2004. That is a challenge to us because not only has it not been updated since some significant events, but under the section "recent news" it says "no news". Those who follow the Zimbabwean situation carefully and closely are aware, for example, that since 20 December 2004, elections have been announced for 31 March 2005, the African Union has produced its report into human rights violations at the time of the presidential elections in 2000 and the Zimbabwean Government has produced its response to that report. There is a challenge in this for this committee and the European Union External Affairs Committee to bring the information up to date on Zimbabwe and to put their heads together to see what can be done in a practical way. We have a number of requests for the committee which we feel are potentially practical ways that should be given serious consideration.

Our submission mentions a number of different channels within the European Union, for example, ECHO and the European initiative for democratisation and human rights where Zimbabwe has been involved and a focus of European work. We realise those bodies exist and are channels for this committee's work. We also recognise the significance of the UN Human Rights Commission and the possibilities for the European Union to bring pressure through those channels for change in Zimbabwe and the upholding of human rights.

We face by-elections here in Meath and Kildare. If Zimbabwean conditions existed in Meath and Kildare, we would be horrified and scandalised. If we knew that half of the people running in the by-election were not sleeping in their own homes and were afraid to walk the streets of Navan or Kildare for fear of being murdered and that they had to escape out of the county and lived in seclusion, we would take the situation seriously. If a political party felt it had a stronghold in a particular residential area and it terrorised the community and informed it that it could discover whether people had voted for it, and if it had cut the tongue from a member of that community to show how serious it was in its intimidation, we would take the situation seriously. If members of an army security group accompanying a transfer of money to a bank in the Meath or Kildare constituency attacked and beat up somebody erecting posters for one of the smaller political parties and a Garda car came on the scene and passed by without stopping or reporting the incident, we would be shocked and appalled. These are some of the situations that occur in Zimbabwe.

It is easy, because Zimbabwe is so far away from us, to forget that we live in one moral universe and that the same human rights are an indivisible component of that universe. Naturally events closer to home are more shocking, but what is happening in Zimbabwe is shocking and requires a moral commitment and serious reflection on our part.

I wish to make two points before I hand over to the rest of the delegation. If things go very badly in the lead-up to the elections or following the elections, there may be a surge of asylum seekers. We have met some remarkable people here in Dublin who are human rights defenders — lawyers and others. They are people of the very highest calibre, not perhaps Mandelas but still people of very great calibre and great courage, who are putting their lives and those of their families at risk. If they were to arrive in Dublin in the next month or two, I do not feel happy about the conditions under which they would be living as asylum seekers in Ireland or indeed in other parts of the European Union. If there was a Mandela and he arrived in one of the countries of the European Union, would we not feel somewhat ashamed at the circumstances and conditions under which he would be forced to live? One of the issues, apart from internal issues within Zimbabwe, is how the European Union will treat with much greater respect people who have already suffered considerably and who have no right to be asked to suffer more when they come as asylum seekers.

There is also the wider issue of fair trade. While we look to countries like Zimbabwe having a brighter future in the long term, part of the conditions for that brighter future depend on how the European Union works towards justice in issues of trade. I ask the committee to note those two issues as well as the human rights violations within Zimbabwe itself, which the delegation will now speak about.

For those members who have the submission in front of them, we will move to page 2, under the heading of the key human rights issues for Amnesty's campaigning. I will ask Ms Kieran Clifford to speak on the first two issues.

Ms Kieran Clifford

I thank the committee for hosting the delegation today. Amnesty is appreciative of the committee's time. The first issue I will address is to do with the NGO Act and human rights defenders which is of particular relevance to Amnesty. Last December legislation was passed in Zimbabwe requiring all NGOs to register with a government-appointed NGO council. This council intimidated and threatened NGOs working on the ground. The groups targeted in particular are those working on human rights and governance. Foreign NGOs have been banned, as has foreign funding for domestic NGOs. The thriving NGO community in Ireland and the mass of services which the NGO community provides to Irish citizens is very similar to the NGO community that existed in Zimbabwe. This has been completely undermined and demolished by this legislation. It is quite worrying and in many instances the provision of aid in the form of health care and poverty reduction, for instance, cannot now be provided because the NGOs are not permitted to operate in Zimbabwe. This is a very worrying development. The NGO Act has not yet been signed but is being used as a further threat to the remaining NGO community in Zimbabwe.

The second issue is to do with human rights violations in the March elections. There is growing concern about the elections. A recent statement by the South African Government gives its view that there is sufficient evidence that the elections will be free and fair. Amnesty knows from reports coming out of Zimbabwe over several years that this is not the case. Intimidation continues to reign. There are threats of violence and the application of violence to election workers happens on a regular basis, although there has been a reduction in the incidence of violence in the past few months.

As a member of the southern African community, Zimbabwe has signed up to election norms that call for good governance and the application of democratic procedures. However, they are making a mockery of these election norms and of the attempts by other African Union members and SADC members who are diligent in their implementation of these democratic mechanisms.

Zimbabwe signed up to the Mauritius protocols last year. These were applied by all the SADC countries. Zimbabwe has failed on two issues in respect of the upcoming elections. An international team of legal experts was to come to the country 90 days prior to the election to review the register and the procedures for individual voter registration but this did not happen. In terms of international elections observer delegations, the invitations are meant to be sent out 30 days prior to the elections but they were sent only last week. These are very worrying developments in terms of these issues.

Amnesty International will issue two reports which will be sent to all members of this committee. The first report will be issued in the week beginning 14 March. This is a briefing document on the elections. The second report will be issued in the week beginning 21 March. This is a global report on human rights defenders in which Zimbabwe features prominently. This report will also be sent to the committee.

Chairman

The delegation referred to the treatment of asylum seekers in the European Union. Is it the delegation's contention that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has treated asylum seekers from Zimbabwe badly? Has there been mistreatment by Ireland?

Senator McDowell raised at our last meeting the relationship of Zimbabwe with South Africa. Should our attention or focus be on the Mbeki government and trying to influence them to improve the situation in Zimbabwe?

Mr. Michael Hanly

I will deal with the issue of asylum. Migration controls in the EU are tightening, yet there is an increase in the number of asylum seekers coming from Zimbabwe. There is a danger that genuine cases will not be able to find asylum in the EU.

The figures for Ireland for last year were that only 18 in the first instance were given asylum and 23 more were allowed on appeal. A large number — 23 — were excluded in the first round. It is our contention that it might be difficult for Zimbabweans to find asylum here. Countries such as the UK are tightening up their asylum and migration procedures. With the situation in Zimbabwe worsening, we are afraid that asylum seekers will not be able to find asylum.

Chairman

Have there been incidences here of people applying for asylum who have been sent back to Zimbabwe? Is the delegation making the case that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has ignored the plight of those who are genuine refugees?

Ms Neltah Chadamoyo

The issue we are trying to bring across is that Zimbabweans require a visa to come to Ireland. As the nearest Irish consulate is in South Africa, one cannot make one's case in person with the officials. It depends on how well versed one is with the requirements for a visa application. It does not matter whether one is seeking asylum. In most cases I do not think I have seen a form which asks if you are seeking asylum. Zimbabwe makes it illegal for Zimbabweans to seek asylum. If you fail to be granted asylum, you will be imprisoned on your return to Zimbabwe. We are asking the committee to consider the matter and determine the best way to accommodate Zimbabweans when they come to Ireland seeking help or shelter.

Chairman

Returning to what Senator McDowell said, while we have been given the numbers granted on appeal, we need to know the numbers who have applied before making any determination. I ask about South Africa and its relationship with Zimbabwe.

Mr. Lloyd Mudiwa

South Africa appears to have already taken a position. The South African Minister for Foreign Affairs has indicated that conditions might be right for a free and fair election. We are saying that is not the position and the playing field is not level. Unless South Africa condemns the situation, nobody else will. This leaves it up to the EU to try to influence South Africa.

Deputy Quinn

I welcome the delegation. I am not sure how much help we can give. In addition to what the witnesses have already told us perhaps they could advise how we might help.

I make two brief observations, which may be superficial, based on what we have heard here and on what I have read in the newspapers in so far as we can get accurate data and information. Is there a certain pessimism, fatigue and fear within the MDC for all the reasons set out here and elsewhere that the result of the elections is determined before it starts? Owing to the massive intimidation which was extensively documented in the presidential elections, this contest appears to be over before it begins. The note given to the committee implies that the MDC will not be very active as a result of all the trouble to date and what ZANU PF can do and has done in the past. The so-called atmosphere created by 31 March will convey to an external observer an impression that the elections are relatively free and fair because the level of intimidation this time around will be less than the last time and the memory of the last election is still fresh.

Given the repressions already imposed by the Zimbabwean Government, I am not sure what this committee can do. If the assembly and national Parliament elections result in a ZANU PF majority, clearly the pressure to seek political asylum among MDC supporters and activists will rise. In that context a report in today's newspapers indicated the level of political asylum seeking across the European Union has dropped in absolute numbers in the past two years. Would it be right to assume that we might see a peak in the numbers from Zimbabwe seeking asylum in Europe, not just in this country? Should we inform the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to be prepared in the months of April, May and June for an increase in the numbers of people from Zimbabwe seeking political asylum? These people may cross the border to South Africa, as we have no consular presence in Harare as far as I am aware, and present at our embassy in Pretoria. We should put our people on notice to prepare for this in a way that does not suggest we are opening the door to invite applicants per se but to be sensitive of the probability of this happening. Would the witnesses regard it as a probability or a possibility that a negative outcome to these elections, in other words a consolidation of ZANU PF, is likely to lead to more repression and therefore more asylum seeking from MDC supporters?

Mr. Furlong

One of the reasons we are so glad to have this meeting today is that it gives us more time to think ahead about the different scenarios the Deputy has outlined. I will address the first question. As members are probably aware, the MDC has stated it is entering these elections under protest and without prejudice. That is to say its members are not happy that the playing field is level. They are concerned that already a very significant rigging of the voters' register has taken place and figures indicate that up to two million votes may have already been cast in preparation for the elections on 31 March. It is clear to many people that President Mugabe is absolutely determined to stay in power.

We had wanted to ask whether the committee regarded it as significant to ask its European colleagues to press to have this election postponed. In other words, would there be any benefit in pursuing that line of thought particularly because the legal team of the SADC community, to which Ms Clifford referred, did not have the opportunity to visit Zimbabwe and make its own assessments in terms of the voting register and a range of allied issues to do with the independence of the commission to oversee the elections? Is it worth giving serious consideration to whether the elections should be postponed?

On the issue of asylum seeking, it would be worth alerting the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. In many other parts of Africa a lack of preparedness, for instance in the case of Rwanda, has led to untold tragedy and loss of life. With our experience in Europe of the affairs of Africa, we have no excuse for not planning ahead and considering alternative scenarios. Apart from the question of whether the Iraq war was morally right in the first place, the lack of thinking about the post-war era is one of the chief criticisms. In so far as we are asking members of the committee to think seriously about Zimbabwe, thinking ahead is part of our agenda today.

Chairman

The initial presentation indicated the delegation had a number of requests. The potential postponement of the election is one of them. What are the others?

Ms Clifford

Amnesty International has a number of recommendations arising from our research. We would like the committee, the Irish Government and the EU to call on the Government of South Africa to take a much stronger public stance on Zimbabwe. South Africa has more influence on Zimbabwe than any other country and as such can make a difference. We would like to see lobbying of the African Union and the other regional players, Uganda and Nigeria, to call for greater pressure to be brought to bear on Zimbabwe by its neighbours. We would like to see support by the EU for the capacity development of the African Union in terms of governance and democratic mechanisms. I ask Mr. Hanly to deal with the previous meetings held.

Mr. Hanly

The UN Commission on Human Rights will meet soon for a six-week period. This will represent an opportunity for the EU to ask the UN Commission on Human Rights for a motion on Zimbabwe. This is one of our main requests. Last year the motion on Zimbabwe ended up being a no-action one and so the UN Commission on Human Rights was unable to act effectively. The committee should use its influence on EU governments to ensure the matter is on the agenda during the Luxembourg Presidency.

I would like to pick up on Ms Clifford's comments about the African Union, which has produced a report on the human rights situation in Zimbabwe. The report, which has been discussed by the AU, will be made public shortly. Its publication will provide an opportunity for the EU, through various channels such as the New Partnership for Africa's Development, the Southern African Development Community and the African Union, to increase the respect for human rights in Zimbabwe.

The Irish section of Amnesty International is asking the members of the joint committee to raise the issue of Zimbabwe every time they meet representatives of African governments. The issue should be on the agenda when EU governments meet African governments.

Senator McDowell

I would like to discuss the possibility of bringing influence to bear. There is a central difficulty in that regard, although I may think it is more important than it is. I ask the delegation to give its views on the matter. I sometimes get the impression that when matters of this nature are debated in Europe, many ordinary black Africans resent it to some extent. They are not pleased when white former colonial powers in Europe get excited, perhaps not for the best of reasons, about what is happening in a democratic or quasi-democratic country.

When President Mugabe travels in southern Africa or elsewhere in Africa, one is struck by the warm reception he generally receives. Crowds have applauded him on the streets of Johannesburg and Maputo and in Namibia. To what extent does the average black Zimbabwean regard European interest as being unwarranted interference or useful influence?

Mr. Mudiwa

I can answer that question. The average Zimbabwean would not have a problem with Mugabe being put in check. Every Zimbabwean believes that Mugabe is undemocratic and basically a dictator. We have come to Ireland because, as a former colony of the UK, it has had a similar history to Zimbabwe. It is easy for Mugabe to say that the British are still interested in controlling us. Ireland can say, as a country that has a similar history to Zimbabwe, that what is happening in Zimbabwe is wrong. We need people who take a firm stance by stating clearly that certain things are wrong.

Senator McDowell

How did Mr. Mudiwa feel when President Mugabe went to Johannesburg and Pretoria six months ago and was well received on the streets?

Mr. Mudiwa

It was all staged. The reception he is given in such places is not genuine. The largest trade union in South Africa, COSATU, is arranging demonstrations as we speak. It is planning to blockade Zimbabwe's borders with South Africa, for example. It is working with many civic groups in South Africa and neighbouring countries in southern Africa. The receptions referred to by the Senator are propaganda exercises.

Senator McDowell

I read an interesting statement by COSATU, which followed a failed visit to Harare by the organisation some time ago. COSATU's position contrasts with the official attitude of the South African Government, which has quietly tolerated the Mugabe regime. Does the delegation feel that the South African Government could apply serious pressure and bring about real change if it wanted to?

Ms Chadamoyo

South Africa can do a great deal to bring about change in Zimbabwe, but it has not done much to date. Zimbabwe is importing a great deal of electricity and other goods from South Africa, which is gaining financially from such trade. I do not know whether that is why the South African Government is not really willing to push for change in Zimbabwe. Most companies which were located in Zimbabwe have moved to South Africa. Zimbabwe helped the ANC when its members needed help and shelter during the apartheid era in South Africa. It gave asylum to those who were seeking it. As the President of South Africa has a special and unique relationship with the President of Zimbabwe, he will not tell his friend that what is wrong unless pressure is put on him to do so. Much can be done to facilitate change if pressure is brought to bear from Ireland, which is a former colony of Britain.

South Africa has given refugee status to approximately 45 Zimbabweans. Many asylum seekers from that country are turned down by the South African Government on the grounds that things are not as bad as they seem in Zimbabwe. Approximately 2,000 people are deported back to Zimbabwe from South Africa each week. The matter is being passed to and fro and not much progress is being made. We need to put more pressure on South Africa, perhaps by trying to involve Botswana, which has been vocal about its stance on Zimbabwe. Botswana is encountering the same problems as South Africa, but it is more open than South Africa to accepting the reality of what is happening in Zimbabwe.

Mr. Furlong

I would like to respond to Senator McDowell's first point about the discussions at EU level about human rights violations in African countries by referring to two remarks I made earlier. If we are to have credibility when we talk about issues of justice, it seems to me that our discussions about human rights violations in African countries should take place in the context of discussions about justice issues, such as fair trade, which affect people in such countries as well as people in Europe. For example, we should assess whether asylum seekers and their families are being given the fairest and most dignified treatment possible, in line with best practice.

Deputy D. Wallace

I welcome the delegation. I spoke on behalf of the EU at an African development community meeting some years ago. I had an informal talk with the Foreign Minister who was present at the meeting. There is very little access to Zimbabwe. Not only does President Mugabe threaten people within Zimbabwe but he threatens people outside it as well. One might not always be told the truth when one has meetings with representatives of other African countries, but at least one can talk to such people. That is not the case in Zimbabwe.

We will be as supportive of the delegation's cause as we can, but I am under no illusions about the challenge we face in that regard. The difficulties in Zimbabwe are not encountered in many other African countries. The kid glove approach of the African development community at the meeting to which I referred was unacceptable to me. The trend of the meeting was that the community did not intend to tread on any toes. The "softly, softly" approach they advocated was not working. The committee will be glad to support the delegation in any way it can.

Chairman

We will have to conclude. After we have dealt with this matter procedurally, it will be referred to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, the remit of which extends to this area to a greater extent than the remit of this committee. I note the document that was forwarded to this committee by the sub-committee on EU scrutiny. I note that agreement on a document concerning measures against Zimbabwe, COM (2005) 18, was reached at a recent meeting of the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council. The committee is aware that the measures against Zimbabwe have been extended for 12 months. The text of a letter to be sent to the President of Zimbabwe was agreed at the Council meeting. A copy of the text has been circulated to the members of this committee. I propose to support the text agreed by the Council and to forward a copy of it, along with a copy of the presentation made at today's meeting, to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs for its information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I propose that we take a formal look at the delegation's requests. The committee will make a recommendation at next week's meeting about the requests it thinks it can realistically and practically support. We will do that over the next week or so.

I am not hopeful that we can persuade the EU to prevent the Zimbabwean elections scheduled for 31 March. We will take your questions on board. I have spoken to Mr. Hanly about the matter previously and the members have raised the valid question of what we can do. You are asking yourselves the same question. We intend to look at the matter this week and revert to the members next week to make a recommendation and try to influence the outcome as much as we possibly can.

Mr. Hanly

The committee will be able to build on the commitment the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, made in the Seanad recently. He said the Government would take up the issue of human rights in general and raise the specific case of Roy Bennett, an opposition Member of Parliament who has been very unjustly imprisoned. The Minister of State said the channel of the General Affairs and External Relations Council would be used to this end. A meeting of the Council will take place quite soon and the concerns in question can be raised then.

Chairman

The committee has also raised the matter with the Minister for Foreign Affairs who has taken a relatively strong line on it. We will update the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, before he attends the Council meeting.

Mr. Mudiwa

Senator McDowell asked earlier whether black people would have a problem with the raising of these issues by a western country. It is important to be even-handed and this can be accomplished by raising the cases of ruling party members of the Zimbabwean Parliament who have been arrested by the government. They fell out of favour and are being tortured, which is a matter the Irish Government could raise as a human rights issue. If they have committed crimes, they should be tried through the normal judicial system.

Chairman

Mr. Hanly touched on that to a certain extent with reference to any potential motion to be passed by the UN. It is an interesting point and one we will explore over the next week. It may or may not have ramifications in the context of what has been said and may fall to be included.

Deputy Allen

The delegates should know that our colleagues left due to a vote and for no other reason.

Chairman

I thank the witnesses for attending.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.45 p.m. and adjourned at 4.55 p.m. sine die.