• Version
• Download 59
• File Size 461.93 KB
• File Count 1
• Create Date June 13, 2024
• Last Updated June 13, 2024

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HANSARD 11 JUNE 2024 VOL 50 NO 58

PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE

Tuesday, 11^th June, 2024

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

PRAYERS

(THE HON.  SPEAKER in the Chair)

           ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE HON. SPEAKER

PETITION RECEIVED FROM CLEOPATRA NYAKU AND TAWANDA MAFUTA AND ZIMRA WORKERS ON THE INCAPACITATION OF ITS WORKERS

          THE HON. SPEAKER: I have to inform the House that Parliament received a petition from Cleopatra Nyaku and Tawanda Mafuta beseeching Parliament to initiate immediate measures to produce and distribute Braille versions of the Persons with Disability Bill to libraries, disabilities focused organisations and Government offices and ensure that all future legislative documents including Bills, Acts and Amendments are made available in accessible formats to facilitate the participation of persons with disabilities in the democratic process of the country.  The petition has since been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare. 

          I also have to inform the House that Parliament received a petition from Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA) workers beseeching Parliament to investigate the causes of the workers’ incapacitation, provide guidance on the matter and ensure that adequate resources are allocated to ZIMRA through the enforcement of the previous Parliament recommendations on the ZIMRA Funding Model.  The petition was deemed inadmissible as the issues raised in the petition are labour issues which can be resolved in a court of law.  The petitioners have since been advised accordingly.

          HON. KARIMATSENGA-NYAMUPINGA: Thank you Hon. Speaker.  My apologies I was not sitting at my usual place.  I rise on a point of national interest Hon. Speaker.  There is a national appeal for more inclusive disability law making.  During the ongoing development of this new Act for Persons with Disabilities, it is crucial to assess the effectiveness of public participation.  Why they are saying so Mr. Speaker, is because the national census data indicate that approximately 10% of our population are living with disabilities with a significant portion residing in socio-economically disadvantaged rural areas.

          The current public hearing structure conducted at provincial level did not reach the districts, it reached capital cities of provinces; it did not reach the grassroots. I think most of the Members in this House represent rural constituencies where the public hearings did not reach.  So, the point of national interest here Hon. Speaker is, this process is not inclusive because it is leaving out the very people demanding this Bill who are residing in the rural areas, but did not have the opportunity to also add their voices to this Bill.  

          Yes, people might say they send out some people to stand in for the voiceless, but I do believe that everyone has got a voice.  They would have wanted to add their own voices.  So, this Bill is actually town or city-centred.  It is not talking about everyone with disability considering that 10% are disabled, but only 0.1 or less attended the public hearings.  So, it is our appeal to you Hon. Speaker, that you allow us to revisit including the centres that they did go. You can imagine someone going to Lupane from your area and they have disability and are poor; they could not get resources or transport.  There was no transport to ferry them and their wheelchairs to the venues knowing that the transport system of this country does not accommodate wheelchairs, most of them. They will ask for extra fare to accommodate you and your wheelchair.  That is the appeal the nation has on this issue. It is the persons with disabilities themselves, the carers of the people with disabilities, the relatives and the community who sometimes support persons with disabilities in their areas.  They could not add their voices on the public hearings that took place.  I thank you.

          THE HON. SPEAKER: Thank you very much. The Committee on Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare is accordingly directed to revisit the areas that have been left out, especially the constituency of people with disabilities so that we have a better picture and understanding of what is on the ground – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear] –

          HON. TIMBURA: Thank you Hon. Speaker Sir. I rise today on a point of national interest to express our profound gratitude to His Excellency the President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, for his visionary decision to licence the Starlink Network provider in Zimbabwe.  This   monumental initiative underscores His Excellency’s unwavering commitment to advancing our nation’s technology infrastructure and bridging the digital divide that has long challenged our progress. Some of the advantages of this is enhanced connectivity, economic growth and fiscus contribution, affordable access and importation facilitation, healthcare improvement, agricultural development, disaster response and management. 

As I conclude, one of the critical important issues I am highlighting and thinking of is the consumer protection and fair pricing.  With Starlink’s entry into the market, we anticipate increased competition among internet service providers.  This competition is essential for protecting citizens from predatory data tariffs, ensuring that internet services remain affordable and accessible.  His Excellency’s focus on consumer protection demonstrates his unwavering commitment to the welfare of all Zimbabweans.  Also, nuetralising the market monopoly, the introduction of Starlink, will help neutralising monopoly of the telecoms sector in Zimbabwe.  A competitive market environment encourages innovation, improves service quality, lowers prices, benefits consumers and fosters a healthier economic landscape.           His Excellency’s strategic vision for a fair and dynamic market is commendable. 

In conclusion, the licencing of Starlink network provider in Zimbabwe is a forward-thinking initiative that will propel our nation into a new era of connectivity and opportunity.  On behalf of this House and the citizens of Zimbabwe, I extend our deepest appreciation to His Excellency, President Emmerson Mnangagwa for his steadfast dedication to our nation.  With the advent of Starlink, we are not just connecting the internet, we are connecting to endless possibilities under the visionary leadership of His Excellency.  We still hold to a future where every Zimbabwean is empowered, every voice is heard and every dream is within reach.  Let us harness this opportunity to build a digitally inclusive vision and economically robust and proudly united Zimbabwe.  I thank you.

          THE HON. SPEAKER: In Zimbabwe, no one can be left behind in the fight of industrial revolution which is anchored on digital technologies.  I think your statement is indeed well-received and I hope the responsible Ministry will act accordingly to realise the dream.

          HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Good afternoon Mr. Speaker Sir. I rise on a point of national interest. Given that Zimbabwe is assuming the role of SADC Chair this August, I urge the Executive arm of Government to refrain from making comments that unsettle country neighbours.  This is in light of the widely publicised comments suggesting that Zambia and Malawi are posing a security threat to Zimbabwe through association with the United States of America (USA) – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Order, order! I think there was a point of order that side.

          *HON. NYABANI: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.  Hon. Members should distinguish what are national, regional and international issues.  I thank you.

          THE HON. SPEAKER: Thank you very much Hon. Nyabani.  Hon. Hlatwayo, the arena of foreign affairs in terms of bi-lateral or regional relations, is a matter for the Executive to deal with at all times. If there are any issues, the Executive – who is saying enda ikoko. Do not interrupt my ruling.  It is unbecoming of the Hon. Member.

          I was saying this is a no-go area where you have issues that relate to bi-lateral or multi-lateral relations between or among States, those are dealt with at the level of the Executive.  So, the chief diplomacy of either countries, the point of order, with its good intentions, I think it is misplaced.  Thank you.   

          An Hon. Member having wanted to raise a point of privilege.

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  There is no point of privilege after the ruling of the Chair.

          HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  I think I am supposed to be heard.

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Do you want to argue with the Chair or not?  I think, if my memory serves me right, you were at the workshop.  At that workshop in Bulawayo a similar question was raised and I advised accordingly.  So this cannot be the forum to raise the issue again. 

          HON. MATEWU: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.   I rise on a point of national interest.  The month of June is mental health month, particularly this week, it is mental health awareness week, which runs - I think from 11^th June.  Mr. Speaker, one in 10 men will struggle with mental health concerns, such as anxiety and depression as they pass the age of 30.  Most striking is that less than half of men actually seek assistance on treatment due to societal expectations of masculinity, most men will suffer in silence.

          Therefore, men are more likely to take toxic substances.  In some cases, as we have seen in newspapers and in social media, commit suicide.  Parliament must be at the forefront in raising awareness on issues to do with men’s mental health.  I so submit.    

          THE HON. SPEAKER: Yes, men sometimes tend to carry some artificial bravery and courage, when in fact we are internally suffering.  It is better to cry out your miseries in order to reduce the stress inside.  Your point is well received and I hope we take care of your observations accordingly. In terms of our Standing Orders, we allow only four points of national interest. Hon. P. Zhou, perhaps you can do yours on Thursday.  There is still time for you to raise that one.

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  On a point of order Hon. Speaker. 

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Hon. Mutodi, you have a point of order arising from what debate? 

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  My point of order is on Order No. 73 of the of the Standing Orders which says a Motion referred to in Standing Order No. 72 (d) concerning a matter of privilege must take precedence over other Motions as well as other orders of the day.  Mr. Speaker, I had raised a point of privilege….

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Why did you not register with the Chief Whip? 

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  I raised it with the Deputy Chief Whip, but maybe she did not raise it with you. 

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Hon. Member, I have got a list here and I go by that list.  You have to have some conversation with the Acting Chief Whip. 

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  But her incompetence cannot compromise….

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Order, order, I said I am going by this list.

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  I am simply saying she is incompetent, I told her, she is incompetent.

          THE HON. SPEAKER:  Order, this is not the place for you to exercise that freedom of speech.  Leader of Government Business can you take the floor.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):  Mr. Speaker, I move that Orders of the Day Numbers 1 and 2, be stood over until Order of the Day Number No. 3 has been disposed of. 

          Motion put and agreed to. 

COMMITTEE STAGE

CRIMINAL LAWS AMENDMENT BILL [H. B. 4, 2024]

          Third Order Read: Committee Stage: Criminal Laws Amendment Bill [H. B. 4. 2024].

          House in Committee.

          Clauses 1 to 2 put and agreed to.

          On Clause 3:

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):  Thank you Hon. Chair.  I move the amendment standing in my name that on page 2 of the Bill, delete clause 3 on lines 2 to 8 and substitute— “3 Amendment of section 61 of Cap. 9:23

Section 61 (“Interpretation in Part III of Chapter V”) of the Criminal Law Code is amended—

• in the repeal of the definition of “brothel” and “prostitution” and the substitution of—

““brothel” means any place which is occupied or used for the purposes of sex work or for persons to visit for the purpose of having sexual intercourse for money or reward;”;

“sex worker” means a male or female person who for money or reward—

• allows other persons to have anal or vaginal sexual intercourse or engage in other sexual conduct with him or her; or
• solicits other persons to have anal or vaginal sexual intercourse or engage in other sexual conduct with him or her;

and the word “sex work” shall be construed accordingly;

• by the repeal of the definition of “sexual intercourse”;
• by the repeal of the definition of “young person” and the substitution of— ““child” means a boy or girl under the age of eighteen ”.

Mr. Speaker, extra-marital is removed and we remain with sexual intercourse.  It has nothing to do with marriage, it is having sexual intercourse with a young person.  In fact, those young people are not even supposed to be married anyway. So, if that can be noted down so that when we are cleaning up the Bill, it clearly reflects the correct meaning.  I hope Hansard will capture it correctly.  Let me go to the actual Bill.  In the actual Bill where it makes reference to Clause 4 (c) where it says “solicits or entices a young person to have extra-marital intercourse.”  That is where I am indicating that the extra-marital intercourse must be removed so that it reads “solicits or entices a young person to have sexual intercourse with him or her.”  Then in that particular clause where it makes reference to ‘extra-marital intercourse’, it is removed and substituted with ‘sexual intercourse.’  I thank you Hon. Chair.

Amendment to Clause 3 put and agreed to.

          Clause 3, as amended, put and agreed to.

          On Clause 4:

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):  I put amendments in my name as they fully appear in the Order Paper, to indicate that we are changing for clarity to those who do not have the Order Paper.  (On pages 24 of the Bill, insert the following clause after Clause 4, and renumber the subsequent clauses accordingly: “70A Deliberate infection of child with a sexually-transmitted disease

• In this section—

“sexually-transmitted disease” includes syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, HIV and all other forms of sexually-transmitted diseases.

• Any person who—
• knowing that he or she is suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease; or
• realising that there is a real risk or possibility that he or she is suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease;

intentionally infects any child with the disease, or does anything or causes or permits anything to be done with the intention or realising that there is a real risk or possibility of infecting the child with the disease, shall be guilty of deliberately infecting that child with a sexually-transmitted disease and liable to a fine up to or exceeding level 14 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both.

• If it is proved in a prosecution that the person charged was suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease at the time of the crime, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that he or she knew or realised that there was a real risk or possibility that he or she was suffering from
• It shall not be a defence to a charge under subsection (1) for the accused to prove that the child concerned—
• knew that the accused was suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease; and
• consented to the act in question, appreciating the nature of the sexually- transmitted disease and the possibility of becoming infected with

(5)A court convicting a person for any crime constituting unlawful sexual conduct against a child shall, if it also convicts that person for deliberately infecting that child with a sexually-transmitted disease, not make any part of the sentence of imprisonment imposed for the latter crime run concurrently with any sentence of imprisonment imposed for the first-mentioned crime.”.

 

Where it says, “sexual intercourse or performing indecent acts with young persons”, in Clause 4 where we are amending Section 70 which reads “sexual intercourse or performing indecent acts with young persons,” we are changing that to reflect the spirit of the Constitution and replace with “sexual intercourse or performing indecent acts with children between the ages of 12 and 18” and we change it accordingly where it makes reference to ‘a young person,’ we are now saying ‘child’.  That is the amendment that I am putting as it fully appears in the notice of amendment.  I thank you.

          HON. MUSHORIWA: I think in principle, I do not have a problem with the amendment, but I think there is something that the Hon. Minister needs to explain.  In his amendment, where a young person and an adult who is not more than three years older than the young person, I see the Minister has actually included a text which says that, ‘unless the Probation Officer appointed in terms of the Children’s Act has authorised a charge’, I am not so sure whether that one is necessary.  I thought the best thing was to simply leave it; where the age difference is three years, the discretion should be left with the Prosecutor General rather than to include that text.  I do not see how it will work in the normal day to day running of the courts.

          HON. Z. ZIYAMBI:  Hon. Chair, the disadvantage that Hon. Mushoriwa is having is that we are going to have the Children’s Amendment Bill in this House.  Issues to do with children are in the Child Justice Bill and ordinarily, we want to defer to the Probation Officer.  We do not want the Prosecutor General to deal with those issues.   We want to protect as much as possible, children under 18 years.  So, in this particular incidence, the Probation Officer will be able to interrogate and explain the behaviour of that particular child that will then be preferred to be prosecuted.  So, this is consistent with what will obtain in the Child Justice Bill when we bring it back.  We feel it is a very good clause where all children, before they are prosecuted, will be referred to the Probation Officer to deal with them and it is the decision of the Probation Officer together with the Prosecutor General that will now determine if that particular child must be prosecuted.  I thank you Hon. Chair.

          HON. MUSHORIWA:  I just wanted the Minister to clarify.  Minister, is it not that the intention here is the three year gap and children that engage in the sexual act with an age difference of three years and an adult whose age difference is also three years, for instance, a 17 year old sleeps with a 20 year old?  I am just wondering whether that would not leave a lot of discretion to the Probation Officer as you stated here or even the Prosecutor General, where we have two cases possibly being handled differently.  Would it not be good for the law to simply say those with three years difference should be left without the need of being criminalised?

          HON. Z. ZIYAMBI.  Thank you Hon. Chair.  My explanation that I proffered the first time still obtains that there may be a consistent behaviour that may be picked by the Probation Officer in that particular individual.  If they are first timers, I do not think that the Probation Officer will then prefer that without any reasonable cause because the Prosecutor General will interrogate that report and be able to satisfy herself that the case should be prosecuted.  He/she is responsible for prosecution.  That is the reason why I said when the Child Justice Bill comes, you will fully understand, and this is a very good provision that we have put in there.  I thank you.

Amendment to Clause 4 put and agreed to.

          Clause 4, as amended, put and agreed to.

          On New Clause 5:      

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): I am proposing to insert after Clause 4 which becomes a new Clause 5 so that as it fully appears on the Order Paper, for those that do not have the Order Paper to insert the following after Clause 4 and renumber subsequent clauses accordingly.  We debated here about deliberate infection with HIV which I indicated that I am going to amend so that it reads:

“70A Deliberate infection of child with a sexually-transmitted disease

• In this section—

“sexually-transmitted disease” includes syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, HIV and all other forms of sexually-transmitted diseases.

• Any person who—
• knowing that he or she is suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease; or
• realising that there is a real risk or possibility that he or she is suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease;

(c) intentionally infects any child with the disease, or does anything or causes or permits anything to be done with the intention of realising that there is a real risk or possibility of infecting the child with the disease, shall be guilty of deliberately infecting that child with a sexually-transmitted disease and liable to a fine up to or exceeding level 14 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both.

• If it is proved in a prosecution that the person charged was suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease at the time of the crime, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that he or she knew or realised that there was a real risk or possibility that he or she was suffering from
• It shall not be a defence to a charge under subsection (1) for the accused to prove that the child concerned—
• knew that the accused was suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease; and
• consented to the act in question, appreciating the nature of the sexually transmitted disease and the possibility of becoming infected with
• A court convicting a person for any crime constituting unlawful sexual conduct against a child shall, if it also convicts that person for deliberately infecting that child with a sexually transmitted disease, not make any part of the sentence of imprisonment

This clause, we amended it in the original text – it appeared like we were criminalising willful transmission of STIs, but we are limiting it to those that have sexual intercourse with a child which we are saying the child cannot consent. So we are equating that to rape. We are saying if you infect that particular child with an STI, that is an aggravating circumstance and your sentence must be stiffer.

          HON. DR. MUTODI: My point of discussion is on the issue of intentionally infecting the child with an STI. We are already saying that having sexual intercourse with a child is against the law. Just having that sexual intercourse is a breach of the law without even going to whether you have done it intentionally or unintentionally. I humbly ask if the Minister can revise the term ‘intentionally’ to include even cases where the person infecting the child did not do it intentionally or did not show any signs of whether he was doing it as punishment or some sort of unruly behaviour. I do not know if that can be accommodated.

          HON. MUSHORIWA:  I also want to buttress that point. There is no need Hon. Minister to use the word ‘intentionally’. It is actually bad for an adult to sleep with a child. It should just simply say, ‘a person whether knowingly or unknowingly know that you are HIV positive, syphilis of gonorrhea or whatever, if you just infect a child with a disease, it will be an aggravating circumstance’. We do not want to leave any room for lawyers to hide behind the word ‘intentional’. Let it just be given, you have to be punished accordingly.

          HON. Z. ZIYAMBI: I hear what the Hon. Members are saying and it is fully covered, there is no problem in the way it is couched. It gives two options. It is an aggravating feature whereby if we remove that it becomes very broad. Somebody may have sexual intercourse with a child when he fully knows that he is infected. There is a difference with somebody who knows that there is a real risk or possibility that he may be suffering from a disease. In sentencing the two will be different. If somebody is taking medication and goes on to do that, he did that with the intention, knowing fully well that there is a high probability. If you look at the word or the way it is couched, in (a) it says, “knowing that he or she is suffering”. There are those that know and go on to do that. It is aggravating. There are those that realise that there is a risk – so we have covered all that in the manner that the law has been couched.

 What becomes dangerous if we do not do that is that the prosecution will have to prove the existence of the essential elements of the crime and if you remove that, you make it broader. When you indicate that there must be a real possibility knowing fully well that you are infected, it is very easy sometimes to prove that. If the prosecution can prove that, that particular individual’s medical records show that they were taking antiretrovirals or they were under medication for an STI, they know because they were taking medication. If prosecution can prove that, that person is extremely promiscuous, there is a high probability that, that particular individual can infect; it is aggravating. We do not need to remove those words because they will ensure that improving the gravity of the crime, the prosecution will be able to do that easily. I so submit.

There is an error in the amendment on (b) on the last line where it says ‘with a sexually transmitted disease and liable to a fine up to or NOT exceeding’ – there is a ‘not’ that has been omitted there.

Amendment to New Clause 5 put and agreed to.

New Clause 5, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 5 Now Clause 6:

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Hon. Chair, I put amendments in my name on New Clause 5 which indicate that we are deleting in the Principal Act, as amended by the deletion from Paragraphs (b) and (  c) ‘of but below the age of 18 years’.  We are deleting that because we have already described the age group that is prohibited to have sexual intercourse is 12 to 18 years.  So we are proposing deletion of that in the Bill.  I thank you.

Amendments to Clause 5, now Clause 6 put and agreed to.

Clause 5, now Clause 6, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 6 now 7:

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Hon. Chair, I put the amendments as they appear in the Order Paper where we are changing the title procuring and substituting it with procuring for purposes of unlawful conduct and removing the word ‘prostitute’ and substitution that with ‘sex worker’. This is in line with the debate that happened here to say that the reference to prostitute is discriminatory.  Those of my kind are not generally referred to as prostitutes, so we have complied with the recommendations that came from the House to substitute ‘prostitute’ with a ‘sex worker’.

Amendments to Clause 6 now 7, put and agreed to

Clause 6, now Clause 7 as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 7 now 8:

HON. MATEWU: Thank you Hon. Chair.  When we make laws, I think it is important to be explicit.  This Clause is basically saying, ‘… being an owner or occupier of any premises knowingly permits another person on the premises to commit rape and so forth…’.  I wonder why we have to put knowingly.  Why should it be knowingly? I want to give an example. If Hon. Sacco gives Hon. Mutodi his premises, if this Clause is there, how are you going to prove that Hon. Sacco knowingly knew that Hon. Mutodi will come with a child on their premises?  I think the law must be explicit that if you give someone your premises, whether knowingly or unknowingly and such acts occur within your premises, then you must be liable by law.  That way people who provide such facilities in the locations say ‘mabase’ would be very much aware that there is nowhere that they can then say knowingly, I did not know that so and so was going to commit such an act. 

          I think the law should be explicit not to leave room that you can start to debate whether one knew or one did not know because it will be very difficult for any prosecutor to actually prove that someone knowingly gave someone a premise to commit that act.  I thank you.

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. MACHINGURA): Honourable, you gave an example of Hon. Sacco that if you are the owner of the hotel - what are you saying?

          HON. MATEWU: I think it is something better to deal with the perpetrator himself or herself.

          HON MUSHORIWA: I actually feel that this clause should actually be deleted from the Bill. Like we pointed during the Second Reading to the Hon. Minister, I do not think you can put the onus on the owners of hotels, lodges or even an owner of a house. For some of us who are MPs in high density suburbs, kids will always tell that I have given a base to John.  John can just come and he give him the keys to the room. You will not ask what sort of a girl he is bringing. So, this question of then saying that you can really have a successful prosecution of a person because he or she gave room to this person to commit such a crime, I think it is too much and I think this one is not necessary. I do not see how in a court of law a prosecutor can actually win a case against either the owner of the lodge or hotel or even our own people who call them bases in the locations. I think this one should be deleted.

          HON. MATEWU: I want to support Hon. Mushoriwa. The reason why I had said that, I want to make it clear for the Minister to know how extremely difficult that clause would become. I think the deletion of this Bill in total would be something that would be enable and would make the law very much applicable.  Like you said, in a hotel, are you going to arrest the owner of the hotel because the law would be saying the occupier or the owner? Are you going to arrest the owner of a lodge? I think it would be very difficult in terms of the law. I think what Hon. Mushoriwa said is correct, that clause is unnecessary. Thank you.

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Member, please make a correction. You referred to the deletion of the Bill. You wanted to say..

HON MATEWU: Sorry, the clause not the Bill.

HON. DR. MUTODI: I think the key word Hon. Chair is, we should provide the accommodation knowing fully that the child was going to be sexually exploited. That makes sense; any lawyer would know that there are elements of the crime that we need to comply with for someone to be found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. The clause as it is, it supports conviction beyond reasonable doubt if the owner of the place knew for certain that the child was going to be sexually exploited by him or her having provided that kind of accommodation. Hon. Matewu referred to a hotel. Maybe, there is a manager, and if the manager knew that a child was going to be sexually exploited, he or she is not different from a driver who drove a vehicle recklessly leading to an accident or death of a person. That would be the same analogy. Thank you.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: How many times do you want to debate Hon. Matewu?

HON. MATEWU: I thought in the Committee Stage we are allowed to debate.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Please proceed.

 HON. MATEWU: Thank you. I fundamentally disagree with Hon. Mutodi on this one. We should not be in the habit of making laws that can never apply. We must make laws that can be applicable and that can make sense. I still believe that this is an unnecessary clause that is in the Bill. Hon. Mutodi cites that if the manager of the hotel knows, the clause here is saying the occupier or the owner, are you going to go back now and trace because the manager is just an employee of the hotel? However, are you going to go to the owner who possibly, maybe it is a company or corporate or if it is not an individual where there are shareholders, are you going to arrest those shareholders? I think this clause here is misplaced. It leads to a lot of ambiguity that is so unnecessary. This clause must be deleted by the Hon. Minister. Thank you.

HON. DR. MUTODI: I think what Hon. Matewu is saying now makes sense. If the Bill is referring to the owner, it then means that if the hotel is multi-owned by several shareholders, it would be difficult to arrest all of them. However, I was talking in terms of saying there is a bus company, the owner is sitting somewhere, the driver is driving the bus and he drives it so recklessly that he causes the death of people in the bus. We would not go and arrest the owner; we would arrest the bus driver for recklessness. In this case, it would be the hotel manager who knew that the child was going to be sexually exploited and then gave the person accommodation. I thank you.

*HON. TSITSI ZHOU: Thank you Hon. Chair. I feel like if we say the owner of the place is the person who is responsible for identifying who comes to his or her place, the way the owner of a lodge or a hotel or a father and mother at their homestead where they receive an in-law who is below 18 years old, the owner is the one to be taken into custody so that they will have to take care of those people who come even while they are under age. Thank you.

HON. MATEWU: What the Hon. Member is referring to, let us take a hotel set-up.  There are shareholders, for example Crown Plaza, which is owned by Africa Sun, which does not have an explicit owner and has shareholders. Are you then saying that those 20 shareholders -  not just 20 shareholders because they will be, you know the way equity works, it can have 1000 shareholders. Are you then going to pin-point and say all these people have not made laws - let us be serious here.  Let us not make laws that jeopardise tourism, that jeopardise our hotels and lodges. What is going to happen is that, if you pass the clause as it is, it means that hotels have to be extra careful but how are they going to be careful. Are they then going to be asking everyone that are you going upstairs or which room are you going to because most hotels are free flow? I think we have not thought through properly. I believe the perpetrator of that crime or the one who committed that offence on the child is the one who is supposed to face the law as it is and to face justice. We are trying to be a country that encourages tourism, to make sure our hotels are filled up. The moment we start to put stringent laws that undermine the growth of this tourism industry, I think we will lose the float. The law must be clear.  If you are going to be found guilty or if you are going to commit this act on a child, you are responsible for that.  If we cannot separate the hotel and individual houses, like we were saying kuma base, kumba and so forth.  If we cannot separate those, then this clause must fall away.  Otherwise we are making a law trying to address one particular issue but we end up affecting the whole industry.  I think this clause is not fit for the purpose. 

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  I think there is another Honourable who debated saying if you are the owner of the house, you are liable.  I wanted that person to clarify, if your son or daughter in your absence provide a friend with a base then what happens to you? 

          *HON. NYABANI:  Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.  Some of the laws that we put in place, let us scrutinise them, like to say in a hotel, we are simply saying people who sleep in a hotel should be 18 years and above.  By so doing, we will be prohibiting all those children below 18 to enter hotels.  That is what we are trying to say, we are saying children below the age of 18 are not allowed into the hotel.  If we say somebody who is 18 years - we have Hon. Members here, they have their children who actually visit them in hotels to collect some money, groceries, how then are you going to identify that this person who is entering is coming for genuine visit, deals or something else?  My opinion is, let us not criminalise that.  Let us simply say this one has entered a hotel to abuse someone who is below 18 – a hotel has not done anything wrong but those people who are committing crimes inside, those are the perpetrators. 

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):  Hon. Chair, just to guide the debate, this section refers to complicity in sexual crime, so debate along those lines. 

          HON. TOGAREPI:  I think the Minister has taken words from my mouth.  Let me start from the manager and the owner.   The manager, in the contract of employment is an agent of the owner.  A manager is part of the ownership of the hotel, whoever accepts such an act to be done under their roof is liable.  There are people who run brothels.  They are into business for that, maybe in a hotel where people have gone into a room, you will not know but there are people who are into business of facilitating sexual relationships and they are paid.  I feel that there should be a way to deal with people who are complicit in this situation. 

          Hon. Chair, how do we do that.  There is a law in this country where if somebody is booking in a hotel must identify himself or herself.  In the process of identification, you are able to know the age of the person or whether a person is a foreigner or not.  So you can correctly charge.  I think we need to curtail the part of complicity; it is very critical because there are people who have got houses dotted around Harare specifically for that.  In most of these cases, you do not see young children going to hotels to do that.  They will go to these houses called bases as what Members were saying today. 

          Hon. Chair, I do not know how it can be couched but let us deal with those who are promoting those sexual relations for the minors in those brothels. Thank you.

          HON. DR. MUTODI:  Hon. Chair, I want the Minister to take cognisance of another situation where maybe where an adult son may be twenty years of age brings a muroora who is less than 18 years of age and the parents of the son accommodate muroora like what is happening in Apostolic Sects.  Maybe someone who is 14 years old or a 15-year old atiziswa by a person who is an adult.  Are we going to arrest the mother and the father since they co-own the house that is being used for the sexual exploitation of the child?  How are we going to deal with that?

          HON. BAJILA:  I think in principle, it is important for us to have a law that criminalises one from being complicity in these kinds of things.  It cannot just be open that people will be aware that criminal activities are being conducted in their premises and there is nothing that touches them. 

Hon. Mutodi just raised another point which is linked to what I was about to also give as an example on the need to look into this broadly and perhaps have a means of differentiating between corporate entities and individual entities in terms of the penalty that would follow after that.  Also, if you read 76 (a), the whole amendment as proposed, there is the point around the degree of relationship.  It is a question of people knowing that this one and this one are cousins.  In terms of our laws, that is incest. It is not allowed but space is given for them to be involved in sexual activities.  Clearly, the two of them must be liable for something and those who create that kind of environment to exist must also be liable for something because they are aware that these people are relatives and they are aware of what they can create. 

Hon. Chair, but we need to then find ourselves asking the question, how are we going to have proof in the context of corporate entities that they are aware you might be having two people, male and a female who are cousins and they check in at a hotel to commit an act of incest.  Clearly, the hotel has no means of knowing that these two are cousins.  That is why the point that says knowingly doing so, if there is a way that we can explicitly put that, how are we going to prove that this was known?  I think then, it will be okay. 

          Hon. Chair, the problem lies largely in saying, you are unlikely to get successful prosecution in most of these cases where it would be difficult to prove knowledge that this act is going to be done.  However, there are some cases that knowledge will be easy to prove, like the one that Hon. Mutodi spoke of, that this one is a young girl, she is 18 and traditionally, it has been said that she must be married to my son.  I am aware of this.  If she is brought to my home, I will provide space for her and my son.  Clearly there is proof and it is easy to prove and even the one of incest, but others will be complex to prove and we might need to go deeper into dealing with proving it, specifically in the context of corporate entities.  I thank you.

          HON. MUSHORIWA:  Hon. Chair, I think if you read this Clause 7 (a), the key word is ‘knowingly’ and without further definition of knowingly, then this will not help us as a nation.  You will never and I bet my last dollar, it will be difficult to have a successful prosecution using the law as it is.  If the Minister insists that he wants it, then I think he needs to do a further amendment to possibly then come up with explicit cases which define knowingly.  Maybe like what Hon. Mutodi said, that if you do this or that but leaving it as it is, I do not think it will be a good law for this country because no prosecution will happen.  We will see people getting arrested, but I think this will be an easier way for lawyers to make money because you will just be hired and you go there. However, can you prove the knowingly part?  Remember, in a criminal case, you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt.  So this one is not worth it and I think it should be removed from this Bill.

          HON. Z. ZIYAMBI:  Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.  Before I go further, I have just observed that my drafters made a mistake.  The reference should be to a ‘child’ and not a ‘young person’ because as it is, it is exactly the same as it is currently in the Criminal Code, but we are removing the definition of a young person and putting the definition of a child.  In this particular case, we are dealing with having sexual intercourse with children between the ages of 12 and 18.  Before I respond, I am actually proposing that where in the Bill reference is made to a young person, we change that to a child. 

Having said that, I earlier on stood and said this particular Section makes reference to being complicit in sexual crimes.  The way it is worded indicates that if you are an owner or occupier - I want to thank Hon. Mutodi and Hon. Togarepi for the way they explained.  Being the owner or occupier of premises knowingly permits and trying to establish that a crime has been committed, there are elements of that particular crime that the prosecution must prove.  In fact, they must prove those points beyond reasonable doubt.  So the law acts as a protector for those that might be innocent and ensure that those that are guilty are nailed by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.  You will find out that the prosecution should actually bring out the mens rea, that you knew what you were doing and you did that.  Having said that, I want to add that in society, there are people who do exactly like this and our investigating officers are able to see a particular pattern.  So, if we say we expunge it from the Bill, we have actually given them a licence to do that. 

There is a specific pattern that comes out in terms of those that deal with brothels.  Our law enforcement agents or our investigators can actually pin-point a specific pattern that this particular brothel even when investigating it, the young child can actually indicate so and so is the one who picked me up and did one, two, three, four and then this particular person came in.  That is why I said that this particular provision has always been there.  We want to deter people who use their premises.  It is different from two young people who pick up each other and go home. There are those that use their premises for that particular purpose and you can have a specific pattern.  We are saying that if the prosecution can prove - because when you are investigating a case, you pick certain essential elements that will nail them and you will say this particular child said this.  This is a deterrence mechanism that we are putting in our law.  It is not going to affect hotels that would not know who went in, but if that particular manager has a habit of facilitating and the prosecution can prove it - this is what we are saying here that if the owner and even agency of owner knowingly permits another person to do that and it is proved beyond reasonable doubt, those essential elements of proving a crime that Hon. Mutodi was talking about; if they are proved, this is the kind of behaviour that we do not want.  We are putting it in our Code as a deterrence and also to punish those that would want to do it.  So I move Hon. Chair, that we keep this.  It is already in the Code anyway, but the change that we need is to remove the young person and replace it with child so that it becomes consistent with the letter and spirit of our Constitution.  I so submit Hon. Chair.

          Amendment to Clause 7, now Clause 8, put and agreed to.

          Clause 7, now Clause 8, as amended, put and agreed to.

          On Clause 8, now Clause 9:

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):   Hon. Chair, I am proposing that we expunge this from the Bill as we have already dealt with it.  I thank you.

          Amendment to Clause 8, now Clause 9 put and agreed to.

          Clause 8, now Clause 9, as amended, put and agreed to.

          THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order, sorry Hon. Members, I have to go back to Clause 7, which is now 8.  Where it says ‘young person’, it must actually read to say ‘child’.

          Amendment to Clause 7, now Clause 8 put and agreed to.

          Clause 7, now Clause 8, as amended, put and agreed to.

           On Clause 9, now Clause 10:

          THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON ZIYAMBI): I move the amendment standing in my name:

On page 5 of the Bill, delete in Clause 9 on line 1, the title “Procuring” and substitute “Procuring for purposes of unlawful sexual conduct”.

On page 5 of the Bill, delete in Clause 9 on line 6 the word “prostitute” and substitute “sex worker”.

*HON TAFANANA ZHOU: I need to seek clarification on Clause 10 which replaces Section 83 and Section 86 of the Criminal Law Codification Act which was declared by the Constitutional Court. I simply need clarification from the Hon. Minister to say when it was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court up to the time when His Excellency used his powers to make a law, a lot of crimes were committed. I kindly need you the Minister to tell us what is it that should be done since there was no active law by then.

          HON. Z. ZIYAMBI: Rules of procedure dictate that we do not debate general issues in Committee. We speak to the actual clauses. I submit.

Amendment to Clause 9 now Clause 10 put and agreed to.

Clause 9 now Clause 10 as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 10 now Clause 11:

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): I move the amendment standing in my name that:

On page 5 of the Bill, delete in Clause 10 on the word “young person” wherever it occurs and substitute “child”.

On page 5 of the Bill, delete in Clause 10, the proviso between lines 39 and 41 and substitute the following:

“Provided that such a defence may be refuted by the prosecutor adducing evidence to the effect that the accused person knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the child concerned was under the age of eighteen years at the time of the alleged crime.”.

During the Committee Stage, there was debate to the effect that this clause was not very clear where it said ‘provided that the apparent physical maturity of the young person, consent shall not on its own constitute reasonable cause for the purposes of this sub section’. This is the clarification that if the Prosecutor General now adducing evidence to show that you knew if you proffer the defence that I did not know that this particular child was below the age of 18 because of the physical appearance, then the Prosecutor General can actually adduce evidence that will prove that you knew and that defence falls away. We put that particular paragraph to give comfort to ensure that those who unknowingly had sexual intercourse with a child, the burden of proof is on the Prosecutor General to prove that they knew. I move that we adopt this amendment.

Amendment to Clause 10 now Clause11 put and agreed to.

Clause 10 now Clause 11, as amended, put and agreed to.

Clause 11 now Clause 12 put and agreed to.

          New Clause 13 inserted after Clause 12;

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI):  Thank you Hon. Chair. I move the amendments as they fully appear on the Order Paper. After Clause 11 (now 12) on page 7 of the Bill, insert the following clause—

13  Minor amendments to Cap. 2:13

The provisions of the principal Act specified in the first column of the Schedule are amended to the extent set out opposite thereto in the second column. Schedule (Section 13) Minor Amendments to Criminal Law Code

Provision   Extent of Amendment

Section 81 (1) By the deletion of “prostitution” and the substitution of “sex work”. Sections 82, by the deletion of “prostitution” and “prostitute” wherever it occurs and the substitution of “sex work” and “sex worker” respectively.

Section 87, by the deletion of “prostitute” and “prostitutes”

wherever it occurs and the substitution of “sex worker” and

“sex workers” respectively:  where I am proposing a new

Clause 12 after Clause 11, that is minor amendment to

[Chapter 2.13] and where we indicate that the provisions of

the principal Act specified in the first column of the Schedule are amended to the extent set out opposite thereto in the second column.  So, there is a schedule there where I am indicating that wherever the word ‘prostitute’ appears, it be deleted and substituted with ‘sex worker’ wherever it appears in Section 81 (I) section 82 and Section 87 respectively.  I so submit.

Amendment to New Clause 12 put and agreed to.

New Clause 12, as amended, put and agreed to.

House resumed.

Bill reported with amendments.

Bill referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Hon. Speaker, I move that Orders of the Day, Nos. 4 to 8 be stood over until Order of the Day No. 9 has been disposed of.

Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

ADMINISTRATION OF THE NATIONAL CADASTRE

SYSTEM TO THE ZIMBABWE NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL

AND SPACE AGENCY

Nineth Order read: Adjourned debate on motion on the establishment of the Electronic Cadastre and Mining Cadastre Systems.

Question again proposed.

HON. TIMBURWA: Thank you Madam Speaker.  Today we are debating a motion on a matter of significant national importance, the establishment of electronic Cadastre and Mining Cadastre system.  The Minister of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion indicated in the Budget Statement on the 30^th of November 2023 that the 2024 National Budget would cater for an electronic cadastre system to be administered by the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Resettlement and a mining cadastre system to be administered by the Ministry of Mines and Mining Development.

Of Concern Madam Speaker, cost and efficiency, it is concerning that establishing two separate cadastre systems under different ministries carry significant cost implications and risk inefficiency.  Let us consider the financial and operational impact.  Cost implications; duplication infrastructures and administrative functions across two ministries will inflate costs.  We must avoid spending excessively when our budget can be utilised more effectively. 

Establishment, maintaining a separate system requires extensive resources including technology staff and on-going operational costs. 

Operational efficiency, managing two separate systems can lead to fragmented data management increasing the likelihood of discrepancies and reducing data reliability. 

Inter-ministerial coordination challenges could lead to delays and bureaucratic shadows slowing down decision making processes.  Zimbabwe National Geospatial and Space Agency capacity already possesses the infrastructure and technical capacity to administer a comprehensive national cadastre system. Here are some of the facts;

Technical expertise; ZINGSA specialises in geospatial data management, satellite imagery and spatial analysis. Their expertise aligns perfectly with the requirements for managing an efficient cadastre system.

Integrating the cadastre systems under ZINGSA would ensure high quality data management and technical precision.

          Existing Infrastructure

          ZINGSA already has the necessary infrastructure in place, which can be utilised to develop and manage the National Cadastre system without significant additional investment. This existing infrastructure include advanced date centres, GIS software and trained personnel capable of handling large scale data projects.

          An electronically Cadastre system is a digitalised platform that manages and records information about land parcels and their ownership.  It integrates geospatial data (maps, satellite imagery) with legal information (ownership, land use rights) to create a comprehensive and up to date database of land information.    This system is crucial for several reasons:

          Accuracy and Precision

          Electronic cadastre utilises advanced geospatial technologies such as geographical information systems (GIS) and global positioning system (GPS) to provide accurate mapping of land parcels.  This accuracy is essential for resolving land disputes, planning infrastructure in projects and managing natural resources.

          Real Time Updates

          Unlike traditional paper-based system, electronic Cadastres can be updated in real time, ensuring that the information is always current and reliable.  Real Time updates are crucial for monitoring land transactions, changes in land use and development in real estates markets. 

          Accessibility and Transparency

          A digital Cadastre system is accessible to various stakeholders, including Government agencies, land owners, investors and general public.  This transparency helps to reduce corruption, prevent fraudulent land transactions and builds trust among stakeholders.

          Hon. Speaker, the importance of the Cadastre system land mines registry system is as follows;

          Streamlining Land Administration

          A centralised land and mines registry system is critical in streamlining land administration in Zimbabwe, by consolidating land and mining data into a single system, we can ensure more efficient and transparent management of these resources.  Such a system will facilitate faster and more accurate processing of land and mining rights, reducing bureaucratic delays and improving service delivery to citizens and businesses.

          Enhanced Data Utilisation

          Utilising satellite imagery and geospatial data, ZINGSA can accurately monitor and manage land use across the country.  This capability is particularly important for identifying under utilised farms and lands.  For example, satellite imagery can reveal fertile regions with little to know agricultural activities, allowing the Government to take corrective action, such as relocating land to more productive use or providing targeted support to farmers.

          Supporting Agriculture Development

          A centralised system will enable the Government to identify and address issues of land under utilised.  By pinpointing regions where fertile land is not being used effectively, targeted interventions can be made to boost agricultural productivity and food security, accurate land data is essential for planning and implementing agricultural policies that maximise the use of available resource and promote sustainable farming practice.

          Transparency and Conflict Reduction

          A centralised registry enhances transparency in land and mining transaction, reducing the likelihood of disputes over ownership and usage rights.  Clear and accessible records help to resolve conflicts efficiently and fairly. Transparency in land administration also builds trust among investors, encourage more investment in agriculture and mining sector.

          Economic Growth and Investment

          Streamlined land and mines administration attracts both domestic and foreign investment.  Investors are more likely to commit resources to a country with clear, reliable and transparent land and mining records.  A well-managed Cadastre system can significantly boost economic growth by creating a more predictable and secure environment for business operations.

          Resource Allocation and Planning

          A centralised Cadastre system provides the Government with comprehensive data on land and resource allocation.  This information is vital for effective planning and development projects.  It enables better coordination among different Government agencies and ensures that resources are allocated effectively and equitably.

          Securing Investments and Addressing Land Disputes

          Securing of investments:

          For both local and foreign investors, the security of their investment is paramount. A centralised Cadastre system ensures that land and mining rights are clearly defined and legally recognised. The legal clarity protects investors from potential disputes and fraudulent claims, providing them with the confidence to invest in long-term projects.  

          Ringfencing Investment

          A robust and transparent registry system allows investors to “ring -fence” their investments, meaning they can clearly demarcate and secure their assets.  This protection is essential for securing financing, as financial institutions require undisputed titles of land and mining rights before they extent loans or investments.

          Reducing Land Disputes

          Land disputes are a significant barrier to economic development.  They often arise from unclear overlapping land rights and lead to prolonged legal battles.  A centralised Cadastre system provides a single, authoritative source of information on land ownership and usage rights.  This clarity helps to prevent disputes from arising and facilitates quicker resolutions when they do occur.

          Improving Governance and Rule of Law

          A centralised registry enhances the rule of law by ensuring that all land and mining transactions are recorded and governed by consistent legal standards.  This system improves governance by making it easier for authorities to enforce land and mining loans, reducing opportunities for corruption and illegal activities.  We can draw lessons from other nations that have successfully implemented the centralised Cadastre system.

          Norway:  Norway is centralised Land Registry System has proven effective in streamlining land administration processing, reducing conflict and enhancing data accuracy.  This system has significantly reduced the time and cost associated with land transactions.

          Rwanda: Coming closer home, we have got a country like Rwanda.  Rwanda’s Land Tenure Regularisation Programme Centralised Land registration under a single agency, resulting in improved land tenure, security and increased investment in land. 

          Potential Challenges and Solutions

          Transition Concerns

          Acknowledge potential challenges during the transition, such as data migration and system integration.  Propose a phased implementation plan with clear timelines and milestones to ensure smooth transition. 

          Stakeholder Engagement

          Emphasise the importance of engaging all relevant stakeholders, including Ministries, land owners and miners to address their concerns and ensure their cooperation.

          Impact on Stakeholders

          For Land owners and Miners

          A unified Cadastre system would provide clear and reliable information on land and mining rights, enhancing security and facilitating investment. Simplified processes and reduced bureaucratic delay would benefit both land owners and miners.

          For Government Agencies

          Streamlined data management would enable data planning and resource allocation, supporting national development goals.  Enhanced coordination between agencies would improve overall governance and service delivery.

          Detailed Cost Analysis

           

          Total Estimated Cost over five years $8,500,000 - $14,700,000.

          Potential Economic Benefits

          Direct Revenue Generation.

          Land Registration Fees

          Estimated revenue: if we assume that the system facilitate 100 000 transactions annually and each transaction generates $50.00 in fees, the annual revenue would be approximately $5 million.

Five year revenue: $25 000 000.

2. Commercial Mining Licences:

Estimated Revenue:

With efficient processing and transparency, the system could attract more commercial mining investments. If 500 new commercial mining licences are issued annually at $10 000 each, the annual revenue would be $5 000 000.

Five Year Revenue: $25 000 000

Indirect Economic Benefits:

1. Increased Investment:

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI);

A reliable cadastre system increases investor confidence, potentially boosting FDI in agriculture, mining and real estate. If the system attracts an additional $50 000 000 annually in FDI, the indirect economic benefit over five years could be $250 000 000.

2. Enhanced Agricultural Productivity:

Improved Land Utilisation;

By identifying underutilised fertile lands, the system can help increase agricultural output. If better land utilisation results in a 10% increase in agricultural GDP, contributing an additional $100 000 000 annually, the five-year benefit could be $500 000 000.

3. Reduction in Land Disputes:

Legal and Administrative Savings;

Efficiently resolving land disputes saves legal costs and administrative expenses. If the system reduces such costs by

$10 000 000 annually, the five-year savings could be $50 000 000.

4. Economic Growth from Infrastructure Development:

Infrastructure Projects;

Accurate land data supports infrastructure projects. Improved infrastructure can lead to an estimated five percent increase in overall economic activity. If this translates to an additional $100 000 000 annually in economic output, the five-year benefit could be $500 000 000.

Summary of Potential Economic Benefits

1. Direct Revenue Generation:

Land registration fees: $25 000 000

Commercial Mining Licences: $25 000 000

2. Indirect Economic Benefits:

Increased FDI: $250 000 000

Enhanced Agricultural Productivity: $500 000 000

Reduction in Land Disputes: $50 000 000

Economic Growth from Infrastructure Development: $500 000 000

Total Estimated Economic Benefits over five years: **$1 350 000 000

Cost-Benefit Analysis:

Total Estimated Cost over five years: $8 500 000 - $14 700 000

Total Estimated Economic Benefits over five years: $1 350 000 000

By implementing a centralised cadastre system, Zimbabwe could potentially realise significant economic benefits, estimated at $1.35 billion over five years, far outweighing the estimated costs of $8.5 million to $14.7 million. This highlights the substantial return on investment and underscores the importance of advancing this critical infrastructure project for national development and economic prosperity.

          Hon. Speaker, I support this motion on setting up of the National Cadastre System. With your indulgence Madam Speaker, I propose a motion for the setting up of a National Cadastre System in Zimbabwe with immediate effect. This system will centralise land and mining administration, enhancing transparency, efficiency, and economic growth.

I strongly recommend establishment of the Centralised Cadastre Implementation Committee. I rise to propose a motion for the establishment of a Centralised Cadastre Implementation Committee.  To harness the benefits of a centralised cadastre system, it is essential to have a dedicated body overseeing its integration and implementation. This committee will ensure efficient coordination and expedite the deployment of the National Cadastre System. To harness the benefits of a centralised cadastre system, it is essential to establish a dedicated committee to oversee its integration and implementation. This will ensure efficient coordination and expedite the system’s deployment.

          Recognising the importance of a centralised cadastre system for national development and economic prosperity, this House resolves to establish a Centralised Cadastre Implementation Committee by 1^st July, 2024. This committee will oversee the integration, implementation, and continuous improvement of the National Cadastre System, ensuring efficient coordination between the Zimbabwe National Geospatial and Space Agency (ZINGSA) and relevant ministries.

Specific Dates:

Formation of Committee: 1 July, 2024.

First Committee Report: 1 September, 2024.

Adoption of the National Cadastre System Implementation Timeline;

Furthermore, I propose a motion for the adoption of a clear implementation timeline for the National Cadastre System. This timeline will ensure coordinated efforts and the swift realisation of the system’s benefits. I urge this House to consider these motions as critical steps towards the efficient and timely implementation of the National Cadastre System. A clear implementation timeline for the National Cadastre sytem is essential for timely execution. This timeline will ensure coordinated efforts and swift realisation of the system’s benefits.

          In light of the need for a structured and timely implementation of the National Cadastre System, this House calls upon the Government to adopt the following implementation timeline:

1. Initial Infrastructure Set-up and Software Development: 1^st August, 2024 to 31^st December, 2024.
2. Data Migration and Integration: 1^st January, 2025 to 30^th June, 2025.
3. Training and Capacity Building Programmes: 1^st February, 2025 to 31^st July, 2025.
4. System Go-Live and Full Operation: 1^st August, 2025.

This timeline will facilitate a smooth transition to a centralised cadastre system, promoting transparency, efficiency and economic growth. 

Hon. Members, it is imperative that we prioritise the establishment of a unified National Cadastre System under ZINGSA. This approach not only ensures cost efficiency and operational effectiveness but also aligns with Zimbabwe’s long-term vision for economic growth and sustainable development. By consolidating the cadastre systems, we can harness the full potential of geospatial data to drive progress and prosperity for our nation.

          I urge you all to support this motion and assign the responsibility of administering the National Cadastre System to ZINGSA. Let us take this decisive step towards a more efficient, transparent and prosperous future for Zimbabwe. Embracing technological advancements like a centralised cadastre system is not just a step forward; it is a leap towards a future where transparency, efficiency and economic prosperity are within our grasp. Let us harness the power of technology to unlock our nation’s true potential and secure a brighter, more sustainable future for all Zimbabweans. Thank you, Hon. Speaker.

          HON. KANGAUSARU: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Greetings from Hurungwe. Thank you for granting me this opportunity to add my voice on this topic debate on the National Cadastre System. Madam Speaker, I stand before this esteemed august House today to add my two senses on the critical issues concerning the National Cadastre System. In a nutshell, the cadastre system is a method of recording and managing information about the land ownership, boundaries and values. It is a comprehensive system that provides a framework for the administration and management of land rights, interest and restrictions. It is in other words, a methodical arranged public inventory of data concerning all legal land objects in Zimbabwe based on the surveying of our boundaries. In other words, it is a parcel based and up to date land information system containing a record of interest in land. It usually includes a geometric description of land parcels linked to other records describing the nature of the interest, the ownership and the control of these interests and often the value on the parcel and its improvement.

          Madam Speaker, the main four components of this system includes the land registration, recording ownership and title information. Let me say it must exclude the communal land “kumusha, kumaruzeva ngakungogara kurikumaruzeva” in order for us to preserve our values, our traditions and our cultures.  The second component that is crucial, it is the cadastre mapping creating and maintaining maps of land boundaries and parcels.  The third component which is crucial in this system is the land evaluation, assessing the value of land for taxation, sale and other purposes. The fourth one being land use regulations, managing zoning land use and development restrictions.  Automatic systems restore and manage lands information which will be able for us to move from manual to automatic.

 Allow me Madam Speaker, to highlight some of the points in favour of the national cadastre system.  It provides a centralised and standardised system for managing land information thereby reducing errors and inconsistencies.  The second one, it provides a clear and secure documentation of land ownership reducing disputes and conflicts.  It streamlines land transactions such as buying and selling by providing easy access to land information.  It also provides valuable data for urban and regional planning, allowing for more informed decision making.

It reduces the opportunity of corrupt parties such as fraudulent land transfers.

          Allow me Madam Speaker, at this juncture to highlight some of the pitfalls of this system that need to be worked around for the system to be a success.  The cadastre system has high implementation costs.  In order for us to implement it, it costs us dearly.  Establishing a national cadastre system requires significant investment in technology, infrastructure and personnel. There is also the privacy concern.  A national cadastre system raises concern about the privacy and the security of land owners’ personal information.  Resistance to change also is one of the pitfalls.  Land owners and local authorities may resist the introduction of a new system particularly, if they are accustomed to traditional methods.  The manual system, the complexity also is one of them.  A national cadastre system can be complex to establish and to maintain, requiring significant technical expertise.  One of the other thing also Madam Speaker, is that there is a potential for errors.  A national Cadastre system is not immune to errors, which can have significant consequences, such as incorrect ownership records.

          In summary, the cadastre system gives goals like to provide land tenure and property rights.  It facilitates efficiency, land transactions and development.  It enhances land use and planning and management.  Overally, the implementation of national cadastre system requires careful concentration of these points, as well as consultation with the stakeholders and experts in the field.  The National Cadastre System in Zimbabwe is currently developing with the Ministry of Mines and Mining Development undergoing a data capture and a cleaning process.

          As already alluded to, this system aims to provide a comprehensive and accurate database of land ownership and boundaries, enhancing land administration and management in Zimbabwe. Once complete, the system will be an available tool for land owners, investors, Government agencies, promoting transparency, efficiency and sustainable land use.  I thank you.

          HON. MUKOMBERI: Thank you Madam Speaker for the opportunity granted to add my voice to the motion on the National Cadastre System. A cadastre system is a digital platform that records and manages mining licences, concessions and other legal instruments related to mining and agricultural corrections in Zimbabwe.  It provides a transparent and accessible data base for all stakeholders such as Government Officials, investors and communities to track and monitor mining activities in the country.  It is quite commendable that Zimbabwe as a country is moving toward the betterment of mining and agricultural industry land use in relation to the merging of such a system in the tool industrial activities. 

          The advantages of such a cadastre system that it will bring maybe to the mining industry in Zimbabwe include among others, elimination of corruption.  How does it eliminate corruption Madam Speaker? A cadastre system eliminates corruption and promotes good governance by digitalising the process.  It becomes more challenging for corrupt officials to manipulate licences and engage in illicit activities because all transactions and approvals are recorded and this allows a clear trail of accountability and reducing opportunities for wide spread corruption in terms of the allocation of the mining land and even an agricultural land.

          Secondly, it facilitates the attraction of foreign direct investment and how is that Madam Speaker? Transparency that is enhanced through this cadastre system is crucial in attracting foreign direct investment into the mining sector because international investors often prioritise countries with strong legal frameworks and reliable systems in place.  So a robust mining cadastre would give the investors the confidence to invest in Zimbabwe knowing that their right and licences are properly registered and protected. 

To add more on that Madam Speaker, such a cadastre system also facilitates in reducing bureaucratic hurdles.  That is to say an iron plant mining cadastre system can help stream line administrative processes and reduce bureaucratic hurdles.  Currently, obtaining mining licences and conducting due diligence in Zimbabwe is time consuming and cumbersome and a digital platform would simplify procedures, reduce red tape and enhance efficiency.  Apart from that, a cadastre system also improves the involvement of local communities when it comes to the allocation and use of land in terms of mining and agricultural activities. 

It is pertinent to note that a mining cadastre system enhances inclusion of local communities in terms of the mining operations, the impact to the nearby communities and their livelihoods.  Through that system communities can access information regarding mining activities in their areas ensuring that they have a say and are consulted in the decision-making processes.  This information is easy to access since it will be a digital process in a digital platform.

          Lastly, it facilitates evidence-based policy making. The mining cadastral would enhance data collection and analysis providing valuable insights for evidence-based policy making. Accurate and up to date information on mining licences and agricultural production; the production of volumes, revenues and environmental impacts can empower law makers, regulators and researchers to make informed decision to maximise the benefits of mining and such activities while minimising its negative impacts.

          I want to make this humble submission and say it is prudent that Zimbabwe will emerge a digital cadastre system on agricultural land as well as mining land. Thank you.

          HON. TOGAREPI: I move that the debate do now adjourn.

          HON. BAJILA: I second

          Motion put and agreed to.

          Debate to resume: Wednesday, 12^th June, 2024.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

HON. TOGAREPI: I move that all Orders of the Day on today’s Order Paper be stood over until Order of the Day Number 10 has been disposed of.

          HON. MUSHORIWA: I second

          Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

LEGISLATION TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF

PREVIOUSLY MARGINALISED LANGUAGES

          Tenth Order read: Adjourned debate on motion on the officially recognised languages of Zimbabwe.

          Question again proposed.

          HON. KANGAUSARU: Thank you Madam Speaker for allowing me and for giving this opportunity to debate on this motion that calls for the promotion and teaching of local languages in our schools. This is a matter of paramount importance as the preservation of our indigenous tongues is essential for the cultural preservation and intellectual enrichment of the people of Zimbabwe.

          The statistics paint a static picture and according to the latest census data, only 67% of Zimbabweans speak their native language at home with the remaining 33% opting for the use of English and other foreign languages. This troubling trend represents a gradual erosion of our linguistic heritage and impediment to the holistic development of our youth.

          We need to look no further than our neighbouring countries to witness the immense benefit that arise from the promotion of local languages in education. In South Africa for example, the 11 official languages are mandatorily taught in schools, resulting in the citizen that is not only multi-linguistic, but deeply connected to their cultural roots.

          The linguistic diversity has been well-spring of innovation, creativity and social coherence. Similarly, if we look at other countries like Tanzania, Swahili enjoys the status of a national language with it being the primary medium of instruction at both primary and secondary schools. This has led to a remarkable unit of purpose and identity among the Tanzanian people while also facilitating broad access to education and economic opportunities.

          Further, I believe that Zimbabwe must follow into footsteps of these success stories. By managing the teaching of a rich contemporary of local languages from Shona and Ndebele to the myriad of minority tongues, we can empower our students to take pride in their cultural heritage while also equipping them with the linguistic tool to strive in an increasingly globalised world.

          In addition, the benefits of this approach extend far beyond the confines of the classroom. The promotion of local language will foster strong community bonds, boost culture tourism, provide a well spring of inspiration for our artists, poets and story tellers. It is an investment in our national identity that will pay dividend for generations to come. When a nation’s citizens are fluent in their native language, it creates a fertile ground for the fruition of creative industries. Just look at the example of India where the resurgence of regional language films, literature and music has been the driving force behind the country’s booming creative economy. In the State of Tamil Nadu for instance, the film industry known as Bollywood creates an estimated US$2.1 billion in annual revenue and employs 300 000 people.

        This vibrant cultural ecosystem has not only provided lucrative careers for actors, directors and producers, but it has sprung a thrilling market of merchandise, tourism and related services. Similarly, in Kenya the rise of the Kenyan literary scenes with authors writing Swahili and other languages has been a boom for the country’s creative industries. Writers like Ngugi wa Thiongo and others have gained global recognition while also inspiring a new generation of Kenyan story tellers. This has also enriched the nation as a whole and has also generated valuable export earnings and job opportunities.

        Zimbabwe is blessed with a rich contemporary of rich linguistic and cultural diversity. By empowering our students to become fluent in their native language, we will be unlocking the tremendous potential of our poetry, artists and story tellers. Imagine the resurgence of Shona and Ndebele literature, the flourishing of Mbira music and the global acumen that could be earned by the Zimbabwean film makers showcasing the vibrancy of our local languages like Ndau and Chewa.

Furthermore, the economic impact of such cultural renaissance cannot be overstated. The creativity industry has the power to general sustainable employment and attract tourism, hence our nation’s soft power on global stage. Moreover, the cultivation of a vibrant and local language-based creativity economy we serve to preserve and to celebrate our unique identity, fostering a profound sense of national pride and unity, are tantamount to the Zimbabwean people.

I implore my colleagues to lend unwavering support to this motion. Let us see the opportunity to chat a course towards Zimbabwe where our children learn to speak the language of their ancestors with pride, dignity, integrity and sincerity. Our diversity linguistic can be celebrated as a source of strength, where our national consciousness is rooted in the rich soil of our cultural heritage. I urge my fellow Hon. Members to embrace this motion with unwavering commitment. Let us invest in the empowerment of our poetry, artists, story-tellers, for in doing so, we shall unlock the untagged potential, the boundless economic and cultural potential that lie within the rich template of our indigenous language. I thank you.

*HON. NYABANI: Thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am. I wanted to say this motion has come at the right time. In fact, it should have come long back for us to debate in this House. If you look at countries like China, they do everything which is good for their nation. Our Great Zimbabwe in Masvingo was built by people who could hardly speak English. People think that it is a modern way of doing things if they speak in English.

This motion has been tabled at the right time because in Zimbabwe, when somebody wants to go to a university, you will be asked to have English as a compulsory subject, even if you want to go to a college. When we say 16 officially recognised languages in our country, why are we only saying English is compulsory? What is so important to have that English? I appreciate this motion. We do not have to look down upon our mother languages thinking or expecting that foreign languages are more important than ours. Others feel that those are the languages which bring us closer to God, but what we are simply saying is, if it is Mathematics, we have somebody who understands to say if I add one plus one, we come up with two.

Let those children learn using that vernacular language. If it is Ndebele, Tonga, Kalanga or any other language, children should be taught in their mother languages which they understand. If children complete their education level, they will do something tangible. When I did my O’ levels, I went to a mission college where they asked if I had English. I said I did not have English and then they said, ‘you want to go and learn mechanics?’ Is English that very important to do that course?  

As black people, we want to take a longer route which is not ours, leaving our own way. Other people try their level best to speak in English when they are in Parliament of which they cannot even eat. If you have any language, it is a mode of communication from one person to the other. You simply want to understand what you want to do. So, if you are in Zimbabwe, I am encouraging all of us that whenever you go to universities or colleges, or wherever you go, people must be taught in their mother language.

I think what is important is to know what you want to do after school. People come from China and they do not even know English. When they come here, they look for somebody who can translate Chinese to English language and the translator will accompany them wherever they go. That Chinese person is doing something tangible in their motherland. In Zimbabwe, if somebody knows his/her duties, you will be looked down upon simply because you cannot speak English. Why do you not look for somebody to translate or to assist and interpret for the betterment of the job?

I support that whoever brought this motion was sent by our ancestral spirits. If I am talking of my name Tendai Nyabani, we have to speak our mother language. We are now empowering those foreigners. Why are we blaming our local languages? In this country, we used to speak in Ndebele, Shona, Zezuru and Kalanga only. What is wrong with us speaking in those languages now that you are taking priority to English? What is so important about English? We are being fooled.

Even those learned people, they simply say there is need to cleanse your mindset because some of the things cannot be explained deeply because you will run out of words as it will not be your mother language. I am telling this whole august House to say what was said by Hon. Bajila, regardless of him being on the left side of the Speaker, that is a very good motion. It simply encourages everyone to learn Mathematics. Whenever you want to learn Science, Agriculture or farming, that person should be taught in his/her mother language. This is because we need that person whenever he/she goes to do practical work and he/she has to do it the rightful way.

I simply remember when Hon. Members are asked if there are any further debates, they simply say ‘no’, just because they were not understanding what was being said. If the law is signed by the President, people will start to say this is not it. How could you let it pass? It is all because you could hardly understand what was being said. Other people were saying those who are blind need to have Braille language to assist them. If you are asked to say any further debate, you simply say no debate. 

When we get to the budget, you are asked if there is any further debate and you say no debate. It is simply because you are not understanding what is being said. This is because everything is being tabled in a foreign language which we do not understand. So, Madam Speaker Ma’am, I would like to thank you for the time you gave me.

With these few words, I have given vision to my colleagues to say we have a lot of people within the foreign languages. It is because those other people know how to speak English and Shona and they have to be assisted in a way whereby we have to have our country progress, not only to say you cannot proceed to Form 6 because you do not have English. Am I a doctor to treat people from America? I can only treat people from my rural area. Let us do something which will take our nation forward. I thank you.

          +HON. MAHLANGU:  Thank you Madam Speaker ma’am.  I would also like to support the motion that was brought by Hon. Bajila and seconded by Hon. Moyo.  This is a very good motion because when you look at how people view languages and, especially when children are growing up it is difficult for them to start learning English, especially a child who is doing ECD who is just starting school.  If that child is taught in the language that he or she understands, it makes it easy for her to grasp the concepts. 

Even here in this House, we speak different languages and at times, it is difficult for me to understand what Hon. so and so was trying to say because I would not be understanding that language.  If everyone is taught languages that are spoken here in Zimbabwe, like what Hon. Bajila said, he mentioned that there are sixteen (16) languages here in Zimbabwe.

          It should be the Government’s responsibility to see to it that people learn all these languages because people travel a lot.  I can leave this place and go to Mutare and find it difficult for me to communicate with them because I would not be knowing the language.  In some places they speak deep Shona, me as a Ndebele person might not even understand the language.  If we go to some countries like South Africa, Namibia, Uganda and even Botswana, they speak their languages.  They know the importance of their languages and even the way they dress, you can easily identify them by their dressing.  They also follow their traditions in languages as well and if you look at other places, offices that we visit at times, you even fail to communicate with someone who is in the office who is supposed to assist you because they can only communicate with them in English only but if you take an old lady who is 64 years or 75 years, it will be difficult  for that old lady to express themselves  properly in English.  So, it will be difficulty for them to get help because of the language barriers.

          Madam Speaker, I also say this motion should pass because it will help us here in Zimbabwe.  It will make us understand what others are saying and we also understand what they are saying.  Even children at school should also understand and even if they are being taught science, the concept should be explained in their native languages.  I thank you.   

          HON. MUROMBEDZI:  Thank you very much Madam Speaker.  I rise to strongly support the motion put forth by Hon. Bajila.  The promotion and development of previously marginalised languages is not just a constitutional mandate but in moral imperative, it is about honouring our diverse heritage.  Fostering inclusivity and building a nation where every linguistic community feels valued and represented.

          Madam Speaker, languages are more than just a means of communication.  They are repository of our cultural heritage and identity.  Each language carries with it, its unique traditions histories and knowledge systems that contribute to the rich tapestry of our national identity.  By promoting these languages, we are preserving invaluable cultural assets for future generations.  Research has consistently shown that children who are educated in their mother language during the early years of schooling, perform better academically.  According to UNESCO, mother tongue is best education which improves learning outcomes and reduces dropout rates.

Madam Speaker, by integrating marginalised languages into our educational system, we can enhance the quality of education and promote greater equity. Investing in language promotion can have significant economic benefits. It can boost tourism by attracting visitors interested in our diverse cultural heritage. Furthermore, it can stimulate the creative industries leading to production of literature, music, films and other cultural products in various languages. This not only preserves our cultural heritage but also creates job opportunities and promotes economic growth.

Countries like South Africa, Ethiopia and India have successfully implemented policies to promote linguistic diversity. South African’s Pan South African Language Body and Ethiopia’s promotion of twelve official languages are exemplary models. These countries have demonstrated that it is possible to create a multi-lingual society where all languages are respected and promoted. Zimbabwe can learn from these examples to develop and implement effective language policies.

Section 6 of our Constitution clearly states that the State must promote all official languages. This is not a choice but an obligation. We have a legal and moral duty to ensure that all sixteen official languages are promoted and developed. This includes creating educational materials, conducting public awareness campaigns and ensuring that the Government services are accessible in all official languages.

          We need to move swiftly to finalise and implement the Draft Language Policy developed in 2022. This policy will provide a comprehensive framework for the promotion and development of all official languages. A statutory body dedicated to language promotion similar to South Africa’s Pan South African Language body can coordinate efforts and ensure sustained progress in this area. We should amend the Education Act to make sure that the teaching of marginalised languages is mandatory in schools. This can be achieved by including a ninth subject for O’level students specifically focusing on a previously marginalised language.

          Digital platforms can also be used to create and disseminate educational and cultural content in various languages. This approach can teach a wider audience and make learning materials more accessible. Engaging our local communities in language promotion efforts is crucial. Communities should be involved in deciding which languages to promote in their regions fostering a sense of ownership and pride. Particular attention should be given to the Khoisan language which is at risk of extinction. As one of the oldest languages in Zimbabwe, its preservation is critical for maintaining our cultural and historical identity. We must prioritise efforts to document, teach and promote Khoisan to ensure it survives for future generations.

          In conclusion, promoting previously marginalised languages is not just about fulfilling a constitutional obligation. It is about building a more inclusive, equitable and culturally rich nation. By supporting this motion, we are taking significant steps towards honouring our diverse heritage, promoting social cohesion and ensuring that every linguistic community in Zimbabwe feels valued and respected. I urge all members of this House to support this important motion. I so submit.

          HON. M. NKOMO:  Thank you so much for affording me this opportunity to add my voice to the debate on the legislation to promote the development of previously marginalised languages, a motion moved by Hon. Bajila, seconded by Hon. Moyo.

          The motion does not only address what Section 6 (4) of our Constitution says, but it resonates well with President Cde E.D. Mnangagwa’s mantra of living no one and no place behind.  Language plays a crucial role in the development of any country, hence the importance of Section 6 (4) and Hon. Bajila’s motion. 

          Besides playing the role of uniting people, language is a vehicle of information and custodian of culture for a group of people.  Let me address the tenets of language by citing what our supreme law says; The Preamble of our Constitution, “United in our diversity…., Celebrating the vibrancy of our traditions and cultures…” As a nation, our uniqueness is our pride upon which unity is anchored.  We are different in colour, language, religion and culture but celebrate the beauty, the liveliness of our way of life.  In Lupane, we have our language, IsiNdebele which carries with it the way we live like the Ndebele people.  When I visit Binga, the baTonga peope have a way of living which I appreciate and enjoy.  However, that appreciation is not enough if I cannot speak or hear their language, hence the need to promote and develop chiTonga and other previously marginalised languages.

          Let me draw your attention to a newspaper article published in ‘The Sunday Mail’ on the 4^th of February, 2024 titled ‘President Mnangagwa’s untold linguistic genius’ written by a Linguistics researcher Talent Mudenda.  The research alludes that President Mnangagwa is fluent in languages like isiNdebele, chiTonga, chiShona, Venda, Kalanga and many other languages which has allowed the President to absorb various cultural norms and traditional world views by understanding the unique historical trajectories and identities of different language groups.  You will recall Madam Speaker when the President went around the country during the 2023 election campaigns, he mostly used the local languages in those communities, including chiTonga in Binga.  He demonstrated his willingness to learn, lead and unite the country by engaging the electorate in their mother languages.  Imagine how our country would be with most leaders able to speak five local languages fluently.  Take for example in this House, if we can be like the President or yourself Madam Speaker, in terms of the languages that you speak – we would not be struggling to use English to debate.  We are now forced to use English because we want everyone in this House and nation to hear what we are debating, assuming that everyone understands English.

          I want to propose, as I support this motion by Hon. Bajila, that the Government should start with National Anthem competitions for the previously marginalised languages.  This can be done through collaboration between the ministries of Sport, Recreation, Arts and Culture and Primary and Secondary Education.  Imagine how many times the National Anthem is sung in those languages in a week, but there is no official and recorded version which can be aired on radio or television.  I therefore call upon the Government to take measures as those of 1994 when we were changing from Nkosi Sikelela iAfrica to Phakamisani iFlag.  We want to hear an official and recorded national anthem in chiTonga, Venda, Shangani, Chewa, Ndau, Nambya, Kalanga among others being aired on community radio stations which were opened by the Second Republic.

          Secondly, the promotion and development of previously marginalised languages cannot take place outside the teaching and learning environment.  I am grateful that the Government has rolled out the Teacher Capacity Development at Great Zimbabwe University, which was meant to empower teachers from previously marginalised languages with diplomas to attain degrees in these languages.  I suggest that the Government also consider sponsoring the young people who have just completed Advanced Level so that they continue studying at teachers’ colleges and study these previously marginalised languages as their learning areas.

          The Government also established the MSU National Languages Institute which launched the Elementary Science Terms dictionary in all indigenous languages last week.  I am of the view that the Government should make deliberate measures of having more literature for these languages, not translations only.  This can be achieved by partnering with one book publisher or use the MSU National Languages Institute to publish en masse, literature for these languages.  There are many young writers of those languages, but they are failing because of the process and expenses of producing a complete book.  Again, when those books are published, the Government, through the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education, can subsidise and buy for schools in bulk like what was done in 2009.  

          HON. TSHUMA: I want to add my voice to this very pertinent motion brought in by Hon. Bajila.  I think Hon. Bajila should have overheard me one day when I was in one of the places drinking wise waters when I spoke about this issue.  He quickly ran and came here with a motion, but well-done Hon. Bajila for definitely bringing a very important issue. 

Madam Speaker, I grew up in Hwange and that is where I did my primary education.  While I was there, I spoke chiNyanja very fluently.   I spoke Nambya, I learnt Tonga and I spoke it.  All this happened at my young age.  What this basically speaks to is that there is nothing as easy as a child learning any language.  A child can learn any language easily, if you take them to France, they can speak French like they are French.  If you take them to Japan or China, they will do the same.  It is very pertinent for us to recognise and actually allude to the fact that the promotion and teaching of these languages should happen down there when the children are developing.  When they grow up, they will grow up being able to speak any language that has been exposed to them.  So, can you imagine if we had to promote all the 16 languages all over the country.  If you go to Matabeleland, they must compulsorily learn Shona, Ndebele, Chichewa, Venda and Tonga and when they grow up, they are able to converse at any given time.

          As I travel around the world, especially in South Africa Madam Speaker, I am always so taken up by the way the South Africans communicate.  You will find a Venda conversing with a Sotho in their own different languages, if you understand what I am talking about.  A Venda will be speaking Venda and the Sotho will be answering in Sotho but they are all understanding each other.  They are communicating.  How wonderful is that.

          I want a situation whereby I can speak to a Shona person in my Ndebele and they can answer me in their Shona, but we still understand each other instead of this thing that you will always find when I go into an office.  If I speak to them in Ndebele, they say handinzwi.  It is so frustrating.  Here you are within Matabeleland, you are supposed to be serving me.  I am speaking to you and you are telling me handinzwi.  The conflict begins there already because I am now saying to myself, what are you looking for in that office and in my part of the region if you cannot speak and understand my language.  That answer can only come from this motion to say, let us literalise the teaching of all the local languages and promote them at grassroot level so that people grow up with these languages and then that way, we all live harmoniously. 

          Madam Speaker, I want to also expand it on the cultural point of view.  Our colonisers discovered that and said you can never colonise these people as long as they are still intact with their culture, and language is part of the culture.  So, they made us come in and think and believe that if you are a good and fluent English speaker then you are the thing to go.  You are the most educated, you are the cleverest and like what Hon. Nyabani said here, that has nothing to do with anything at all.

          The Chinese are the greatest inventors and they have been so good at whatever they have been doing.  Everything that they have done they have learnt it in the Chinese language.  They never go and start learning science in English or Mathematics in English.  Can you imagine trying to teach a child, my child at school, the Pythagoras theory.  Already, they do not understand the word Pythagoras at all before they even understand what the theory is all about, but had we spoken about it in the local language of that child, they would have understood it easily but it really is supposed to be learnt.  What is supposed to be done to solve that kind of problem? 

This is why I am saying that no matter what we do, let us definitely support this kind of motion.  It might be too late for us but it is not too late for the generation that is coming to start learning the other languages from there.  Let us have our Mathematics being taught in our local languages, Madam Speaker. Mathematics is not difficult, what is difficult is English.  They do not understand in English, but had we been taught in Ndebele that nxa ufuna ukuqathanisa lokhu ukuhlanganisa lalokhuyana kuzaphuma lokhu, I could have got As.  Even here, Madam Speaker, our Standing Rules should actually change.  If I try and speak to you right now and mix Shona and Ndebele, you would be saying order Hon. Member, speak in one language.

So, already here in the House, we are not promoting the local languages enough.  We want to stick to what Parliament adopted from the colonial era up to today yet we should be able to be flexible here to say if you want to debate and speak in Shona, Ndebele, Tonga and mix them all, everybody must be there to understand and if you do not understand like you are privileged, you can have your headphones to put on and hear what the Hon. Member is saying, but we are limiting each other already here in this very august House.  So, it is very important. 

Section 6 (3) of our Constitution clearly states that, ‘The State and all institutions and agencies of Government at every level must (a) ensure that all officially recognised languages are treated equitably and (b) take into account the language preference of people affected by governmental measures or communications and (4) says, ‘The State must promote and advance the use of all languages used in Zimbabwe including Sign Language and must create conditions for the development of those languages.’

So, it is very clear according to our Constitution, Madam Speaker, we are not doing enough.  It also cascades down to our provincial levels.  I really wonder why the Public Service Commission that employs people will bring someone to come and run the Ministry of Education in Bulawayo or Matabeleland South or Matabeleland North who does not even understand a word of Ndebele.  I do not understand why the Government would place a teacher who has no understanding of Shona in Manicaland to go and teach the children in Manicaland yet they cannot even understand the chiManyika.  Why are we doing that?  Is it arrogance, what is it?

So, Madam Speaker, we need to be realistic with each other here.  Let us be able to say look, it is not tribalism to demand that we want a person who understands here as Zimbabweans.  It is not tribalism for the Manyika people to demand that they want a Manyika person there.  It is just a simple matter of saying, let us be real - if you are going to deploy a Ndebele speaking nurse in Muzarabani and she does not even understand any word in Shona, then our ambuya who has never spoken any English or isiNdebele per se, goes there for help and cannot be helped because simply, the nurse does not understand what she needs.  Then, what kind of country are we?  What kind of culture are we trying to portray?

          We are lying to each other.  We always want to hide saying, do not be tribalist or do not be regionalist.  It is not.  It is a simple matter of saying we have made a mistake that we are talking about today, to correct.  Before we correct it, let us have people who will be able to converse with local people there and that is how it should be.  So, it is not tribalism Madam Speaker, for the Matebele people to say no, we cannot have a Provincial Education Director who cannot even speak Ndebele or we cannot have a Provincial Medical Director who does not understand Ndebele because they do not even understand the culture of the Ndebele people vis-à-vis even in the maShona places as well.

          So, let us treat this matter with the soberness that it requires and make sure that we follow the mantra of our dear President who says that, we do not want to leave any place behind and anybody behind.  This motion by Hon. Bajila is a very timeous and pertinent motion.  I would urge that we all support it.  Like I said, let us begin by trying to enact a law to say, all languages must be learnt from the ECD level because children learn faster.  Then they will be able to know isiNdebele, isiShona, isiChewa, isiXhosa, isiVenda, isiTonga, isiNambya whilst growing up.

          When they grow up, they will be able to come to a point whereby, like I said in South Africa, a Venda speaking person speaks to a Sotho or Xhosa speaker in their own languages and they all understand each other as they link harmoniously because languages can create or cause conflict if not properly managed.  With these few words Madam Speaker, may I then definitely say, I also support and move that we all take into consideration this very pertinent issue.  So, I submit.  I thank you.

          HON. TOGAREPI:  Madam Speaker, I move that the debate do now adjourn.

          HON. BAJILA:  I second.

          Motion put and agreed to.

          Debate to resume:  Wednesday, 12^th June, 2024.

          On the motion of HON. TOGAREPI, seconded by HON. MATEWU, the House adjourned at Twenty-Five Minutes past Five o’clock p.m.