Download is available until [expire_date]
  • Version
  • Download 131
  • File Size 366.77 KB
  • File Count 1
  • Create Date February 1, 2023
  • Last Updated February 1, 2023



Wednesday, 1st February, 2023

The National Assembly met at a Quarter-past Two o’clock p.m.


(THE HON. SPEAKER in the Chair)



THE HON. SPEAKER:  I have to inform the House that the 2023 calendars and diaries are ready for collection at the Public Relations Office 1; Pax House, Third Floor, North Wing.

An Hon. Member having been bending while another Hon. Member was speaking.

THE HON. SPEAKER: Order. Who is the Hon. Member bending there? Who is that Hon. Member! – [AN HON. MEMBER: Shumbamhini.] – Hon. Member, you should not be upstanding when another Hon. Member is presenting. Secondly, when you enter this august House you must do obeisance to the Chair. Thank you.



THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI) presented the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Amendment Bill [H. B. 15, 2022].

Bill read the first time.

Bill referred to Parliamentary Legal Committee.




Bill read the first time.

Bill referred to Parliamentary Legal Committee.



THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir. I move that Orders of the Day, Numbers 1 to 12 be stood over until Order of the Day Number 13 has been disposed of.

Motion put and agreed to.



HON. TOGAREPI: I move the motion standing in my name that a respectful address be presented to the President of Zimbabwe as follows: -

       May it please you, your Excellency the President.

       We, the Members of Parliament of Zimbabwe, desire to express our loyalty to        Zimbabwe and beg leave to offer our respectful thanks for the speech, which you have been pleased to address to Parliament.

HON. P. ZHOU: I second.

HON. TOGAREPI: Mr. Speaker, I am here to debate the State of the Nation Address by His Excellency the President, Cde E.D. Mnangagwa. The President raised very important issues when he presented the SONA to this House. Members would agree with me that when we went to the New Parliament Building, we saw a building that was done for the Parliament of Zimbabwe which is second to none if we look around Africa. It was well-done with a lot of expertise and space for Parliament. When we went there, I saw every Member of Parliament appreciating what the Government of Zimbabwe, through the assistance that we got from the Chinese Government - that this is good work. I hope every sector of this economy and Government will take a cue from what Government has done in coming up with this very important and prestigious building, our Parliament at Mt. Hampden.

The other issues that the President looked at include issues of social economic development. There has been a lot of improvement in the lives of our people since the new dispensation...

THE HON. SPEAKER: Members on my left, can you reduce your conversations to whispers.

HON. TOGAREPI: This has been seen through the implementation of the National Development Strategy One (1). We have seen a lot of movement towards economic development for our people. There has been a lot of development in many sectors, including road construction. We have seen mining developing and a lot of effort in agriculture. If you go around the country today with the good rains that we have received, there is a lot of agricultural production that is going on. This will reduce the amount of importation of food and more resources will then be allocated to economic development, which is very good for the growth of our economy.

The other thing that I also appreciated is what Government is doing at the moment, dealing with the inflation that was now destroying our currency and the buying power of our people was now compromised by – [HON. BITI: Uko Shumba, aiwa Mhofu dai masiya.] – Mr. Speaker, there is this gentleman – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – [HON. BITI: I thought uri shamwari yangu.] – Okay, Hon. Biti Mr. Speaker, yah, he is my friend but Hon. Biti thinks I am Shumba when I am a Mhofu and I get very worried.

THE HON. SPEAKER: Order, Hon. Biti you are a seasoned politician – [HON. BITI: Good afternoon Sir!] – No, I am not accepting that.

HON. TOGAREPI: Mr. Speaker, if you see the growth of foreign currency earnings of our country is an indication that there is a lot of economic activity and improved trade.  I call upon the people of Zimbabwe to support Government in an effort to increase production and manufacturing in our economy so that we can earn more income in terms of foreign currency so as to improve the economic development of our country. 

I also want to talk about the area where our Government has done a good job.  This is to do with the run-away parallel market rate that was causing untold suffering to our people.  Government came up with the gold coins which definitely stabilised our currency against the hard currencies.  There was a lot of pressure on the Zimbabwe dollar which after the coming in of the gold coin then stabilised.  Many people went for Christmas with a stable currency which improved the welfare of our people and it was very important.

I also want to applaud what Government is doing in terms of improving agricultural production.  The Pfumvudza programme has done a tremendous job in the rural areas.  People can feed themselves and you can also appreciate that with the type of production, people are going to have improved standards of living.  Added to that, I would like to applaud our Government for the support they gave to farmers in terms of production of wheat, given the wars that are taking place between Ukraine and Russia.  These two countries were the sources of wheat and bread that we enjoy in some of our countries that are not producing wheat.  Now, with the support of Government to produce wheat, it means we can be self sufficient as a country.  I want to applaud Government for that and encourage those with land to produce wheat to come on board and start producing wheat so that in a few years, we will be able to export wheat to some of these countries.  If you look at the war in Ukraine, it is not going to end very soon.  There will be more years of fighting and less wheat coming to Africa.  That is a market we must take advantage of. 

I also want to talk about the Harare/Beitbridge Road.  Government has done a good job using our own resources.  When driving on that road, you enjoy it because the road is very good.  However, I would like the Hon. Minister of Roads to take note of a concern I have.  The road is wide but as you get to the bridges, the road narrows down and exposes people to accidents.  I do not know what plans the Minister has but I am sure he will be able to tell us how he will deal with that because most of the accidents that we are seeing along these roads are caused by the narrow bridges.  So, we would want to see an improvement on those bridges. 

Madam Speaker, I also want to applaud Government for the continued growth in the mining sector.  We are seeing a lot of mining houses coming up, downstream industries such as the Manhize Plant coming up, which will aid the development of the country.  It is my wish that all that is happening now can be supported by all the people of Zimbabwe to ensure that this country develops as fast as we envisage and see that our people’s standards of living will improve.  I thank you Madam Speaker.

HON. CHIKWINYA:  On a point of order Madam Speaker.  Just before you assumed the Chair, I had asked for guidance from the Speaker pertaining to why we are not referring back to Question Time today and he referred me to Order Number 66 of the Rules.  Firstly, I would like to quote what the Minister of Justice said yesterday.  He moved that we suspend Rule 66 (2) which is to do with Question Time.  This rule lays out the sequence by which Orders should be done.  The sequence states that unless the House has resolved, otherwise determine on Wednesdays, the routine of business shall be as follows, in order of precedence:

a) Questions

b) Notice of Motions in the name of Private Members

c) Private Members Orders of the Day

d) Other Notices of Motions and Orders of the Day.

We resolved to suspend this whole section yesterday but today the Minister of Justice who is the leader of Government business came not prepared to expunge the Government business under which we suspended the rules.  He then moved that we revert to adopting Section 66 (2) but unfortunately, we did not revert in its order of precedence as set out in the Rules.  The Rules give precedence to Question Time first.  I therefore move that we respect the Rules and go back to Question Time, and move as prescribed in our Rules.  I thank you.

THE HON DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Chikwinya, I am being advised that the Question Time was suspended yesterday and this motion which is being debated falls under Government business. 

HON. CHIKWINYA:  I referred to you and the Clerk to Order of the Day, Number 1 on today’s Order Paper, No. 14 which captures the Justice Minister who is Leader of Government Business’s presentation and I may go through it but in respect of time, he suspended Standing Order Number 53, 66 (2) with no particular reference to a Clause.  If he did not want to suspend Question Time, he could have skipped a, b, c or d in order of his precedence but he suspended the whole of Standing Order Number 66 (2). What then the Standing Rules say and it is explicit – business shall be as follows in order of precedence.  The key word is precedence and precedence (a) is Question Time.  If the Minister cannot expunge of Government Business which we had agreed to and resolved to suspend business for, we should go back to Question Time – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

The motion being moved by Hon. Togarepi is not Government Business.  It is his respect for the motion where he is imploring us to respect the speech by the Head of State and we are allowed to do that as long as we expunge of Question Time and I beg you to respect the rules which you are part of and the rules which you made Madam Speaker – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –  if you may prove that we want to do Question Time that is alright but I still refer you to the Order of the Day – it directs us to Question Time, then we can deal with Hon. Togarepi’s time – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Chikwinya, – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – Hon. Chikwinya, we are going ahead with the motion which was moved by Hon. Togarepi because Question Time was suspended and the Minister has just gone to the Senate.  He will be coming back very soon.

HON. CHIKWINYA:  It is alright Madam Speaker, nyika inotongwa nevene vayo. Vene vayo ndimi but you are wrong – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  We are not wrong Hon. Chikwinya.  We are going ahead with the motion.

HON. P. ZHOU:  Thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am for giving me this opportunity to second the motion and to debate on the State of the Nation Address (SONA) delivered by His Excellency the President of Zimbabwe...

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Member are you connected?

HON. P. ZHOU: I think so. – [HON. CHIBAYA: President of Zimbabwe Nelson Chamisa] – [HON. MEMBERS: Aaaah!] - [HON. T. MOYO: Zviroto zvako izvo.]  – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – [HON. MATHE: Withdraw that.] – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Zhou, please go ahead.

          HON. P. ZHOU: Thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

HON. TOGAREPI: On a point of order Madam Speaker.  I think the Hon. Member must withdraw the statement that Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Who said that?  He must withdraw because that is a misleading statement. – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – Order, may we please have order in the House.  Who said Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe – [AN HON. MEMBER: Hon. Chibaya!] -

Hon. Chibaya, please...

Hon. Chikwinya having stood up

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Chikwinya, I did not recognise you. Please may you take your seat?

HON. CHIKWINYA: Handiti zvanzi tiite withdraw.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  No. Are you the one who said that?

HON. CHIKWINYA:  We want to withdraw.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Are you the one who said that statement – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          HON. CHIKWINYA:  Haana kunzwa zvakanaka. Hanzi President Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe Citizen Coalition for Change.  Haana kunzwa the last part – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Chibaya, please may you withdraw your statement – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

An Hon. Member having stood to raise a point of order.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Please sit down.  You cannot raise a point of order on top of another one. Hon. Chibaya, withdraw your statement.

HON. CHIBAYA:  Hon. Speaker, I do not know what you want me to withdraw.  It is true that President Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe Citizen Coalition for Change – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

*THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  What has that got to do with the business of this House? – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – If you continue behaving in that manner, I will send you out Hon. Members.  You are disrupting the smooth running of the business of this House – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – I am giving you the last warning.

HON. T. MOYO:  On a point of order, Hon. Chibaya said Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe. That has to be withdrawn – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –   The overzealous member said Chamisa is the President of Zimbabwe and that has to be withdrawn.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Chibaya, may you be honourable and withdraw your statement?  Why are you misleading the people?  Hon. Chibaya withdraw your statement!  Hon. Chibaya withdraw your statement! – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

Hon. Gonese having stood to raise a point of order.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Gonese, take your seat.

HON. GONESE:  I have not spoken. 

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I have not recognised you.  Please take your seat.

HON. GONESE:  I just stood up.  I think it is allowed to stand up Madam Speaker – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Why are you standing Hon. Gonese?

HON. GONESE:  I want to raise a point of order ...

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  No, why are you disrupting the smooth running of this motion? Please take a seat.

HON. GONESE:  It is not that Madam Speaker.  I just stood up and I did not say anything.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Take your seat Hon. Gonese. 

Hon. Chibaya withdraw your statement.

HON. CHIBAYA:  Hon. Speaker, I do not know what you want me to withdraw I said the President of CCC Zimbabwe Nelson Chamisa.  What is wrong with that?

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: That is not what you said Hon. Chibaya.

          HON. CHIBAYA: That is what I said and I can replay it.  I do not know where the anger is coming from, I do not know why my Central Committee Member is getting angry. – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Anyway Hon. Members, we will check in the Hansard.  You may continue Hon. Zhou.

          HON. P. ZHOU: Madam Speaker – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  Hon. Speaker, for starters, I think it is important that you treat us as equal Members of Parliament. When from the ZANU PF side someone rises on a point of order, you should allow them to speak just as you do on the left side of your seat.

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: That is what I always do.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Let me deal with the issue that you raised that you are going to play the recording.  I think it is important that you inform the House on which Order you are relying on to say Hon. Chibaya should withdraw.  This is a House of Rules; it is not a House of feelings and emotions.  Apparently…

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: There are no emotions Hon. Member, I have already ruled on that matter.  May you take your seat! – [HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Which Order are you basing on, that is my question?] – If you continue in that manner, I am going to send you out – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – Order, order! You are disrupting the smooth running of this House, I am giving you the last warning.  Hon. Chibaya, the second warning.

          HON. P. ZHOU: Thank you Madam Speaker Maam for giving me the opportunity to second the motion, State of the Nation Address (SONA) delivered by His Excellency, the President of Zimbabwe, Dr. E.D Mnangagwa and presented here by Hon. Togarepi.

          HON. CHIBAYA: On a point of order!

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Chibaya, I am not recognizing you, take your seat.  Why are you disrupting? – [HON. CHIBAYA: The Hon. Member is reading her maiden speech.] – Hon. Chibaya!

          HON. P. ZHOU: The President’s Address is very important because it drives the nation in the right direction.

          THE HON. SPEAKER: May the Hon. Member be heard in silence

          *HON. P. ZHOU: Allow me to present in my mother tongue; the President said a lot of things – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          HON. T. MLISWA: Madam Speaker, some of us have got more things to do out there.  When we decided to be Members of Parliament, it was to represent people and this kind of behaviour in the House leaves a lot to be desired in terms of the agenda of the Hon. Members.  We have been quiet, the Office of the President must be respected at all given times.  The State of the Nation Address is critical in terms of the direction in which he sets – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] –

          I was hoping that the ruling party would certainly debate and the government-in-waiting would also debate – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] - That is the Opposition, it is known as the government-in-waiting.  So to me, what we must look forward to is what the government-in-waiting has to say and at the same time the ruling party moves to address their manifesto in terms of what they promised the people.  If what the President said does not complement and is not in line with the manifesto, then let us critique it.  It is about facts on the debate. So may we respect the State of the Nation Address so that we are able to debate for the purpose of Zimbabweans who elected us. 

          When we are here, we are not here on our own but because people believed that I would represent the country – [HON. CHIKWINYA: Inaudible interjection.] – What I am saying Hon. Chikwinya is important, you are a seasoned politician; we actually look up to you.  You were in Parliament before me, you should be leading me and giving me advice. Let us respect the Chair.  We have the Madam Speaker who is there; when the Hon. Speaker was in the Chair, you did not make  noise.  Does it mean that women will be looked down upon? This is abuse to the women. 

We cannot allow this to continue. Madam Speaker, exercise your powers and chuck people out.  Some of us have got businesses which give us more money than being here.  We are here to represent the people who chose us to represent the country.  Hon. Chikwinya, I think it is important that we move together.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you very much Hon. Mliswa.  People should present facts not just to disrupt debate in this House. 

*HON. P. ZHOU:  The President raised a lot of issues: on roads, food security and corruption.    Madam Speaker, I would like to thank him for the agricultural aspect that he addressed – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – These two are disturbing me - I cannot concentrate on my speech.


*HON. P. ZHOU: Pfumvudza Programme helped in increasing agricultural yield output as well as the Presidential Input Scheme which increased the wheat output. We managed to attain a record breaking tonnage. We also managed to have rural cooperatives being able to grow wheat. As a result, we managed to get more than 375 000 metric tonnes of wheat. That gives us surplus and enough for a year’s supply for the whole country. Speaking about wheat, many countries in Africa are struggling to get wheat because most of them were importing from Ukraine and Russia where there is war currently.

          The United Nations reports that many countries in Africa imported 44% of wheat between 2018/20 from Russia. As we speak, the price of wheat has gone up by 45% and that means as Zimbabweans, we are blessed because of these strategies that we are implementing in agriculture. We are not struggling to produce bread because we are getting it from our locally produced wheat. We have enough wheat in the strategic reserves and now we will be focusing on other crops. That really shows that as a country, we are well organised.

          I would like to applaud the gold coin strategy that came, especially the introduction of smaller denominations which are being sold at US$200 and below.  I really like that one very much and I wish more smaller denominations could be introduced in order for us to transact even in rural areas for procurement of goods such as goats. I would really like to applaud the introduction of the gold coins’ strategy that arrested inflation. As you know, there are unscrupulous people that continue destabilising the Zimbabwe currency. They are trying to manipulate our currency but I would like to say the gold coin strategy is very key and effective.

          Going back to my earlier point, we also have enough crops like maize and I hereby request that farmers be paid on time so that they are able to go back and continue producing.  Midlands Province falls under Regions 3, 4 and 5 and there is need to establish irrigation schemes so that farmers are able to produce more food. I would like to applaud the plan by Government in allowing several cooperatives to start irrigation schemes.

          The Road Rehabilitation Programme was well done in some other parts of the country including Midlands Province where some roads were attended to. For example, CMED attended to the Amaveni Road in Kwekwe and the remainder of the kilometers were done by the City Council. In Gokwe, the Masvisvi-Silver Bridge was attended to. I would like to applaud the Minister of Transport and Infrastructural Development for listening to our concerns. There was a tree at Sebakwe River which was posing a danger to motorists and I am happy to report that the tree was cut down. I really want to thank the Minister because he works hard. I also want to applaud the Minister for erecting speed humps on all high accident zones so as to reduce the rate of accidents.

          HON. T. MLISWA: The beauty about vernacular language, I am sure it is a bridge and you can describe it rather than saying grrrr grrrrr.

          *HON. P. ZHOU: I would like to turn to the health sector. I would like to thank our Government for putting in place measures to contain the spread of COVID-19. A lot of our people did not succumb to the disease and I really want to thank the Government.  Furthermore, Government opened and rehabilitated a lot of clinics and health facilities in order to take care of COVID patients. On Universal Health Coverage, a state of the art Pathology and Diagnostic Centre was constructed at Midlands State University.

Patients are no longer going to Harare.  There is Sherwood Clinic and there is need for staff accommodation and investors should fulfill their corporate responsibility.   

          The President talked of the 16 Bills and Medical Services Act is also included, looking at Chapter 15 of the Medical Service Amendment Bill in trying to align it with the Medical Services Act.  We urge the Government to provide anti-snake venom because people are losing lives by the time they get to hospitals.  There must be provision of oxygen at clinic level and anti-snake venom so that they are attended to earlier.  I also wish if ambulances could be availed at clinics so that patients can be attended to much earlier from clinics to district hospitals.  We must also consider that the country is under sanctions yet they are doing so much to improve the livelihoods of people.  Hypertension and diabetic testing kits should also be availed at clinic level. 

          Madam Speaker, regarding the 16 Bills, I would like to thank Hon. Minister Ziyambi for informing Parliament that we shall be working very hard and knocking off late.  Talking of Parliament building, I would like to appreciate the relationship between the Government of Zimbabwe and the Chinese Government through the Look East Policy. I say may it continue because we are seeing results.   I also want to thank our listening President.  Our President is a listening President, he takes all requests from Members of Parliament, civil servants and he urges officials to work on all those requests. 

          For those 16 Bills that I referred to, I request that we all unite as Members of Parliament, members of staff and all stakeholders so that we pass the Bills on time.  I thank you Madam Speaker.

HON. T. MLISWA:  Thank you very much Madam Speaker Ma’am.  I want to begin by thanking the President as usual for setting the tone.  The State of the Nation Address and as the words say, ‘state of the nation address’, it is very clear in terms of what must be achieved and the success and the challenges but that also cannot be complete without the Ministers responding.  Unfortunately, not many Ministers respond, which renders the state of the nation address a mere ceremony.  We gathered in that beautiful building, others feel comfortable because they have not been given accommodation, they sleep in a beautiful building - the Ministers are all there listening but they never respond.  So what is the point of the State of the Nation Address when Ministers do not respond because each portfolio is mentioned by the President?  The Ministers will be listening so they have to respond but you agree with me Madam Speaker, that it has been a challenge to get Ministers to respond.  When Ministers do not respond, it becomes a non-event. The coach who has a game plan for his team to say the midfielder will be defensive, we have a   4-2-2-2 structure, if players do not adhere to the   4-2-2-2 structure, then there is no point for that.  I still ask myself, why should we have the State of the Nation Address when Ministers are not responding, only a few will respond.  If we have to count the Cabinet Ministers and how many of them responded, you realise that while the President is right in saying nyika inovakwa nevene vayo, asi pane vamwe futi vene vayo vari kuvaka nyika who are Ministers who are not responding. 

          Madam Speaker Ma’am, we need to be very clear about this and asking ourselves the importance of the State of the Nation Address which the President would have devoted a lot of time to.  Information you would have got it but then you zero in on it, the Ministers then must respond.  My question is how do you measure the success and failure when Ministers have not responded.  Are we not just using tax payers’ money, abusing it?  The President set the tone and this is important, some of the Ministers who are here must speak to your colleagues about this that they are disrespecting the appointments of the Head of State.  There are many people capable of being Ministers here, people who are competent.  Hon. Mhona was a Member of Parliament, he is now a Minister but today his performance is there.  There are a lot more Mhonas within the party who can do the job.  Why should we be keeping people who are not doing the job?  What other job are they doing in reporting to the President other than makuhwa?  It has now become a norm.  What are you reporting to the President if you are not able to respond on issues that you have been appointed to do in Parliament? You do not. This is the House that represents everyone. They can go to Cabinet, they can go to any Congress but there is only one Parliament which represents the people and this is the august House. So if you cannot lay your case here, it will not be heard. People will say you are doing nothing. This issue Madam Speaker is very important for it to be dealt with. This again the Speaker’s Panel, yourself included, I think you are also a bit lenient on the Ministers. There are rules which must be followed - for the first time I will also challenge the powers of the Speaker sitting there. He has the power to whip all the Ministers. If not, they can be charged for contempt. No Minister has been charged for contempt. They do not come to Parliament question time. The last time the Vice President came here, he assured us they will come. They have not come. The President says the State of the Nation Address, they do not come. The Hon. Vice President comes as well hoping that he is a General, they also listen and see that he is a General but they still do not come. Vanhu vakaita sei? Inhinhi dzakaita sei dzisingaende munzira imwe chete?

I have to say this as we end this Parliament that one arm of the State is not firing, that is the Executive. Unfortunately, the prerogative lies with the President. They are responsible for the policy. They are responsible for execution and we are responsible for making the laws. We have done our bit in making the laws with limited resources while they have got more resources than we have. This House passes a Budget for them to have two cars while we have one. This House passes that they have everything while we have nothing so that they can discharge their duty properly but they have failed.

We cannot end this Parliament by not talking about how the Executive has been sleeping on duty and how they have let the President down. All they are good at is going to Official Openings together. They go to State banquets, they do not miss them. They like their food and wine but they do not want to come to Parliament and respond to issues of national interest. Madam Speaker, this is something which has let the SONA become a non-event because they are not participating where they should participate. Boxes must be ticked and not only that, Parliament too has allowed them to get away with murder. This is an institution which is governed by its rules and those rules must be used. They must not be used when people feel they must be personal, raise a point of order on a Privileges Committee for Hon. Mliswa and others for a bribe attempt. That is the only thing, but in terms of contempt on the cases which are there, they have not done that. I am also disappointed that the Speaker’s Panel has not exercised its power in ensuring that people are active when it comes to work.

Let me also go to the Parliament itself, which is a beautiful Parliament. I am not worried who built it but at what cost? We are all celebrating how great the Parliament is, but at what cost? There is nothing that is beautiful that comes for free. There is no grant that is given for free. You now know that when they give it for free, they are taking Manhize which is worth USD153 million. Could we not have mined our resources and make that money to build our own? To us, let us not be excited about sitting in a Parliament which comes with a cost. There is no-one who will ever give you anything for free. In Shona they say, itsitsi dzei kubvisa mwana wemvana madzihwa? Inini munondiziva kuti handina kuroora, mukaona ndakubvisa mwana wemvana madzihwa, chii chandirikutsvaga? Ndakudaka mai vachoSaka hazviuye mahara – [HON. MATHE: Inaudible interjection.] – Madam Speaker, the Hon. Member is being generous as my big sister by saying, ‘kana tabva panapa ndichakuratidza mukadzi wekuroora’. So I am waiting for that.

Madam Speaker, all these things are at a cost. You see the influx of foreigners coming in, they are not coming for nothing, yet they say Zimbabwe is not bad. So what bad publicity can we say we are encountering when they keep coming? Go on the Air Link which comes from South Africa at 06.30 you will see more white people than black. What are they coming to do? On the way back, you see more white people than black but those are the very same white people that are not saying good things about Zimbabwe. They are the same ones who are going about telling their friends ‘do not come to Zimbabwe’ because they are making money. They do not want others to come here.

Jump on the Air Link, why is it 06.30 in the morning and arriving at 08.00. It is because they go straight to the office and why is it that it leaves at 06.30 again back? It is because they finish work at 4, so they go and board and come back. There is a secret to it and it is never empty, it is always full. That tells you the resources that we have. To me, it is important that we bring the Indigenisation Act back. That is where I am going to. For a very long time, people did not understand. One thing that you cannot take away from the former late President, R. G. Mugabe is, he could see further than we did. He understood the mentality of white people and foreigners. He was in it for a long time. He was an accomplished Statesman, he was an accomplished historian, educated who was pro-black and believed the resources are for his people.

The amount of the resources that have gone to people who are not ours cannot be compared. He was prepared to keep those resources for his people so that generations to come would enjoy them. He was more worried about being in power than plundering the resources for the people. Today, if you look at it, the foreign direct investments which have come through, what has changed the country? We are busy fighting the Minister of Finance here but there is no production. Every Minister is telling you about this much is coming, how much is coming? The foreign direct investments which were laid before this House by the late Hon. Sen. General S. B. Moyo, may his soul rest in peace; what have we done to take stock of them? One of them is Chinese factory in my constituency. It was said to be worth $60 to $80 million. What are they bringing to the economy? The workers are abused. They are violating human rights. They are getting money in foreign currency and they do not bank the money.

The very same investors who are coming here are taking everything. There is environmental degradation. They have destroyed sacred places, uko vachingoburitsa mari. Which country can allow a situation where your resources are plundered to a point where even the environment, nzvimbo dzinoyera nemakomo haasisina basa? What are they bringing back? We need to be told on the SONA, those informing the President, how much these ventures have brought. The MOUs that have been signed and amount of money spent on those MOUs to be signed, is so much that we could have built a number of hotels. How many delegations flying out to go and do MOUs but where do those MOUs go?

We are here attacking the Minister of Finance who is not responsible for production. If we talk about production in terms of resources, Manhize – we made a lot of noise there and we decided to keep quiet because at the end of the day you could see that Government is not involved. The biggest steel works in the entire of Africa which will be generating USD20 billion a year, we have nothing in it. We ask the Ministers what is in it for us, there was no answer. How do you build a country when you are not involved in the biggest resource you have in terms of steel – no one can give you an answer.

We walked away without an answer and today we do not have an answer. My colleagues who are in the ruling party cannot answer because they will be expelled. They cannot ask again. We went to Manhize, made noise and we got up. We left that Pre-budget empty-handed yet we represent people. How then can we turn around the welfare of the people when we are not getting our resources? Manhize, who owns Manhize? I cannot even tell you Madam Speaker. Who in Zimbabwe is Manhize, I cannot tell you.

          We have the Deputy Minister of Mines here; they have been trying to get a lot of investment going. There is one thing, signing an MOU. Most of the investors that have come in, for example Cold Storage Commission brief case - they love whites. When they see a white man, they believe. They give the resources to a white man without due diligence. Who was responsible for the due diligence? How can you allow CSC to go to people who act and even the Vice President coming there? In fact, those were Hollywood actors.

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Mliswa, you are left with five minutes.

          HON. T. MLISWA: Madam Speaker, on that one, it is something which I was going to bring as a point of order. I do not know where they pick this time up because yesterday they gave me a certain time and unbeknown to them, I was timing. I had spoken for twenty-three minutes in my whole conversation. Hon. Biti got up to extend by ten minutes, so it was supposed to be 30 minutes. While we are there, what source of timing do they use because there must be a bell. We can have a bell which tells us 5, 10, 15 and 20 minutes. We cannot rely on human beings. This Parliament must be professional. There must be a timer there which tells me I have spoken 5 or 10 minutes and while I am speaking, I am watching the timer. These times we are given are not true. I want to know the source of the timing and we start from there.

          THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is a watch over there Hon. Mliswa.

HON. T. MLISWA: There is no watch over there. Why were we not told that we are starting at this time so that we can refer? I cannot refer to that time. To me, I want to be honest and I see that it usually happens with me when I start debating and hitting where it hurts, and they now say ‘five minutes Hon. Mliswa’. Twenty minutes is a lot. All I ask is, can we have a timer. I think this Parliament has got money to put a timer and rings five or ten minutes. Madam Nyawo, unfortunately you are not a good source for timing. Can we just have it there so that we deal with it? I therefore propose that you put a timer so that when a person has the floor and debating, they can see the time. Even munhu anomhanya 100 metres, haungoti hauna kubata time iyo time iripo. Mumastadiums ese zvirimo.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please, may you debate the motion Hon. Mliswa. You are now wasting time speaking about time.

HON. T. MLISWA: No, it is very important. Madam Speaker, we had the issue with FDIs. To us, that SONA was supposed to give figures to every foreign direct investment but they did not give figures to the President because those FDIs are not working. Every FDI has a figure and we have signed an MOU. What has come in and at what stage is it at? To me, that was lacking and it becomes very difficult for us to be able to do that.

The Indigenisation Act was very clear, 51/49. I cry every day, why did we really remove that one? No-one argued with it. Even the people investing in this country had agreed that they would stay. The mining houses you see today were supposed to give 10% to the local community, 10% to the workers and 31% would go to sovereign wealth but now we cannot do it. Now, they are telling you that law is not there but the likes of Biti can tell us. Does the law work in retrospect because the deal was signed? Today ZIMPLATS has not given 10% to its people and Mimosa and Unki, I do not know.

To me, what was the point of the law? We must be able to come back to that law because that is the only law that guarantees us. While the Constitution is very clear in terms of Section 13 (4) that local communities must benefit, it is up to the company to do that but it is not law. Indigenisation Act was law and that has got to come back. It was important that in the SONA, that was the critical point after our debates and we all agreed on that. So, why is it that the things we talk about at pre-Budget are not factored in there? The people will continue to suffer for as long as they do not control their resources.

Agriculture is a painful one. One white man told me that you think it is easy to farm. We were excited when we took over farms and these were white farmers who were well-funded but while they were well-funded, it was still difficult. This land reform which happened, actually most of them did celebrate –

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Your time is up Hon. Mliswa.

HON. MADZIMURE: I move that the Hon. Member’s time be extended by ten minutes.

HON. TEKESHE: I second.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Your time is extended by five minutes Hon. Mliswa.

Motion put and agreed to.

HON. T. MLISWA: We go to agriculture. Hon. Togarepi indeed praised the maize but agriculture means nothing when the producer price is poor. The wheat that we are talking about, they are paying the farmers now and this was money that they were supposed to get during the 2022 season. No wonder why there is no maize. We do not see a lot of maize because people were relying on their wheat money and the wheat money is coming now; late disbursement and poor pricing. How can you give a wheat farmer now when he wants to use that money to buy fertiliser for the 2023 agriculture season? You are giving them now as you saw in February, zvakamboitika kupi?

So now what are we doing that we have a shortage of maize? Whether it is a set up or strategy or cartel but they are going to import more maize, especially going towards elections they pay more for importing. Let us talk about the maize price in this country alone that the farmers got. It was US$90 or RTS$100 000 or if you look at it, it is $140/150 000 but they are importing at US$320/340. Honestly, where have you ever seen a successful agriculture agenda when farmers are paid this much? For you to continue with agriculture and you are a farmer, the cost of inputs must be replaced through production. That is it, and if that does not happen, this is no wonder why there is so much downsizing in the country. It is not because people cannot farm but there are no resources. You can downsize but for as long as you are not given resources, the subsidy, where is the subsidy? There is no agriculture which can triumph without subsidy. Look at Zambia and Malawi. You are buying $13 for a bag of fertiliser and the Government pays the difference. It makes sense. You now have a situation where in terms of agriculture, the pricing model where there is no inflation does not make sense. How many times have we said let us dollarise but the economy is dollarised quietly and they cannot admit because once they admit, they will say oh Hon. Biti was correct and that hits them hard. We are all dollarised right now and that is where we are going.

How can you go and borrow inputs in ZWL but your loan is in USD? Varimi ngatibetseranei apa. We were given our inputs in ZWD but the loan is now USD. How do you pay it back? How do you pay back a loan ZWD which has now been converted to USD? To me, the farmer is poor. There was supposed to be an intervention and the SONA was supposed to be very clear to say for all the debt the farmers owe you must pay this percentage and the rest Government takes over. No wonder why all the farmers are back in the fields because the pricing yanga yakaderera kwanga kuine inflation vanodzosera chikwereti sei, kasi ndave kunogura munda wavo futi. Ko ivo vamagurira munda futi vachaiwana kupi mari yacho?

So you also have a price matrix which is wrong. You cannot have one borrowing in ZWD and the next thing it is US dollars.

Hon. Speaker, the issue of agriculture, I do not know why cotton was not mentioned.  The cotton issue seems to be a hot potato.  We have COTTCO, which made more money than the farmers.  The farmers from Nembudziya in Gokwe were paid less money and were being paid ininputs yet there was $5.5million which was meant for them.

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Your time is up Hon. Mliswa.

          HON. T. MLISWA:  No, I was watching the clock when I started.  I still have five minutes.  It was 10 minutes and I still have another five minutes.  I would not lie.  I said each time I go to hot things, I am told the time is up.  The cotton issue is a hot one.  Who is protecting who? The $5.5million for cotton went to legislators and I am being told to stop talking.  Every time I am told to stop talking.  What should I do?

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Standing Order No 93 provides that a Motion moved at the expiry of time limit – a Member may be permitted to speak in excess of 20 minutes for not more than five minutes and not 10 minutes.  So, please wind up.

HON. T. MLISWA:  So, as I conclude, the cotton issue where $5.5million was given for the farmers ended up in people’s pockets and unfortunately this Parliament is implicated in terms of the Agricultural Committee which did not play its role.  So, if you are representing people, why is that money finding itself in the pockets of Members of Parliament, in politicians’ pockets?  Then they want to say the matter is political.  When you steal you say it is political.  Then they are backed up by heavy weights.

Now, let me move to my final point of corruption.  The issue of corruption was not hit hard in the SONA yet it has become cancerous.  Corruption has become more dangerous than sanctions.  In-fact we have lived with sanctions which are now our friends.  We now know how to go around them but corruption is constantly being taken to different levels.  So, the issue of corruption, the illicit flows which are there, the drugs which you are talking about, the mutoriro and guka is corruption.  Who is bringing them in?  A society is dying because of that and the issue of drugs was very important at the end of the day.  The war veterans themselves must be given what belongs to them.  I did not see in the SONA how war veterans will be compensated for going to the struggle.  Today they are still impoverished.  I also did not see a discussion of our heritage, culture and tradition.  If you see Mbuya Nehanda statue, people are not allowed there.  So, what was the point of putting her there?  People and visitors who want to take pictures are not allowed.  How much are we putting in our culture, heritage and tradition?  When you put a lot of money there, all these behaviours change.  Drugs will be a thing of the past because our tradition matters a lot in the rural areas.  Therefore, more money must be put in the rural areas because they are the majority of the people in the country.  I did not see that in the SONA.  Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir for allowing me to speak and at the same time helping those I was going to expose not to be exposed.

HON. CHIKWINYA: You said, ZANU, ZANU then former ZANU.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: No, I was not in.  You are disturbing the flow of debate Hon. Chikwinya.

HON. T. MOYO:  Hon. Speaker, I want to add my voice to a motion moved by Hon. Togarepi and seconded by …

HON. T. MLISWA:  On a point of Order Hon. Speaker.  Hon Chikwinya said ZANU, ZANU and former ZANU.  May I set the record straight.  I am still ZANU-PF but I am outside ZANU-PF.

HON. T. MOYO:  Hon. Speaker, I want to thank you for recognising me.  May I add my voice to a motion moved by Hon. Togarepi and seconded by Hon Zhou.  Firstly, I want to commend His Excellency Dr. Mnangagwa for a well thought out, insightful, informative and highly comprehensive speech.  The speech was made in a very spacious building Mr. Speaker Sir.  The SONA was made in a spacious building with a lot of comfort such that the Hon. Members ended up sleeping, especially Members on your left.

HON. GONESE:  On a point of order Hon. Speaker.  I believe that it is important for the Chair to clarify to Hon Members when an issue has arisen.  The point is that there is a convention in the Standing Orders but it does not specifically mention the rations.  I want clarification as to what has informed the decision whereby you recognised two members from the governing party including one who is in ZANU but outside ZANU and it makes them three.  A member from the opposition benches rose to contribute and you did not recognise him.  I would like the Speaker to explain to us so that the people of Zimbabwe and not just the Hon. Members are informed as to what is the justification for that.  I think I should call it discrimination or unfairness. For me, this is blatantly unfair. 

My understanding is that when you are in the House, you have got the governing party and the opposition.  The opposition as of now is constituted of two political parties as well as an Independent Member of Parliament.  I believe that it is important to have balance in terms of debate. Otherwise if it is one sided, it gives a completely wrong picture of how the legislatures are perceiving a particular issue.  I believe that we should alternate – that is what I have observed in other Parliaments, notwithstanding the numbers....

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  You have made your point and we take note.  Hon. Togarepi is the mover of the motion and the seconder is not counted.  We start counting – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-  I am chairing and I have given Hon. Moyo the chance to debate and the next is Hon. Sibanda.  I have made that decision already – [HON. MEMBERS: What is the rule?] – The rule is that the mover and seconder are not counted.  It is not a matter of us arguing Hon. Gonese.

HON. GONESE:  Before I sit down, I would like you to point out the Standing Order which you are placing reliance on with regards to what you have just said.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  I am checking on that one.

In the mean-time, Hon. Moyo can you go ahead?

HON. T. MOYO: Hon. Speaker, I was describing the building where the State of the Nation was made that it is such a majestic building, spacious and with a lot of comfort and equipped with closed circuit television such that because of the ambience in that room, the majority of members to your left ended up sleeping. I am also aware that very few members on your right could have slept.

Hon. Speaker, His Excellency the President spoke about political violence.  The President said that political violence must be condemned at whatever costs.  Political violence must never be condoned.  This reminds me about the speech by the former Prime Minister of Prussia Otto von Bismarck who said “the questions of the day shall not be decided by great speeches and majority decisions but by blood and iron”.  Here we are saying that Dr. Mnangagwa has emphasised that we must cultivate a culture of love, harmony and peace.  Violence is unAfrican and has no place in a democracy.  It must be condemned at whatever level.  That was a great speech that was made by His Excellency the President.

He also spoke about ZIMSTAT 1. By ZIMSTAT 1, we are saying that Zimbabwe was able to launch our own Zimbabwean satellite showing our brands and the implications of such a satellite.  We are able to detect and also to perceive disasters before they occur in Zimbabwe.  We want to commend the Second Republic for a job well done.  ZIMSTAT is also very important in as far as ensuring that we are able to locate those minerals that have not been discovered.  One such mineral is uranium which is found in my constituency Gokwe-Chireya.  There is a lot of uranium.  It is in abundance.  We are so endowed because of those minerals. I need to commend the Second Republic for signing a Memorandum of Understanding between the University of Zimbabwe and Russian University so that we are able to develop our own nuclear energy as a way of alleviating problems that are affecting Zimbabwe, especially the issue of challenges of electricity.

I now turn to Education 5.0 – this speaks about the issue of innovation and industrialisation which is a prelude to development and modernisation.  According to the new curriculum, students must desist from regurgitation facts.  Education 5.0 emphasises on creation of jobs – those people who complete their degrees must be job creators rather than job seekers.  That was a very important message that came from the President’s speech.

I now want to turn to the issue of mining. The President commended the great work that is being done by artisanal miners. They have contributed immensely towards the number of more than 30 tonnes that Zimbabwe got in 2022.  My message is that whilst I appreciate the importance of mining to economic development, we need to condemn those companies that have a habit of exporting minerals in their raw form, especially platinum, lithium, chrome and so on.  That is in line with neo-colonialism.  According to Andre Gunder Frank’s theory of metropol satellite relations, when we export those mineral ores, we are under-developing ourselves in line with the under-development theory.  I want to thank the Government for passing a Statutory Instrument that criminalises the export of lithium and other mineral products.  We want to emphasise the issue of value addition and beneficiation.  Let us have processing plants being constructed in Zimbabwe.  Let us produce our batteries and sell locally and also export them.  This will contribute immensely to sustainable economic development that will contribute to modernisation or modernity.

On the issue of Pfumvudza/Intwasa, whilst I commend Government for a job well done, I would like to condemn the peasant farmers who have got the habit of selling inputs at very low prices.  That is a way of –[HON. BITI:  Why are you calling them peasant farmers] –

          HON. T. MOYO: Why are you talking to me? No, you do not have to ask me enda unonwa mapiritsi, hauna kunwa mapiritsi e HIV, tanga wanwa mapiritsi e HIV, stupid.

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER (HON. MUTOMBA): Address the Chair Hon. Moyo, please.

          HON. T. MOYO: Mr. Speaker Sir, the issue of inputs that are being abused by very few people who are selling those inputs - yes, that is very bad and also some civil servants, a few civil servants –[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – get away, rubbish!  You do not have a right to…

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Moyo! Hon. Moyo! – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – Please withdraw that.

          HON. T. MOYO: You are not allowed to challenge me, I have the floor. Hon. Speaker, I have the floor – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – Anondirova ndiani?

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: On a point of order! What is he withdrawing?

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: He knows what he has said.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Hon. Speaker, the type of language that I heard from the Hon. Member is not only unparliamentary, it is unruly.  For him to call any Hon. Member that he should go and take his tablets is not only defaming but it is also stigmatising if indeed that Member is taking those tablets and for him to then worse of say ‘rubbish’ a minute later, Hon. Speaker, that kind of behaviour cannot be allowed.  I believe that this Hon. Member cannot be allowed to continue debating. 

          HON. T. MOYO: - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: I have given him the floor; it is me who is in the Chair.  I have given him instructions to withdraw and he is about to do that – [HON. MEMBERS: inaudible interjections.] –

          HON. T. MOYO: May I withdraw the unparliamentary language that I used on Hon. Biti.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir, for allowing me to debate the State of the Nation Address. You will realise that I have two gadgets in my hand. One of them is actually showing the 18-page speech that was given by Mr. Mnangagwa on 23rd November 2022. On the other one – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections]-.

          I have had the privilege to be in this House for close to 10 years and it is the first time that I am debating the State of the Nation Address. Circumstances aside but I feel this is a great opportunity for us as a nation to make an assessment of our progress that we make through political leadership. The State of the Nation Address comes against the background that I have laid to say I first came to this august House in 2013 and I am nearing ten years and this is my tenth year of being in the august House. I am a witness to the events that unfolded in 2017 and that ushered in the so called Second Dispensation.

          *HON. P. ZHOU: On a point of order. The Hon. Member said Mr. Mnangagwa. Is that his proper title? He is referred to as President Dr. E. D. Mnangagwa. If he does not want to recognise that, then he must not debate his speech. Majaira kuvhiringa zvinhu.

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Sibanda, we address the President as President of Zimbabwe and not Mr. Mnangagwa, please.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Mr. Speaker Sir, I will leave that for another day.

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: What you need to do is to withdraw that statement and then move on.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: This State of the Nation Address which was given on 23rd November 2022 is actually the final and last before we get to the next…

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Ah Hon Sibanda!

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: Sorry Mr. Speaker Sir, you wanted me to say something.

          THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Withdraw the word “Mr.” and replace it with “President Mnangagwa”.

          HON. P. D. SIBANDA: I withdraw what was seen or heard to be unparliamentary. As I indicated the State of the Nation Address on 23rd November 2022 was the last and final by His Excellency in the life of this term. Therefore, when we analyse it and look at it, it is important that on the other end, we compare it with the 2018 manifestos of his political party because he is a leader of that political party. Therefore, when we measure the State of the Nation Address, it is important that we measure it against tangible achievements or failure of achievements from whatever promises that Government had made prior to 2018 elections.

            I will refrain from the promises made by ZANU PF in 2018 and possibly deal with the promises made by the incumbent when he was elected President in 2018.  Most of them are actually contained in the State of the Nation Address that was given on the 22nd November, 2022.

          Hon. Speaker, amongst the issues that appear in the State of Nation Address and for avoidance of doubt, on page 2 - the last paragraph of page number 2, where it states that Parliament was expected to accomplish a legislative agenda in line with the expectations of the electorate; allow me Hon. Speaker, to say that in the life of this Parliament, my experience was different from the life of the previous Parliament that I experienced.  It is this period of time that we saw very controversial constitutional amendments, some of which are sub judice in the sense that the issues are still before the courts but when we talk about the legislative agenda Hon. Speaker, we have not been able to go even 50% of what we had on our agenda.

          Mr. Speaker Sir, when it comes to the social economic growth that had been promised, what is in this statement of the State of Nation Address and other promises that have been made is quite different from what we are seeing on the ground.  Social economic growth that is being reflected and numbers that are given is not the same with the state of livelihood that the people of this country are currently encountering.  Instead of social economic growth, we have seen increased poverty and we have seen the increased suffering of public servants in this country. 

          Hon. Speaker, in his speech, the President also mentioned about the Presidential Input Programme.  It is a good programme on the face of it, but Hon. Speaker, honestly if we want to build our agricultural sector, it is important that we move from a welfare kind of programme to an economic beneficial programme where Government will take money from the State coffers and lend to farmers who then are made to pay back at concessional rates, contrary to the current one which is actually appearing to be easily abused for political reasons.  I guess across the political divide we have seen and at times we have had Ministers actually being arrested for abuse of inputs that come from this same programme.  If we were to assess Hon. Speaker how much has been utilised in this programme, we will realise that the State coffers have lost a lot of money towards unscrupulous dealers who have been abusing the Presidential Input Programme. 

          Mr. Speaker Sir, then when it comes to mining, contrary to the promises that were made in the State of Nation Address, leakages and smuggling has actually increased in this country between the time when the President was speaking and now.  What is most worrying is that the people that are mostly involved in this smuggling of precious minerals from this country are people that are close to his inner circle, including his own children.  Hon. Speaker, we cannot talk of corruption and the President cannot really stand up and say I am talking about corruption and that I am going to curb corruption when as I speak currently, there is an ongoing case of corruption in Victoria Falls that involves one of the sons of the President where he intends to forcefully possess a piece of land that has been under the lease of an internationally renowned and operating tourism company.

Hon. Speaker, our fear is that when corruption is coming from the First family and when corruption is coming as if it is impunity, investors will shun investing in this economy.  Hon. Speaker, I go on to attend to – [THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS: Iyi haisi hama yedu iyi.] -

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order Hon. Sibanda, what you are debating or raising, are you pretty sure that the son that you are talking about is the son to the President or it is similarity of names? -[HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] –

HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  Hon. Speaker, for avoidance of doubt, I am a legal practitioner, a registered one, so I am aware of what I am talking about.  I am not speculating and I am sure what I am saying is on record…

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: If you are a renowned lawyer like you are saying, why are you now raising issues that are before the courts?

HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  Which issues before the courts that I have raised?

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: The one that you are talking about.

HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  No, the one that I am talking about is not before the court.  I am talking about a case in which an internationally renowned tourism company is being dispossessed of its land by a son of the President who gave this State of the Nation Address.  I am saying there is no investment that can come in a country that has got...

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order, order, may I guide you. Section 98 stipulates that “no Member must, while speaking to the question, speak against or reflect upon any resolution of the House or an entry into the Journals House except for the purpose of moving that such resolution or entry be rescinded or expunged as provided in Standing Order No. 107, use the name of the President irrelevantly in debates or for the purposes of influencing the House in its deliberations…” – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  Hon. Speaker, my sincere apologies that you have been ill-advised by the Clerk...

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  No, no, I have not been ill-advised. Please sit down I am still continuing – ‘…use derogatory, disrespectful, offensive or unbecoming words against the President, Parliament or its Members or the Speaker or the President of the Senate’. So, stand guided by that ruling.  

HON. P. D. SIBANDA:  Hon. Speaker, charity begins at home; I have been guided by my brother Hon. Minister Ziyambi to take a different direction.  The President, on page number 7, spoke about the promises that his Government had made in terms of schools and school fees that we are going to have free education. For the past three/four years, this country has been advised that we are going to enjoy free education. Even this year, some parents had relaxed and thought that the Government was going to implement the free education policy, but even as we get to the end of the life of this Parliament, Zimbabweans should measure such State of the Nation Addresses and promises that were made in making choices as we go to the election of 2023.

          One of the promises that had been made was universal health coverage but as we speak, if you walk into a hospital, for example Binga District Hospital where I come from, it is easier to call for your traditional healer to come and treat you whilst you are admitted at the hospital because the hospital is only offering a bed and nothing else. There was talk about BEAM and I doubt if it still exists in the records of school headmasters. It is no longer there because there is nothing that is happening to BEAM.

          So even when we talk about engagement to attract investment which I find on page 11 of the State of the Nation Address, it is clear that investors except for rogue investors, criminals and thugs, feel real investors are walking into this country because the promises that are being made are promises that one can tell that they are not meant for the good of this nation.

          As I wind up, I want to state that Gen. Tongogara wherever he is sleeping, Gen. P. V. Sibanda wherever he is seated in his office and all war veterans that fought for this country, I am sure they can now realise that the objective that they fought for is no longer being fulfilled. The people that they went to war with whilst they had agreed that they were going to fight for the majority, currently the resources of this country are being enjoyed by just a few and those few are the ones that are seen surrounding the first person of this nation.

          We have failed to pass the Mines and Minerals Amendment Bill up to date and the reason is because corruption around mines and minerals is within the clique and the inner cluster of a few ruling class in this country. That is why I say most of the war veterans regret why they went to war because currently the proceeds of independence are accumulating to a few and we have seen how that is being abused. That being the case, war veterans and all citizens of this country have got an opportunity  in 2023 to ensure that the objectives, values, ethos of the 1970s liberation struggle are final, have finally come to be seen and are fulfilled by a new and better inclusive government. Thank you Hon. Speaker and thank you to your Clerk for continuing to ill advise you.

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): I move that the debate do now adjourn.

          Motion put and agreed to.

          Debate to resume: Thursday, 2nd February, 2023.



          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Mr. Speaker Sir, I move that we revert to Order of the Day, No. 1.

          Motion put and agreed to



          First Order read: Resumption of Committee: Judicial Laws Amendment Bill [H. B. 3, 2022].

          Question again proposed.

          House in Committee.

HON. BITI: On a point of order Hon. Chairperson.

          THE CHAIRPERSON: What is your point of order?

          HON. BITI: I move that we revert back to Clause 3 which escaped our attention in yesterday. 

          HON. CHIKWINYA: I second.

          HON. BITI: Thank you Sir. Mr. Chairperson, the remarks I make apply to both Clause 3 and 4.  I respectively submit that there is an omission, there is a lacuna in both Clause 3 and 4, whereas subsection 3 of 3 and the proviso to subsection 2 makes it clear that the parties concerned must consent to the proceedings being conducted by way of a virtual sitting.  We should insert in these provisions and guarantee the right of members of the public including the press of access to those virtual hearings.  So I propose that we put a stand-alone provision that will read as follows ‘that rules of court shall ensure that the right of members of public, including the press - of access to the virtual court proceedings so that the constitutional right of having public hearings in trials or appeals is guaranteed’.  I submit that that should be a cross cutting addition to every virtual sitting.  So a member of the public should have a right to participate in those virtual sittings.  Whatever virtual platform that the particular court is using must be accessed by the public. 

          Speaking as a lawyer, the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court are already on a virtual system but it is a very private system, you must have a private email.  The staff at the Supreme and Constitutional courts has to come to your laptop and desktop to actually insert software that will allow you to participate in the virtual hearings. So, members of the public are actually excluded by the particular IECM software that they are using.  So, I am proposing that they must use, in order for us to comply with the Constitution, every platform must allow access to the proceedings.

          The second thing that is also cross cutting and this applies in particular, Hon. Chairperson and Minister of Justice, this applies in particular to criminal hearings whether in the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court application of a criminal matter.  The virtual sittings must allow virtual communication and guarantee virtual communication between the lawyer and his client and I propose also between the National Prosecuting Authority or the State agency and its witnesses.  Virtual communication must be private.  At the present moment; the Magistrate Court has actually hold virtual court sittings for remands.   So remand prisoners at Harare Maximum Prison and Harare Remand are actually having virtual sittings, those sittings now if you go to court 6 for instance, there is no private communication between the lawyer and his client.  If you go to court 6 now there is a screen and everyone can see all the prisoners who are being remanded on that day. 

          We need to create a virtual court system and system which allows that private communication which allows and guarantees the constitutional right to communication between the lawyer and his client.  The lawyers must ask if his clients have been treated well, were they not assaulted, did they take their tablets.  That communication must be there and it is not there at the present moment.  So I submit that, that should be incorporated.  I thank you very much I think the Hon. Minister will see the wisdom of what I am saying.

          HON. GONESE: Thank you very much Hon. Chairperson and I want to express my gratitude and appreciation to the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs for his indulgence in us for deferring the consideration of the Committee Stage to today from yesterday and secondly for allowing us to revert to Clause 3 of the Bill.  Having said that, I think it is also important and I know that he is conferring with Hon. Biti, if I can just wait so that he will also pay attention to what I will be saying. I have got additional points to what was raised by Hon. Biti. 

          The first point I want to make is an obvious one.  I think I am just going to make it to ensure that we are all in the same page.  Not just the Hon. Minister but all the Hon. Members in the august House, that is to make reference to the provisions of section 69 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe which is the supreme law of the land that is the section which deals with the right to a fair hearing.  It makes reference to a public trial and it is not just confined to criminal matters but also even to civil matters.  I think that it is only fair that I actually make reference to the actual provision which talks of the right to a fair hearing and says that every accused person accused of an offence has the right to a fair and public trial.  I want to emphasise the word public. Even when you go to subsection 3, it actually makes reference that every person has the right of access to the courts or to some other tribunal or forum established by law for the resolution of any dispute. That necessarily means Mr. Chairman, this right is not just extended to the participants in a criminal matter even citizens of Zimbabwe who are not part and parcel of that particular proceeding are also entitled to have access to what would be happening. That is to emphasise the point made by Hon. Biti who has spoken before me that you must then have virtual sittings which then accommodate and enable other people to have access to that particular proceeding. If you leave it open ended the way it is, it will then reduce and I will also speak from the experience of being a practising legal practitioner. You will find that in the Supreme Court and in the Commercial Division of the High Court where you are already having these virtual sittings, they have been reduced to Chamber proceedings. When you are looking at what we call Chamber proceedings Mr. Chairman, it is those proceedings which are held in the office of the judge.

You have got two different processes in terms of applications. You have got the court application and the Chamber application. The Chamber application is for example, when there are urgent matters on interdicts and so on. This is the kind of procedure where you are only having the parties and it is called Chamber because it will be in the Chambers, in other words, in common language, the offices of the judge. When you are talking of court application, you are going to have it and it is supposed to be in open court. So when you are looking at Court C for example, it is a very big court and that is where you have a lot of these and even unopposed applications. That is where you have them at High Court and they are accessible to anyone. You can just walk in and you are able to follow proceedings.

The danger that we have Mr. Chairman is that we are trying to deal and move with technology as the Hon. Minister was saying yesterday, but at the same time we must not violate provisions of the Constitution. We must not violate principles which have been applied over the years in terms of access to justice. Even if it is a civil matter, members of public are entitled – it can be a matter of public interest for most people, it does not matter. The bottom line is that people have got a right to follow those proceedings and I therefore submit that it is important in Clause 4 to have some formulation which enables – like yesterday, we had a zoom platform on the Electoral Amendment Bill and it was accessible to people from all over and even people in the diaspora were able to have access to hear. That is the kind of platform that we need for these virtual proceedings so that people who have interest where there is a criminal trial, or whether civil proceedings, they are in a position to do what they would normally do under the ordinary sittings of the court.

That is the reason why I believe that the Hon. Minister of Justice must look at this closely and appreciate where we are coming from. In making these remarks, I also wish to point out that during the Second Reading of this particular Bill, the Portfolio Committee made its presentation. At the same time, the presentation of the Portfolio Committee was not just informed by what members of the public said, but also by the Law Society of Zimbabwe which represents the legal profession in this country. They also made their written submissions in that direction, which I am now going into.

The other point Mr. Chairman is that when we look at the formulation of Clause 3, it simply talks of the right to be heard. It does not talk about the right to be seen as well, the reason being when you have got public trials, if it is a criminal case, the accused will be in court with the magistrate and all other parties who are interested. At the same time, even in civil proceedings, when it is in open court, it is accessible to members of the public. I submit that the formulation should not just make reference to the right to be heard but also to be seen so that the accused, the plaintiff and the defendant, if it is a civil case; if is a court application, the applicant and the respondent also have those same rights. As a result, I would submit that let us have audio visual equipment to be added as part of the definition when we are looking at virtual sittings so that it is clear.

We do not want to leave anything open to doubt. We do not want to have a situation where the rights of the people of Zimbabwe which are enshrined in the Constitution are then going to be compromised by language, which is not explicit. That is the reason why I am suggesting to the Hon. Minister that we must add audio visual two way equipment. At the same time we also put the formulation proposed by Hon. Biti that there is access to members of the public. That will also apply to Clause 4 which refers to the High Court and other clauses which refer to the other courts which are the Labour Court and the Administrative Court. I will speak in detail regarding the rights of accused persons when we come to remand because we have got a specific clause on that. For now, those are the two issues which I believe the Hon. Minister of Justice should pay close attention to so that we can have appropriate amendments which will ensure that we are not depriving people of their rights.

Before I sit down, I just want to indicate that yes, it is desirable to have some of these virtual court sittings but I submit that this should be the exception and not the rule. We should look at situations where there is a pandemic so that we have access to justice during those periods. Unlike the situation that we had in 2020 where the court proceedings virtually came to standstill, we do not want that scenario but where things are operating normally, where everything has been opened up, I think we must additionally use the traditional system where we have got physical hearings. Having said that, when we have to revert to virtual sittings for whatever reason, let us ensure those two principles are properly captured by an appropriate formulation. I believe that we simply have to add the right to be heard and also to be seen. That cures one of the problems, then the other obviously is to say that this public platform is accessible to whoever wants to follow proceedings and listen. Those would be my submissions Mr. Chairman.

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Mr. Chairman, it looks like we are now going back to the second reading speech. I listened attentively to Hon. Gonese. He was making reference to Clause 4, Clause 3 and to general issues. We are on Clause 3 and the Hon. Members must specify what they need done on that clause and we proceed. Issues of dealing with general statements, we will sleep here without having done anything. What we need is concrete amendments to say that, on Clause 3 it is wrong in that it has one, two, three and four. My suggestion is this. Then we debate that so that I can say yes or no but these general debates – my submission is, let us give specifics like what Hon. Biti said, to say that can we have something that indicates that rules of the court will allow it to be a public hearing whereby the public can have access; something like that rather than a general discussion.

Where I will turn to disagree with Hon. Gonese is the section that he mentions, he is trying to protect the accused and not members of the public who are at home. By saying that, you are entitled to a free, fair and public trial. It is protecting the accused, not the people who want to listen. The very basis of even a commercial arbitration is to deal with the dispute. The others will benefit but I agree that it has to be, to a certain extent, a public affair but we are not doing it for the purposes of an onlooker. Let us couch it in a manner that while we quote the Constitution, let us put the Constitution into the proper context and we come up with an amendment that will suit what we are saying.

HON. P.D. SIBANDA: I would like to raise a concern on the proviso to Clause 3 (2) and apparently that proviso also applies to Clauses 4, 5 and 8. Now, this proviso provides that there should be consent of the parties for a virtual sitting to occur. My submission is that this proviso does not contemplate a scenario where parties might now agree. One might disagree and unreasonably for that matter. It is my proposal that we should be able to state that where such a situation arises, should the matter revert to an open court, physical sitting or should the judicial officer be given that power to make their discretional ruling to say we should continue or revert to a physical sitting.

HON.  BITI: I think Hon. Sibanda raises an interesting point. Clause 3 is talking of the Constitutional Court. Clause 4 is talking of the Supreme Court. By far the overwhelming number and substance hearings in the Constitutional Court and in the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court is a Court of Appeal. The Constitutional Court does not hear evidence, it hears application and most of the applications in the Constitutional Court are actually appeals because it has limited original jurisdiction. Its limited original jurisdiction is limited to certain issues that are spelt out in Section 167 of the Constitution. So for instance, Presidential challenges pursuant to a Presidential Election, the Constitutional Court has original jurisdiction. Section 167 (2) speaks of challenges relating to the failure to comply with constitutional obligations by Parliament or the President, so very limited jurisdiction but all that is on paper.

So, I think in my submission if it is a constitutional application, a Supreme Court appeal and where the other party is being unreasonable because everything is on paper and no evidence is being lost, I think the court should be able to say come on, come on, and let us proceed by virtual. It is different from a trial now in the High Court which tests evidence. In the High Court where it is a criminal trial or a civil trial, if one party says I do not want, I want the old traditional method then that party should be respected, but in the Constitutional and the Supreme Courts, because they are essentially courts of records, you are going to page 85.

I was doing a matter last week which had 2000 pages; surely we should be able to proceed virtually because there is no prejudice.  It is basically a technical lawyers’ thing as opposed to the High Court where – do you see my point – [HON. ZIYAMBI: Yeah] – So, we should say for Clauses 3 and 4, in the event that one of the parties objects, the court should have the final say on whether the proceedings will proceed virtually or not. The court now has discretion. We should give the court discretion and the court might say this particular matter, we want the whole; for instance I was doing a case for Chilonga people whose land was dispossessed. I am sure my clients would have objected to the hearing because of the importance of the matter and the Judge will say, surely these people have travelled from Chiredzi. They want to know about their land rights, so let us give discretion to the judicial officer. I thank you.

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI):  Hon. Chair, I move that we report progress and seek leave to sit again.

          Motion put and agreed.

          House resumed.

          Progress reported.

          Committee to resume: Thursday, 2nd February, 2023.



THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Madam Speaker Ma’am, I move that Orders of the Day Numbers 2 to 9 be stood over until Order of the Day Number 10 has been disposed of.

          Motion put and agreed to.



Tenth Order read:  Committee Stage:  Institute of Loss Control and Private Security Managers Bill [H. B. 5, 2022].

House in Committee.

On Clause 1:

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Madam Speaker, I propose the amendment in response to input from the Portfolio Committee and from the information gathered from the Public Hearing.  Accordingly, amendment of the title is proposed as follows:

“Title of the Bill is amended by the deletion of the word ‘Managers’ after Security and substitution with ‘Management’ and in all instances where the title appears in the Bill”.

Amendments to Clause 1 put and agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 2:

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Thank you Madam Chair. Clause 2 of the Bill is amended  

  • On page 5 in line 11 by the insertion of the following definition -

 “private security” means armed or unarmed security or protection of physical and non-physical assets including human beings, infrastructure, finances, cyber space and other forms of property provided as a service on private basis; and

 “security service” means security service provided by security services institutions established in terms of section 207 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe”;

  • On page 5, in line 9, by the insertion of “guard” after “security” in the two instances in which the word “security” appears in line 9.

I so move Madam Chair.

HON. BITI:  On a point of clarity Madam Chair.  He refers to security managers being referred by Section 207 of the Constitution.  Section 207 of the Constitution refers to the country’s security forces. This Bill is not talking about the country’s security.  It is talking about private security.  So I seek clarification why he is making a reference to the military, the police and the CIO.  Maybe if I can have somewhere where I can read where he is reading from.  Can I have a copy of the Order Paper?

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Thank you Madam Chair.  I would like to thank the Hon. Member for making that observation but for clarity purposes, here the Bill is trying to explain the difference between private security and national security.  That is why we found it necessary to put security services as opposed to private security services because the Constitution talks of national security services.  So this is for the purpose of distinction.  That is why it is on the definition.   Unless if the Hon. Member has got another proposal of how we can define it so that we separate it from private security as envisaged in the Bill. Thank you Madam Chair.

HON. BITI: So I propose that we add the word ‘national’ so that it is national security services. 

HON.  DR. MURIRE:  I have no objection to that.

Amendments to Clause 2 put and agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, put and agreed to.          

On Clause 3:

          HON. DR. MURIRE: Thank you Madam Chair.  Clause 3 of the Bill is amended on page 5, in line 14, by insertion of ‘professional’ after practice.  I so move Madam Chair.

          Hon. Biti having rose to debate

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. MAVETERA): Hon. Biti, if the amendment is put, there is no debate.

          HON. BITI: No, you were on the amendment, I have no problem with those amendments.  You are now on the substantive 3.  You put his amendment, I did not object to that.  Now you are on Clause 3 as it originally stood.  That is all.

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Wait till I finish then you can come in.

          Amendment to Clause 3 put and agreed to.

          Clause 3, as amended, put and agreed to.

          HON. BITI: I think Clause 3 is where we should make it clear that this Bill is applying to the operations of private institutions that provide security to private individuals as opposed to national.  That is where we need to make it very clear, that this is private security.  I will say that, “this Act shall apply to the registration, regulation, operation and practice of private security operators and private chartered loss control operations”.  That is how I would put it.

          HON. DR. MURIRE: I seem not to agree.  This is a private regulation for a specific group of professionals who are offering their management services.  It is not like a public regulation that regulates everybody who is in that industry.  It is specifically offering on those who are qualified as managers.  Just like we have got engineers, the engineers are regulated by the engineers’ regulation or accountants.  This is a subsidiary law as opposed to a private regulation.

          For example, accountants have got Public Accountancy and Auditors Act that offers the framework to regulate all those who offer auditing and accounting services but the CIS Act focuses on those who are offering a common interest in accounting.  This is why we are saying those who are practicing as chartered loss control and private security managers.

          HON. BITI: So in his example, he is regulating the manager, let us say Fawcett Security but where is the law that regulates running operators like Fawcett Security and Chitkem?

          HON. DR. MURIRE: That is the Private Investigators’ and Security Guards Control Act, Chapter 27: 10, which is also - actually the Minister is proposing amendment to that Act as well.  Thank you.

          HON. BITI: He knows his stuff, actually I did not know.

          On Clause 4:

          HON. DR. MURIRE: I move the amendment standing in my name on the Deletion and substitution of Clause 4, that Clause 4 of the Bill is deleted and substituted by the following-

          Objects of the Act are to-

(a)     set minimum qualifications for the admission of members of the institute;

(b) develop standards, guidelines, best practices and recommend regulations and a code of conduct for application by members;

  •       influence the development of appropriate and relevant national loss control and private security management educational and professional training curriculum and qualification framework;
  • promote—
    •       the studying and practice of loss control and private security management as a profession;
    •       the facilitation of sustainable skills relevance by offering mandatory continuing professional development for members;
    •      compliance to practice standards established and contained in the code of conduct; and
    •      professional integrity, repress malpractices including corrupt practices, increase and promote public confidence in those persons practicing or teaching the profession;
  •       raise the character and status of the profession and in so doing, preserve the integrity and quality of the service offered by its members;
  •       provide disciplinary mechanism for breach of the code of ethics and non-compliance with regulations, practice standards and guidelines.

 (2) The Institute shall exercise its functions and recommend regulations necessary to give full effect to the objectives set out in this Act (1).” I so move Madam Chair.

Amendments to Clause 4 put and agreed to.

Clause 4 as amended, put and agreed to.

          Amendment to Clause 4 put and agreed to. 

          Clause 4, as amended, put and agreed to. 

          On Clause 5:

          HON. DR. MURIRE:  Madam Chair, Clause 6 of the Bill is amended on page 6 in line 10 by the insertion of sub-clause (2) as follows—

 “(2) The institute is a professional body with loss prevention occupations (including cyber security, digital, physical and forensic investigation; debt collection, risk management, loss assessment, loss control and disaster and emergency management) as its constituent elements.” and the current clause shall accordingly be renumbered sub-clause (1).  I so move Madam Chair. 

          Amendment to Clause 5 put and agreed to.

          Clause 5, as amended, put and agreed to.

          On Clause 8:

          HON. DR. MURIRE:  Clause 8 of the Bill is amended—

  • on page 6 in line 34 by the deletion of “or other relevant discipline”;
  • on page 6 in line 36 by the deletion of paragraph (a) and the substitution of the following—

    “(a) members nominated for election are competent to implement provisions of the Act and regulations made under it and in so doing complementing the State on its obligation to provide quality loss prevention and security protection service to citizens; and”

  • on page 7 in line 19 by the insertion of “and approved by the Minister” after the word “nominated”.

HON. BITI:  Thank you Madam Chair.  The Bill is seeking to create two bodies.  First is the Institute of Chartered Loss Control provided by Clause 6.  Then under Clause 8, you have got the Council, so you have got two things, the Council and the Institute.  So under Clause 8 …

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. MAVETERA):  May you please switch on the microphone.

HON. BITI:  Madam Chair, under Clause 6, the Bill provides for the Institute of Chartered Loss Control and Private Managers and then it provides for the functions.  Under Clause 8, you have got the Council. Under Clause 8, the clause provides for how members of the Council are elected.  It provides for the composition of the Council, which includes the President, the Vice President, the Secretary General and how they are elected. 

Under Clause 6, there is no provision of how members of the Institute are elected or appointed.  The clause just said, he is hereby establishing authority to be known as the Institute of Chartered Control, which shall be an association of professional loss control and private security managers. A body corporate capable of suing and suing in its name and subject to this act of conforming all the acts bodies, corporate may by law perform.  Functions of the institute are to design, formulate, coordinate, et cetera.

The functions of the Institute are different from the functions of the Council that are defined in Section 9.  So, is the intention Hon. Member to create different bodies for the Institute and different persons for the Institute with those that are different from the Council or your idea is that the councillors are in fact going to run the Institute, in which case you need to conflate Section 6, 7, 8 and 9. 

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Thank you Madam Chair.  Perhaps with his legal mind, he could put more flesh to it but the idea is the Institute is an institution with members who apply to be members on a voluntary basis.  That forms the Institute.  Now, the Council that we are talking about is a management body of the Institute.  I am sure also in the legal profession, you have got a management body that runs the Law Society of Zimbabwe.  The Law Society is the institution but you have got a management body, which we might call a council, a committee, whatever.  Perhaps the use of the word council is what you might put in your legal mind to me so that I understand but it is one thing.  The institute is the organisation, which has got a council that runs its day to day affairs and makes policy for the institute itself.  With that perhaps, you can offer more flesh.  Thank you.

HON. BITI:  The submission that I would make to him is that there must be a policy body, which is the Council.  So, I would suggest that the policy body should be appointed by the Minister, whoever Minister is going to administer this, whether it is Home Affairs or Security.  However, your Section 6 must say, the Minister must appoint these people from the following persons and you define them.  So in the case of the Law Society, there used to be a Retired Judge, a Practitioner a lawyer, someone from the University of Zimbabwe and so forth. So there will be a professional body. Then your Clause 9 now is the operational body, your Council, the one that deals with the day to day running which can be elected members, just like at the Law Society, we now have a council where lawyers choose whom you want to be President of the Law Society.  However, the Minister does not appoint these ones.  The Minister only applies those that are unelected. That would be my suggestion Madam Chair. 

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Thank you Madam Chair.  On this one, we just made our thinking in line with other professions.  Like CIS, the Minister does not appoint a council for CIS.  They elect themselves and the Minister only approves.  Chartered Accountants of Zimbabwe, the Minister does not appoint, they elect themselves to the Council and the Minister approves.  The purpose of the approval for those who are nominated is because these are people who are working in the security field.  As such, the Minister’s nod is required.  If they nominate themselves to council, then the Minister approves. 

HON. BITI:  You did not mention Clause 6 …

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. MAVETERA):  May you please switch on your microphone.

HON. BITI: Members who are defined in Section 9, Secretary General, President and so forth.

          So you simply now need to say, ‘there shall be an institute run by council whose functions are the following:’.

          HON. DR. MURIRE:  Accepted Madam Chair, perhaps you can put it in the proper legal wording, then it can be captured so that we do not revert to it again.

          On Clause 8:

          HON. DR. MURIRE:  Madam Chair, I move the amendment standing in my name, that Clause 8 of the Bill is amended—

  •       on page 6, in line 34, by the deletion of “or other relevant discipline”;
  •       on page 6, in line 36, by the deletion of paragraph (a) and the substitution of the following—

               “(a) members nominated for election are competent to implement provisions of the Act and regulations made under it and in so doing, complementing the State on its obligation to provide quality loss prevention and security protection services to citizens; and”

  •      On page 7, in line 19, by the insertion of “and approved by the Minister” after the word “nominated”. I so move Madam Chairperson.
  • Amendment to Clause 8 put and agreed to

Clause 8, as amended, put and agreed to.

Clauses 9 to 12 put and agreed to.

On Clause 7:

HON. DR. MURIRE:  Madam Chair, I move the amendment standing in my name that;


          The Bill is amended on page 9, in line 44 —           (a)     by the insertion of a sub-clause (3) to Clause 13—      “(3) Any person may inspect the register and make copies of any entry therein at all reasonable times upon payment of such fee as may be prescribed.”; and

(b) by the insertion of new Parts IV and V after Clause 13 as

follows -



14.     Prohibition against practice without practicing certificate

  • Subject to subsections 2 and 3, no person shall practice as a chartered loss control manager or chartered private security manager, whether directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or in partnership or association with any other person, except in accordance with the terms and conditions of a valid practice certificate which authorises him/her to practice as a chartered loss control manager or chartered private security manager as the case may be.
  • Subsection (1) shall not apply to anything done by a registered person which he or she could lawfully do as an unregistered person in terms of section 26.
  • Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 8 or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year or both such fine and imprisonment.
  • Conviction for any offences under subsection 3 shall not be a bar to a further prosecution or conviction if the offence continues.

15.        Application for practicing certificate

          A person who wishes to obtain a practicing certificate shall apply to the council in the form and manner prescribed, and shall submit with his or her application such fee, certificates, documents and information as may be prescribed.

16.        Issue and   refusal of  practicing certificate

  • On receipt of an application for practicing certificate in terms of section 15, the council shall issue a practicing certificate to the applicant authorising him or her to practice as a chartered loss control manager or chartered private security manager if the council is satisfied that the applicant is registered as a chartered loss control manager or chartered private security manager, as the case may be.
  • Where an applicant who already holds a practicing certificate authorising him or her to practice as a chartered loss control manager has applied for a practice certificate authorising him or her to practice as a chartered security manager, the council shall require him or her to surrender his or her existing practice certificate before issuing him or her with a new practice certificate.



17.  Licensing for provision of private investigation and security guard services

          (1) A registered chartered private security manager shall not, whether by himself or herself or in partnership with other or as an association, engage in the practice of/or offering private investigation or security guard services unless he or she respectively—

  • obtains a private investigators license issued by the controller of private investigators and security guards in terms of the Private Investigators and Security Guards Control Act [Chapter 27:10] and regulation made under it;
  • obtains a security guard license issued by the controller of private investigators and security guards in terms of the Private Investigators and Security Guards Control Act [Chapter 27:10] and regulation made under it.”; and the subsequent clauses are accordingly renumbered. Thank you Madam Chair.

HON. BITI:  Thank you Madam Chair.  We have liaised with Counsel to Parliament and the drafters.  So what we have agreed is that the way that Clauses 6, 7, 8 and 9 are currently formulated - the Bill gives the impression that it is creating two separate bodies, that is, a council and an institute.

The institute’s functions are defined under Clause 7, with the council’s functions defined under Clause 9 but it is clear from the Hon. Member that he seeks to create an institute which is run by a council. So there are no two separate organs. There is no separate institution and there is no separate council. There is just one institute run by a council. The best way of reconciling the contradiction is to simply marry Clause 7 and Clause 9. The functions of the council are married with the functions of the institute. We are marrying Clause 7 and Clause 9 and everything else remains the same. You now have an institute run by a council whose functions are in some totality of Clause 7 and Clause 9. That is what we have agreed. Thank you.

          Amendment to Clause 6 put and agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, put and agreed to.

          Clauses 14 to 19 put and agreed to.

On Clause 8:


            HON. DR. MURIRE: Thank you Madam Chair. The Bill is amended on pages 12 and 13, by the deletion of Part VI and the substitution as follows—



24. Use of certain designations

  • A registered chartered loss control manager shall be entitled to the use of the designation “chartered loss control manager” or in abbreviation as CpLM, which is an indication one is a chartered professional loss control manager.
  • A registered chartered security manager shall be entitled to use the designation “chartered security manager” or in abbreviation as CpSM which is an indication one is a chartered professional private security manager.

25. Offences by unregistered persons

 (1) Subject to section twenty-six, no person other than a registered chartered loss control manager shall—

  •       practice as a registered chartered loss control manager; or
  •       hold himself or herself out to be a registered chartered loss control manager; or
  •       use the designation or initials referred to in section 24 (1) or any other names, title, designation or letters indicating that he or she is a registered chartered loss control manager, whether by advertisement or description or in any document.

 (2) Subject to section 26, no person other than a registered chartered security manager shall—

  •      practice as a registered chartered security manager; or
  •       hold himself or herself out to be a chartered security manager; or
  •       use the designation or initials referred to in section 24 (2) or any other names, title, designation or letters indicating that he or she is a registered chartered security manager, whether by advertisement or description or in any document.
  • Any person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 8 or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year or both fine and such imprisonment.
  • Conviction for any offence under subsection (3) shall not be a bar to a further prosecution or conviction if the offence continues.

26. Exemptions

  (1) Section 25 shall not prevent a person who—

  •       employed exclusively at a salary and does not carry on the business on his or her own account, from describing himself or herself as a loss control manager or private security manager in relation to the undertaking in which he or she is employed; or
  •       without receiving any fee or reward, prepares or reports on the security or loss control systems of a club, society, institute or other association not established for profit, from describing himself or herself as a private security manager or loss control manager in relation to the preparation of/or reporting on such systems.

  (2) Any person in bona fide employment of—

  •      a registered loss control management company; or
  •      a company or partnership referred to in subsection (5) shall not be regarded as practicing as a chartered loss control manager or as holding himself or herself out to be a registered chartered loss control manager for the purpose of section 25 in respect of anything done in the course of such employment while under the direction or control of registered chartered loss control manager.

          (3) Any person in bona fide employment of—        (a)     a registered security management company; or

 (b) a company or partnership referred to in subsection (5) shall not be regarded as practicing as a chartered private security manager or as holding himself or herself out to be a registered chartered private security manager for the purpose of section 25 in respect of anything done in the course of such employment while under the direction or control of registered chartered private security manager.

  • Section 25 shall not apply to any person in the full-time employment of the State, a statutory body, or local authority in respect of anything whose directors or the course of such employment.

5.  Notwithstanding section 24, a company or partnership whose directors or partners, as the case may be—

  •      are registered chartered loss control managers or registered chartered private security managers; and
  •       hold practicing certificates; and
  •      directly control and manage the provision of loss control or private security management services offered by the company or partnership; may practice as chartered loss control or chartered private security managers.

27. Reciprocity:

  • Where any country, specified by the Government by notice in the Gazette, prevents citizens and residents of Zimbabwe from becoming members of any institution similar to the institute or subjects them to unfair discrimination in that country, no subject of any such country shall be entitled to become a member of the institute or practice the profession of loss control and private security management in Zimbabwe under the name of the institute.
  • Subject to the provisions of subsection (1), the council may prescribe the conditions, if any, subject to which foreign qualifications relating to loss control and private management shall be recognised by the institute for the purposes of entry in the Register.

28. Regulations:

  1. Subject to this section, the Minister, in consultation with or upon recommendation of the council, may make regulations providing for all matters which by this Act are required or are permitted to be prescribed or which, in his or her opinion, are necessary or convenient to be prescribed in order to carry out or give effect to this Act.
  2. Regulations made in terms of this section may provide for—

 a)     The standard and conduct of qualifying examinations under these regulations;

b) the qualifications for the entry of the name of any person in the Register as a member of the institute;

c)  the conditions under which any examination or training may be treated as equivalent to the examination and training prescribed for members of the institute;

d)  the conditions under which any foreign qualification may be recognised;

e)  the manner in which and the conditions subject to which applications for entry in the Register may be made;

f)  the fees payable for membership of the institute and the annual fees payable by associates and fellows of the institute in respect of their certificates;

g)  loss control security management general principles;

h)  the establishment and functions of Council Committee;

i) the particulars to be entered in the Register;

j) the internship training, the fixation of limits within which trainees may be charged and the cancellation and termination of internship engagement for misconduct or for any other sufficient cause;

k)  the regulation and maintenance of the status and standard of professional qualifications of members of the institute;

l) the maintenance of a library and publication of books and periodicals on loss control and management;

m) the management of the property of the council and the maintenance and audit of its accounts;

n) the summoning and holding of meetings of General Meeting, the times and places of such meetings, the conduct of business thereat and the number of members necessary to form a quorum;

o)  the powers, duties and functions of the President and the Vice-President of the Council;

p) the terms of office, and the powers, duties and functions of the Secretariat;

q) the establishment of a loss control managers Quality Review Board;

r)  conditions for cancellation, suspension and restoration of registration;

s)  conditions under which practicing certificates shall be issued or withdrawn;

t) disciplinary regulations and appeal procedures;

u) any other matter which is required to be or may be prescribed under these regulations.

     3   Regulations made in terms of this Act may impose a fine not exceeding level 8 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year or to both such fine and such imprisonment.” Those are the amendments proposed Madam Chair.

      Amendments to Clause 8 put and agreed to.

      Clause 8, as amended, put and agreed to.

      House resumed.

      Bill reported with amendments.

      Bill referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

      On the motion of HON. TEKESHE, seconded by HON. MUTSEYAMI, the House adjourned at Nine Minutes to Seven o’clock p.m.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment