Home

Details: Written by: By Munyaradzi Masaka; Category: CAB3 Implications; Published: 15 November 2026; Hits: 19

Zimbabwe’s Government Must Lead by Example:

You Cannot Demand What You Fail to Deliver

The Government of Zimbabwe has issued a directive requiring property owners across the country to repair, refurbish, repaint and maintain dilapidated buildings and their surrounding environments, warning that those who fail to comply may face legal penalties, including a Level Five fine or imprisonment of up to six months. According to reports the directive applies to landlords, homeowners, churches, shopping centres, business complexes, industrial properties and office buildings,

Nobody should oppose efforts to ensure that buildings are structurally sound, public spaces are clean and neighbourhoods are safe for residents.

However, an important question must be asked: What about the Government's own buildings, public institutions and infrastructure that have been neglected for years? If private property owners are expected to take responsibility for their buildings, should the Government not be the first to demonstrate that responsibility?

The Government Must Practise What It Preaches

Across Zimbabwe, citizens have witnessed the deterioration of public infrastructure, including government offices, public housing, hospitals, schools and other state-owned facilities. Some buildings have visibly fallen into disrepair, raising concerns about maintenance, public safety and the responsible use of taxpayers' money. In April 2026, The Herald reported that the Government had acknowledged the deteriorating condition of its housing stock. The Minister of National Housing and Social Amenities, Professor Paul Mavima, attributed the situation partly to years of inadequate funding for repairs and maintenance.

This raises a fundamental question about priorities. If the Government acknowledges that its own properties have suffered from years of underfunding, what concrete measures are being taken to restore them to acceptable standards?

The Government cannot reasonably demand accountability from citizens while appearing unwilling or unable to demonstrate the same level of accountability in managing public assets. A government building is not merely a structure. It represents a public institution, an essential service and the resources entrusted to the state by the people. When such buildings deteriorate, it is legitimate for citizens to ask who is responsible, how maintenance budgets are being spent and what plans exist to address the problem.Will the Law Apply Equally to Everyone?

The reported penalties raise another important concern about equality before the law. An ordinary landlord who fails to comply with a lawful order may face financial penalties or imprisonment. A church leader responsible for a neglected building may also face enforcement action. Homeowners and business operators are similarly expected to comply with applicable regulations. But what happens when a government-owned building is neglected? Who is held accountable when a public institution fails to maintain its premises? Will the responsible department face meaningful consequences? Will officials be required to explain why public property has been allowed to deteriorate?

These are not unreasonable questions. They are essential questions in any society that values transparency, good governance and the rule of law. The issue is not whether property owners should maintain their buildings. They should. The issue is whether the same principles of responsibility and accountability will be applied consistently, regardless of who owns the property.The Government must clarify how the requirements will apply to public buildings and what mechanisms will ensure compliance by government departments and state institutions. The law must not become a burden imposed primarily on ordinary citizens while public authorities escape scrutiny.

Beautification Must Not Become a Substitute for Service Delivery

Zimbabwe's urban challenges go beyond the appearance of buildings. Residents in various communities continue to raise concerns about unreliable water supplies, deteriorating roads, inadequate drainage, waste collection, sewage problems and other essential services. These problems affect public health, economic activity and the everyday lives of citizens. A freshly painted building may improve the appearance of a street, but paint alone will not repair a broken sewer system, provide clean drinking water or restore a damaged road.

Likewise, a government office may look attractive from the outside while the institution inside struggles to deliver the services citizens need.
The National Clean-Up Campaign and efforts to improve the built environment should therefore be accompanied by a comprehensive programme of public infrastructure maintenance, reliable service delivery and responsible financial management.

Beautification must be part of national development, not a substitute for it.

Where Is the Accountability for Public Money? Government buildings and public infrastructure are maintained using resources that ultimately belong to the people. Citizens contribute through taxes, fees and other forms of public revenue, and they have a legitimate interest in knowing whether those resources are being used effectively. Zimbabwe's 2026 national budget includes a programme specifically concerned with the construction, maintenance and management of government buildings. The budget also sets targets for the number of public buildings to be maintained. "See Zimbabwe's 2026 national budget estimates".

This makes it reasonable to ask for public reporting on the condition of government properties, the maintenance work completed, the resources allocated and the results achieved. How many government buildings require urgent repairs? How many have been refurbished? Which institutions are responsible for neglected properties? What timelines have been established to address unsafe structures? These questions deserve clear answers supported by published information rather than political promises.

Parliament, local authorities, the Auditor-General and other relevant oversight institutions should help ensure that public assets are properly managed and that failures are investigated. Where negligence, misuse of public funds or misconduct is established, the responsible individuals should be held accountable through lawful and fair procedures.

We Deserve Fair Treatment, Not Selective Enforcement

It is important to recognise that some property owners may struggle financially to undertake extensive renovations. While the law must be respected, local authorities should communicate requirements clearly, provide reasonable compliance periods where the law permits and distinguish between cosmetic improvements and repairs necessary to address genuine safety risks. A building with a dangerous structure presents a different concern from a property that simply needs repainting. Enforcement should therefore be proportionate, transparent and focused on legitimate public interests, especially the protection of human life and public health.

The same approach should apply to public institutions. Where a government building poses a safety risk, the authorities should take prompt action to protect occupants and members of the public, arrange necessary repairs and disclose how the problem will be resolved.Accountability must be practical, not merely rhetorical.Leadership Begins at the TopA government that wants cleaner cities, safer buildings and better-maintained neighbourhoods must demonstrate those standards through its own conduct.

If the state expects landlords to refurbish their properties, it must maintain its own buildings. If it demands cleanliness from churches and businesses, government premises must meet the same expectations. If it insists on compliance with the law, public institutions must respect the law and accept scrutiny when they fail. Zimbabwe does not need policies that simply transfer responsibility to citizens. It needs leadership that accepts responsibility alongside the people.

The Government should publish a nationwide assessment of dilapidated public buildings, establish clear maintenance targets, disclose the resources allocated to repairs and report regularly on progress. Local authorities should also make enforcement decisions transparent and apply the law fairly.These measures would demonstrate that the campaign is genuinely about improving the country rather than merely threatening property owners with punishments and jail terms.

We deserve safe homes, clean streets, reliable public services and well-maintained public institutions. We also deserve a government that recognises its own responsibilities before demanding compliance from everyone else.There is nothing wrong with asking citizens to maintain their properties. There is, however, something fundamentally wrong if the authorities enforce standards against private owners while failing to address comparable neglect in public buildings ,before demanding that every landlord, church, business and homeowner beautify their property, the Government must demonstrate that it can properly maintain the buildings and infrastructure entrusted to it.

Leadership is not measured by the severity of the penalties imposed on ordinary citizens. It is measured by the standards leaders set, the services they deliver and the accountability they accept.

Zimbabwe belongs to its people, and public resources must be managed in the public interest. Citizens should not have to ask why the law is strict with them but seemingly less demanding of those in authority.if the Government wants a cleaner, safer and more beautiful Zimbabwe, it must begin with itself.You cannot demand excellence from the people while excusing failure within your own institutions. Lead by example, practise what you preach, and let accountability begin at the top.

Details: Written by: John C Burke; Category: ZEXIT; Published: 24 August 2026; Hits: 642

Rhodes Had a Business Plan — Does Zimbabwe's Ruling Elite?

Adapted for ZHRO from an original commentary by Tendai Ruben Mbofana, "At least Rhodes had established business interests: where are own ruling elite acquiring their wealth?" Mbofana is a Zimbabwean social justice advocate and writer. Follow his commentary on WhatsApp or contact him directly on +263 71 566 7700 / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

There are some comparisons that simply make no sense — and one making the rounds in Zimbabwean commentary lately is among them. It's the loose equation of Cecil Rhodes and the British South Africa Company's colonial-era plunder with the wealth being amassed by Zimbabwe's current ruling elite.

As Mbofana argues in the commentary this article draws on, the comparison collapses under its own weight — not because Rhodes deserves any rehabilitation, but because of what set his enterprise apart even in its worst abuses: it was visible. Rhodes raised private capital, built mines, laid railways, founded towns, and left behind a corporate structure — the BSAC — that could be chartered, audited, and eventually held to account. Whatever one thinks of how that wealth was extracted, its provenance could be traced.

Zimbabwe's post-independence elite, the argument goes, cannot say the same.

A case study with a paper trail — of a different kind

The clearest illustration currently before Zimbabwe's courts is the case of Kelsea Tadiwa Tafirenyika, the 22-year-old wife of Collins Mnangagwa — one of President Emmerson Mnangagwa's twin sons, and by marriage the president's daughter-in-law.

Zimbabwe's Power, Water and Sewage:

One System Collapsing, Not Three

By Sun Earth Energy Ltd, in association with Urbium Research Ltd

Zimbabwe doesn't have an electricity crisis, a water crisis and a sanitation crisis. It has one crisis, playing out across three 'pipes'.

That's the core finding of a diagnostic briefing prepared by Sun Earth Energy Ltd and its research affiliate Urbium Research Ltd, drawing on Auditor-General reporting, Human Rights Watch investigations and peer-reviewed epidemiology. The evidence shows that Zimbabwe's power grid, water treatment and sewage network are physically interdependent — and that chronic underinvestment in one has been quietly degrading the other two for two decades.

A grid with no margin for error

Zimbabwe currently generates around 866MW against a national demand of roughly 2,400MW — a shortfall that produces daily load-shedding of up to 16 hours even in ordinary conditions. But the more telling pattern is what happens when something goes wrong. In January 2024, a single busbar fault at the Insukamini substation in Bulawayo took down the entire national grid. In 2025, a fire at Harare's Highfield substation knocked out four neighbouring substations in one go, plunging Southerton, Old Ardbennie, Rugare and parts of Mbare into darkness. Most recently, a fault on the Warren–Alaska 330kV line again brought down power nationwide, forcing ZESA to pull emergency supply from South Africa, Kariba, Cahora Bassa and Hwange simultaneously.

That's not bad luck. It's what a grid with no redundancy looks like — and redundancy costs money that a 2019 forensic audit, commissioned by Zimbabwe's own Auditor-General, found had been diverted elsewhere: inflated transformer contracts, obsolete equipment purchases, and spending that never reached maintenance budgets at all.

Details: Written by: John C Burke; Category: Beyond CAB and Dictatorships; Published: 22 July 2026; Hits: 865

Zimbabweans in the UK Held Demonstration Against CAB3 at Zimbabwe Embassy

in London On the 10th of July 2026,

Zimbabweans and supporters gathered outside the Zimbabwean Embassy in London for a peaceful demonstration opposing Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) and expressing wider concerns about constitutional rights, democracy, governance, and the rule of law in Zimbabwe.

The demonstration was conducted peacefully and lawfully, with participants calling for respect for Zimbabwe’s 2013 Constitution and the democratic rights of its citizens. Organisers emphasised that the protest was a peaceful expression of civic participation and encouraged all attendees to remain respectful and non-violent throughout the event.

Defending the 2013 Constitution

Many participants expressed the view that the Constitution belongs to the people and should not be altered in ways they believe undermine democratic principles. Demonstrators argued that constitutional reforms should reflect the will of Zimbabwean citizens and preserve the values enshrined in the 2013 Constitution.

Throughout the demonstration, protesters called on Zimbabweans both at home and in the diaspora to organise peacefully, remain united, and continue advocating for constitutional governance through lawful means. They stressed that their campaign is rooted in peaceful civic action and respect for the law.

Several of the messages shared by participants focused on defending the Constitution, rejecting what they see as attempts to weaken it, and holding elected representatives accountable to the people who elected them. Some speakers also described CAB3 as contrary to the spirit and principles of the 2013 Constitution.

A Nation with a History and a Lineage

The Matabele Nation is part of the greater Nguni grouping of Southern Africa. Chief Ndiweni traces its foundation to King Mzilikazi of the Royal House Khumalo, who departed the Zulu kingdom in 1823 and, over a seventeen-year journey through what are now South Africa, Botswana and Zambia, built a nation by assimilation before establishing his kingdom between the Zambezi and the Limpopo by 1840. He was succeeded by King Lobengula, whose reign was overtaken by the discovery of gold, the fraudulent Rudd Concession, and the war with Cecil Rhodes’s British South Africa Company. Lobengula was never captured, killed or made to surrender; he disappeared into the landscape in 1893 — a fact, Chief Ndiweni argues, that has sustained the Nation’s sense that it was never truly defeated.

The Jameson Line and the Historical Two-State Reality

Central to Chief Ndiweni’s argument is that the territory was, in historical fact, two states divided by the Jameson Line — Matabeleland and Mashonaland — a division reaffirmed by the peace negotiated between the Matabele and Rhodes after the 1896 uprising. Even under colonial administration, he records, the two retained separate high courts, reserve banks, state houses, economic systems and traditional-leadership structures. The unitary state of 1980 was therefore an imposition upon a pre-existing dual reality, not a natural unit.

Page 1 of 19