Africa Image Live


Grab the widget  Tech Dreams

Monday, 29 June 2009

Stability a critical issue in presidential vote

Months after soldiers killed former President Joao Bernardo Vieira, Guinea-Bissau goes to the polls Sunday to elect a replacement amid widespread hopes for stability in the poor, coup-wracked African nation.

AFP - Guinea-Bissau goes to the polls Sunday in an election where the key contenders are promising to bring stability and peace to one of Africa's poorest and coup-wracked states.
The current political crisis in the West African country, a notorious transit point for the drugs trade to Europe, was sparked by the March murder of president Joao Bernardo Vieira.
The leader, who ruled Guinea-Bissau for 23 years, was killed by members of the army on March 2 in apparent revenge for a bomb attack that claimed the life of the army chief, General Batista Tagme Na Waie.
Eleven candidates, including three former presidents, are in the running, as one pulled out after the army killed two senior politicians on June 5 after they were accused by the government of plotting a coup.
One favourite is Malam Bacai Sanha, who served as interim president from June 1999 to May 2000 and who is the candidate for the long-dominant African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC).
The PAIGC already controls 67 of the 100 seats in the country's national assembly.
The other aspirants are former presidents Kumba Yala (2000-2003), who was toppled in a coup and whose reign was marked by wide fiscal mismanagement and sweeping arrests of opposition figures, and Henrique Rosa (2003-2005).
Both Yala and Rosa have also made stability and peace the main planks of their electoral campaigns.
A second round, anticipated for July 28, could also take place to decide on the new president.
Around 600,000 of the country's 1.3 million inhabitants are eligible to vote when polling stations open at 7 am (0700 GMT). Voting is due to end at 5 pm.
Observers have been sceptical that Guinea-Bissau is ready for a vote after the recent upsurge in violence.
In a bid to ensure Sunday's election runs smoothly, regional west African bloc ECOWAS announced that it had paid the country's armed forces three months salary they were owed and issued a call for pledges of support to help after the vote.
But other government employees, also unpaid for three months, still face uncertainty in a state which was ranked 175 out of 177 countries in the 2007-2008 human development report by the United Nations Development Programme.
The elections costing around 5.1 million euros (7.1 million dollars) is entirely funded by foreign donors.
The European Union is sending election observers to the former Portuguese colony, which won its independence in 1974 but has since been overwhelmed and weakened by the international drugs trade.
Observers say the sudden influx of drugs money has considerably raised the stakes in the ongoing power feuds between the army and politicians.

Nigeria Corruption war


Asset Recovery and anti-corruption are principally governed by the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) (Establishment) Act, 2004. Both statutes require conviction before assets can be forfeited. However, the laws provide for interim forfeiture of the assets under investigation through an ex-parte process.

The EFCC Act 2004 requires a person arrested for corruption or other economic and financial crimes to declare all his assets. Any false information furnished regarding this is an offence and is punishable by 5 years imprisonment. The disposal of forfeited assets is only upon a final order of court and such assets payable to the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation. All instrumentalities of crime directly or indirectly connected to the commission of the offence are liable to forfeiture.

Presently, Nigeria does not have a non-conviction based asset forfeiture regime although there are ongoing plans to incorporate this into the laws.

Some recent cases include:

  • In 2005, Mr. Tafa Balogun, then Chief of Police was tried and convicted and sentenced forcorruption and ML. Assets worth over N17 billion were confiscated and returned to the Federal Government of Nigeria. The assets were misappropriated monies meant for the welfare of the Police.
  • In 2007, Mr. DSP Alamiesagha, former Governor of Bayelsa State was also tried, convicted and sentenced for corruption and ML. As governor the poverty stricken state of Bayelsa, he stole huge sums from the treasury meant for development projects, approximately N15billion. Some of these assets were traced to the UK, and South Africa. These monies are in the process of being realized and return to Nigeria.

Sharp-dressing ex-Zambian president stole £23m

The former Zambian president, Frederick Chiluba, and four of his senior aides conspired to rob their country's government and people of £23m, the high court in London ruled today.

In a decision of major importance for the fight against corruption in Africa, a judge held that Dr Chiluba took part in two separate conspiracies to siphon off the money.

Part of his ill-gotten gains was laundered through two London law firms, Meer Care & Desai and Cave Malik & Co, who were part of the conspiracy.

In a graphic and telling example of the corruption involved, Mr Justice Peter Smith said Dr Chiluba, president between 1991 and 2001, had a worldwide reputation as a "smart and expensive dresser".

He had hundreds of stylish suits and shirts bearing his monogram "FJT", and specially made "signature" shoes with extra-high heels.

As president, he officially earned about £52,500 over 10 years. Yet an exclusive shop in Switzerland - Boutique Basile - received £600,000, all stolen from the Republic of Zambia.

"This was at a time when the vast majority of Zambians were struggling to live on one dollar a day and many could not afford more than one meal a day," the judge said. "FJT had the benefit of this largesse at the expense of the people of Zambia. He still wears some of the clothes.

"The people of Zambia will know that whenever FJT appears in public wearing a smart handmade suit or a pair of his "signature" shoes that they were acquired by stealing money from the people, the vast majority of whom live at subsistence levels."

The ruling found that Dr Chibula received over £500,000 for clothes, while another £181,000 was plundered by an aide to pay school fees. Other money was siphoned off as cash to buy motorbikes, and over £6,000 was spent on a beauty therapy course.

Janet Legrand, of global law firm DLA Piper, which acted for the Zambian government, said the judgment was a "resounding victory" for President Levy Mwanawasa's battle to stamp out corruption.

Zambia's case was backed by the UK government through an anti-corruption fund that has contributed more than £1m to various causes over the past three years.

The international development secretary, Hilary Benn, said today's ruling was a "historic victory" for Zambians.

"This money, intended to benefit all Zambians, was instead plundered by a few. The money recovered can now be returned to the government of Zambia to be invested in the people's future - such as education or clean drinking water for some of the seven million Zambians living in poverty," he said

However, today's ruling could re-ignite debate about the City of London's role as a centre for international money laundering.

Britain is a signatory to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and United Nations anti-bribery conventions but has been criticised by the OECD for failing to devote sufficient resources to the fight against corruption.

Trisha Rogers, director of the Jubilee Debt Campaign, said she was "delighted" with today's ruling but criticised the paucity of assets that have been returned to African people.

Much of the ill-gained money in today's case was held in British bank accounts, she added. Details of precisely how much is recoverable - freezing orders were obtained at the commencement of proceedings - from each defendant will be decided by the court at a later date.

The judge was giving judgment in civil proceedings, brought by the attorney general of Zambia, after a hearing spread over four months and held in private to protect the interests of the Zambian defendants involved in criminal proceedings.

The case was brought in London because it was considered to be the centre of wrongdoing by defendants based in Zambia and elsewhere and because the stolen money passed through bank accounts in London.

Other defendants found liable by the judge were Xavier Chungu, former head of Zambian secret intelligence services, Stella Chibanda, a former senior official in the Ministry of Finance, and two financial advisers and directors of Access Financial Services Ltd - Faustin Kabwe and Aaron Chungu.

The judge also held that the former Zambian ambassador to the US, Atan Shansonga, was liable for giving dishonest assistance in respect of about £1.4m.

Raphael Soriano, a Congolese now resident in Belgium, participated in the misappropriation of £10.5m.

And the judge held that FJT's Swiss tailors, Basile, were liable for £600,000 for conspiracy and dishonest assistance.

Mr Chiluba's election, after decades of rule by Kenneth Kaunda, led to a wave of optimism which dissipated as economic problems deepened. A former union leader, Mr Chiluba as president backed free-market policies and oversaw the privatisation of many nationalised industries.

He left power after failing in an attempt to rewrite his country's constitution to enable him to stand for a third term and has been dogged by corruption allegations ever since.

Chiluba Told To Repay Stolen Millions

A British judge delivered what some experts called a signal verdict against African corruption, ordering the former Zambian president Frederick Chiluba, left, and 19 others to return at least $46 million it said they had stolen while in power in the 1990s and early this decade. The London judge, Peter Smith, ruled that Mr. Chiluba, in power from 1991 to 2001, ''was uniquely positioned to stop corruption'' in government, but that he elected instead to join in it. Zambia's government sued in London because it alleged that Mr. Chiluba and his associates had bought assets in Britain and elsewhere in Europe. Mr. Chiluba said in a statement that he did not recognize a British court's authority in Zambian issues, arguing that the case circumvented Zambia's justice system. Other African experts said the verdict, the first against a current or former head of state, could set an anticorruption precedent. MICHAEL WINES

Frederick Chiluba: A Thief who was denied a dictaor's position?

Chiluba's legacy to Zambia
Former BBC Zambia correspondent Ishbel Matheson reflects on Frederick Chiluba's time as president. Mr Chiluba has been found guilty of stealing $46m (£23m) of public money by a court in London.

Frederick Chiluba with his wife, Regina
Mr Chiluba has always denied stealing public money

Soon after President Frederick JT Chiluba swept to power in a landslide election win in 1991, he was heard to remark to close aides: "Power is sweet."

After 10 years in charge, the former bus conductor and trade union leader, continued to enjoy the taste of power.

So much so that he mounted a campaign to change the country's constitution to allow him to run for the presidency a third time.

He was forced to abandon this plan, after massive opposition from within his own ruling Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) and from the Zambian public.

But the move did much to damage the president's personal prestige.

Many Zambians saw it as an attempt to turn the clock back - as well as a betrayal of the democratic principles which he had preached since the beginning of his presidency.

"We don't hate you, Mr President," said one shop assistant as the arguments raged in 2001. "But please just do the right thing, and leave."

Heady times

When Mr Chiluba was elected, it was amid a atmosphere of elation and euphoria.

His fledgling MMD had trounced the incumbent Kenneth Kaunda and his ruling Unip at the polls.

Kaunda's men were pickpockets, but Chiluba's lot are thieves
Zambian journalist

It was an audacious victory, which sent shockwaves across Africa.

The charismatic Mr Kaunda had held the reins of power since independence in 1964 - much of it under one-party rule.

Although he had been forced by popular discontent to hold elections, when beaten at the polls, he ceded power peacefully.

His successor Frederick Chiluba was hailed as one of a new breed of democratically elected leaders, in a continent where rulers clung on for decades.

Zambians looked forward to a bright, new future.

The new government set about unshackling the country's collapsing economy from stifling state controls. Guided by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, it embraced the free-market market with one of the most ambitious liberalisation programmes in Africa.

With its large copper reserves - some of the biggest in the world - and rich agricultural potential, foreign investors started to eye this poor southern Africa nation with interest.


But 10 years on, that optimism had mostly evaporated. Many regarded Mr Chiluba's rule as a disappointment. The promise of the MMD revolution remained unfulfilled.

So what went wrong? For one, despite being promoted as an new-style African leader, Mr Chiluba began to show some decidedly old-fashioned traits.

Former President Kenneth Kaunda
Kenneth Kaunda was hounded by his successor

Within a year-and-a-half, he had sacked independent-minded colleagues from his cabinet, and began to surround himself by "yes" men and women.

Corruption flourished. Some of Mr Chiluba's cronies, it seemed, were more interested with lining their own pockets, than serving their country.

Within a decade, graft seeped into Zambia's way of life.

"Kaunda's men were pickpockets," commented one Zambian journalist. "But Chiluba's lot are thieves."

The government's sell-off of the copper mines - the country's biggest asset - was botched and scandal-ridden.

A parliamentary probe revealed that some of the assets of ZCCM, the mines' company, simply vanished into thin air, while other valuable properties were sold for a song.

In the meantime, the free-market economy failed to deliver.

Despite billions of dollars of international aid since 1991, three-quarters of Zambia's population still live below the World Bank poverty threshold of $1 a day. The much-needed foreign investment to kick-start the economy has not transpired.


A large part of the blame must rest with Mr Chiluba himself. He often seemed more interested in securing his own position, than improving the lot of his people.

His attempts to hound his rival and former president, Mr Kaunda, out of politics in the mid-1990s, tarnished his reputation badly with the international community.

President Levy Mwanawasa
President Levy Mwanawasa says he will pardon Mr Chiluba - if he returns 75% of the money

In 1997, Mr Kaunda was accused of conspiring in failed coup plot and imprisoned.

It took protests from Africa's elder statesmen, Nelson Mandela and Julius Nyerere, to persuade Mr Chiluba to release him.

Then there was the long-running, politically inspired court case, which attempted to strip Zambia's independence leader of his citizenship.

Many saw the hounding of Mr Kaunda as spiteful and malicious, by a leader who felt jealous of the older man's popularity, both with the Zambian people and among fellow African leaders.

Mr Chiluba, himself, cut a curious figure in public life.

He is a "natty" dresser, with a fondness for expensive, monogrammed clothes, and built-up shoes to improve his diminutive height.

A fervent born-again Christian, his private life was the subject of much gossip. In September 2001, he divorced his wife Vera, to whom he had been married for 33 years.

Positive change

But although Mr Chiluba may not have left office a popular leader, Zambia changed greatly under his tenure, and a lot of it, for the good.

The public opposition to his third term bid showed that Zambians treasured their young democracy, so much so that even in this famously, laid-back country, they were prepared to mobilise to protect it.

Moreover, the freedom of speech allowed under Mr Chiluba would have been unthinkable for much of Mr Kaunda's rule.

There was a lively, free printed media, which relentlessly - and cruelly - lampooned the country's political leadership including Mr Chiluba. Such public mockery of the presidency is unknown in some parts of Africa.

Although the free-market has not delivered prosperity, the consensus among the country's political class - opposition and government - is that it is the only way forward.

The goal is to make Zambia's economy work better, not to return to the days of price controls, and the over-weaning state.

Finally, although Mr Chiluba wanted to stay in power, it is to his credit that he did not use widespread, state-sponsored violence to do so.

Zambians only have to look south, to neighbouring Zimbabwe and President Robert Mugabe, to see what the alternative might have been.

Mr Chiluba - Zambia's second leader since independence - opted to go the other route, leaving office peacefully. For this, Zambians can be thankful.

French court blocks corruption book

  • Send feedback

A French court has blocked the publication of a book by a former investigating magistrate who exposed corruption at the Elf oil company.

The court said that Eva Joly's book, which was due out on Thursday, might prejudice the ongoing trial of former Elf executives.

The book will now be published only after the closing arguments for the defence in the trial, scheduled for 7 July.

Correspondents say this is the first time a book by a judge has been blocked by the French courts.

Ms Joly said she would appeal against the decision, denouncing it as "censorship".

"Ms Joly has served our country with courage and should be proposed for the Legion of Honour," said Socialist MP Arnaud Montebourg.

Network of graft

The book - titled Is this the world we want to live in?, argues that France is institutionally corrupt.

Ms Joly, 57, led the investigation against Elf from its inception in 1994, focusing initially on Elf's bail-out of the Bidermann textile group and Bidermann's apparent payment of a secret commission to Elf director Loik le Floch-Prigent's wife.

But the inquiry soon widened as investigators found evidence of a network of graft stretching to Spain, Germany and Africa.

The Norwegian-born magistrate is considered to be at the vanguard of a new generation of lawyers bent on exposing the corrupt practices that were once part and parcel of the French political system.

Correspondents say she has made some powerful enemies during the trial.

Le Floch-Prigent and two other senior officials, Alfred Sirven and Andre Tarallo, could face jail of up to eight years if convicted for a range of financial machinations which enriched African leaders and some of the defendants.

Le Floch-Prigent and Sirven have been serving prison sentences since 2001 for organising a company slush fund.

But former foreign minister Roland Dumas was cleared on appeal in January of receiving Elf-funded gifts from his former mistress.

New Claims About Corrupt Relations With Dictators

The possibility that French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner might have misused his public position in France to boost his profitable private business with prominent African dictators arises at a time when the local authorities are dealing with numerous corruption affairs.

The accusations against Kouchner are summarised in a new book "Le Monde selon K." ("The world according to K.") by investigative journalist Pierre Pean.

In the book, Pean alleges that Kouchner, co-owner of IMEDIA and African Steps, obtained profitable contracts from the governments of Gabon and the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) at a time when he was executive director of a public health cooperation agency in Paris. IMEDIA and African Steps are two political counselling companies.

The governments in Gabon and the Republic of Congo - both oil-rich countries - are notorious as two particularly corrupt dictatorships. Omar Bongo has ruled Gabon since 1968 and Denis Sassou Nguesso has been in power in Brazzaville since 1997 when his troops, supported by Angola, won a civil war against then president Pascal Lissouba.

Bongo and Sassou Nguesso have family links: Bongo is married to Edith Lucie Sassou-Nguesso, Denis's daughter.

According to the claims by Pean, based on official documents from the respective African governments, the two companies were paid 4.6 million euros by the governments of Gabon and Congo Brazzaville, for advising their respective health departments.

Although Kouchner's activities as advisor were not illegal, several circumstances make the dealings with Bongo and Sassou Nguesso problematic. On the one hand, Kouchner was at the time of the dealings president of Esther, a French health cooperation agency which mainly engages with African countries.

On the other hand, the last payments by the Gabonese government to IMEDIA came when Kouchner was already serving as foreign minister. In a letter dated Aug 2, 2007, Eric Danon, executive at IMEDIA and close to Kouchner, urged Bongo's government to pay bills which had been outstanding since 2006.

Finally, in January and March 2008, the Gabonese government settled the bills.

IPS possesses copies of the letter by Danon, as well as of the transfers from the Gabonese treasury to IMEDIA. As foreign minister, Kouchner appointed Danon and his other business partner Jacques Baudouin to important posts at the foreign ministry.

And finally, the dealings contradict the image Kouchner has always transmitted of himself. "What I find reproachful is that Kouchner has cultivated an image of an immaculate knight whose behaviour is firmly rooted on ethics," Pean told IPS. "But this image does not fit his business dealings."

Kouchner, who had been a former member of the Socialist Party since the 1980s until he left the party to become minister under right-wing president Nicolas Sarkozy, has denied any wrongdoings. "Pean's accusations against me are abominable and grotesque," he said during a parliamentary debate on Feb 4.

Kouchner said that he was proud of having helped the two African governments to improve their public health systems and announced that he is pursuing a case of defamation against Pean.

Kouchner's dealings are also more questionable because they involve dictators who, despite presiding over some of the poorest people in Africa, command huge fortunes, as evidenced by their vast properties in France.

According to a report by the Paris-based police agency against organised and financial crimes (OCRGDF, after its French name), Bongo and Sassou Nguesso, together with the president of Angola, Jose Eduardo dos Santos, and that of Equatorial Guinea, Teodoro Obiang, possess considerable fortunes in real estate and luxurious automobiles in France.

The OCRGDF report, consisting of 34 files and thousands of pages, was opened in late 2007 after three French humanitarian associations lodged a complaint against the four dictators and the president of Burkina Faso, Blase Compaore, under the charges of "embezzlement of public funds".

In the report, the French police conclude that the African leaders have amassed a fortune in real estate in "the neighbourhoods (in and around Paris) of highest commercial value" and presents a non-exhaustive list of properties. All African leaders investigated are also owners of large fleets of luxurious sport cars and limousines and control numerous bank accounts.

The list includes a luxurious mansion near the Champs Elysees, the most high-priced neighbourhood in Paris, bought on June 15, 2007 for almost 19 million Euros (some 25 million dollars), by Omar Bongo's two children, Omar Denis and Yacine Queenie, who were 13 and 16 years old at the time.

Bongo alone is owner of 33 luxurious real estate properties in Paris and in the south of France.

Similarly, Denis Sassou Nguesso and his relatives are owners of at least five sumptuous mansions in and around Paris, for a market value of at least 10 million euros.

The African dictators also own a large flotilla of expensive sport automobiles and limousines, including Ferraris, Bugattis, Aston Martins and Mercedez Benzes. According to the OCRGDF report, Teodoro Nguema Obiang, of Equatorial Guinea possesses 15 luxurious sport cars and limousines, worth 5.7 million euros.

Despite the evidence suggesting impropriety, the French authorities closed the investigation without further consequences. But it had to open it again last December, when the anti-corruption watchdog organisation Transparency International presented a new claim against the five African heads of government.

And yet, few observers believe that the complaints will ever lead to judgments or sanctions against the African leaders. As the daily newspaper Le Monde put it recently, "three of the five governments concerned enjoy the unshakeable support of French president Nicolas Sarkozy".

Another proof of this support: Jean-Marie Bockel, former French deputy minister for international cooperation, who in Jan 2008 had dared to publicly speak of the "squandering of African resources" by African heads of state, was soon after removed from office.

In his book, Pean claims that Bongo and Sassou Nguesso complained to Kouchner about these "unobliging" remarks. Now Bockel is deputy minister in charge of French war veterans at the ministry of defence.

Monday, 22 June 2009

Zimbabwe: Ten Years of hell – Why nobody said a word…

I used to be extremely upset about why nobody seemed to be outraged by what happened to the whites in Zimbabwe. It used to make me so angry I could scream, but I’ve learned a lot since then. I now know why the West operates the way it does. I once, in a state of fury, arranged to see the American Military Attaché in Pretoria and we had lunch off the record. He agreed to see me and we chatted. He was a Colonel in the US Army, and when I met him, he was sitting reading an Afrikaans newspaper. I was amazed. So I asked him how it was that he could read Afrikaans, and he told me that they had sent him on a course in LA and he had studied Afrikaans before taking up his position here. We talked. He was very courteous and I actually enjoyed his company, until I began telling him about the way I saw things going on here politically, and then a smirk crossed his face. He was very skeptical of what I had to say. And it was that smirk, which irritated me forever thereafter. When we parted company he told me: If there is anything we need to know in the future, then contact us. I never did, and I never intended to either. I do think that he did do something for me, and if he did, what I thought he did, then I am grateful to him for saving me. I do think my visit was not totally worthless, but running to the Americans again and again is not something I intend doing. I only went to see him out of desperation. All such contacts are reported, and the materials I gave him were no doubt kept and written up, and perhaps joked over… who knows. Not that I care. Since then, I still take pride in the fact that most everything I warned of him of came true.

But during my discussion with him, I openly asked him about why nobody sorts out Mugabe militarily. In fact, since then, a number of people I know, including blacks who visited the American embassy, openly asked America for military support to overthrow Mugabe. The Americans never showed any interest in this. What he told me to my face though was that all problems “would be sorted out diplomatically”. Of course, you could argue that America would never be foolish enough to tell people off the street: “Sure, we’re going to attack Mugabe”. But I think, over the years the Americans have proven their bona fides in this matter. What the Americans say, they do. They no doubt spy a lot on Zimbabwe – of that I have no doubt. I have no doubt that CIA agents are moving around Zimbabwe and that lots of intelligence reports are generated there daily. But spying is one thing, doing something is different.

In order to understand Globalism, you need to understand a few basic foundational facts, which I will disclose to you as I revisit this concept. The first concept you must get in your head is that post-World War II, the West has been so freaked out by what war can do, plus they have been EVEN MORE FREAKED OUT by the time when the Soviets set out to FOMENT WORLDWIDE COMMUNIST AND TERRORIST REVOLUTION (some of which is still running to this day). The British were the ones who laid the groundwork for the Western Globalism that followed. The British decided they could not fight everyone everywhere to maintain their empire. The British decided to dismantle their empire while trying to retain control and friendly relations. Thus the British created the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth doesn’t sound like an Empire but it is Britain’s neo-colonial way of trying to keep the Empire or parts of the Empire under their influence. Remember, influence is not control, but it is the 2nd best option.

Globalism is merely the same policy, adopted as the strategy of the West. The West can’t run the world, but it can influence it and it does so, under the propaganda of Globalism. This America, which previously was not a colonial power became a neo-colonial power – the countries of the most interest to it in Africa are: South Africa, DRC & Nigeria.

Most crucially, Globalism is a Peace System. There used to be a War system. But the War System has been abandoned because the War System can do more harm than good to the West. The Russians and Chinese would like the War system to continue, but the West’s grip on the world is too tenuous, and the Russians and Chinese could succeed. So the West has opted for the Peace System. They try to hold things together by preventing conflict because war can be their undoing. The Middle East since 1990 is a special exception to the Peace System, and we will discuss it later. Globalism is about Peace, because if war starts, and if wars grow, they will go out of control, and the West will be the biggest loser – or that is their perception.

This is why the West goes and firmly attaches its lips to the backsides of terrorists, Communist Dictators and Mass Murderers who massacre their own people while crying “Democracy”.

Southern Africa could explode into a massive black on black war which then merges with a racial war on top of it… and all of southern Africa could burn to the ground. A war in Zimbabwe could easily spread to neighbouring countries, especially South Africa and burn the whole place down, and we’d fight for the next 20 years. (Personally, I don’t think that’s such a bad idea… I quite like the idea actually…I’d like to get a chance to kill some of our enemies). The Western world doesn’t want this because it would completely mess up 50 years of painstaking Globalist activity in Africa. Their tenuous, mediocre successes in Africa would be damaged overnight and they would lose their accesses to countries, to minerals, etc. It would strengthen the hand of terrorists, of the Russians and the Chinese, and it would be a bigger debacle than in the Middle East.

No, the ANC does not want war in Zimbabwe. The Globalists don’t want war either. China has military bases there just in case. I am convinced that the anti-communist forces would do well actually, and if there was a race war in South Africa, the whites, if some of them actually decided to stand and fight, would do pretty well. However, the fact is that the West isn’t interested in this. It is all too risky, and will do too much damage to their carefully calculated penetration and manipulations of people in Africa.

The West is somewhat genuine in their desire for Democracy among Black Africans, and the West prefers to pull the “democracy strings” behind the scenes. This is a long term game, and the West is in no rush to spend money on tricky courses of action which won’t result in anything substantial. The West did want the MDC to win, but the MDC lacked the ability to stand firm, and it was the MDC which, for once, was the weaker link. The MDC then decided to merge with Mugabe. It was a mistake. The West will support the MDC because the MDC is the voice of the masses of Zimbabwe.

But when you think of Globalism, think of a Peace System versus a War System. That is the basic approach. The aim is to use secret, cunning, tricky, political and economic methods to achieve what is needed. Napoleon invented the Continental System back in the 1800s against Britain. It failed. But Britain and America are now using the same concept. Globalism is a club where countries work together applying the principles of Napoleon’s Continental System – but they’re applying it ACROSS THE WORLD. It is a way of exerting pressure and fighting without actually fighting. They use it against smaller nations who are susceptible to such pressures.

But in reality, the aim is to suck other people into the club because the bigger the club is, the more power it has, so the West ignores the crimes of globalist members. The West knows Nelson Mandela is a terrorist and the ANC are terrorist scum. They know it all. It is something I must discuss too. I think the West has a special reason why they ignore the crimes of Nelson Mandela and why the Americans continue to promote Nelson Mandela as a great forgiver. I think it is a very special type of psychological warfare aimed at Nelson Mandela himself, to force him to be something he is not, and never was, but there is a reason for it.

Robert Mugabe perceived early on, and the British were keen to suck him into the Globalist club. They hoped it would make a decent person of him, but he went and murdered 30,000 of his own people anyway. But they want Zimbabwe, like South Africa to be a good member of the Globalist club. South Africa has only become a member of the Globalist club since 1994. Prior to that the Afrikaners showed the Globalists the finger and that was why the West demonized them so much. The ANC are tolerated because the ANC and Mugabe are willing to be members to some degree. The West will accept anyone into the globalist club no matter what sort of mass murderer, hard core communist, blood-thirsty thief he is. They will welcome him into the family, and will say nice things about him in the media in order to try to win him away from Russia and China. If Russia offers him missile systems, the West will offer him money. The Americans and the West will sit and chat to most blood thirsty murderer and communist, muslim fiend from hell. They’ll have tea with him even as blood is dripping from his hands on to their carpet. They’re busy playing a bigger game. The game is to bring everyone into the globalist club. Fidel Castro, Ian Smith or PW Botha were not interested in the globalist club. But, FW De Klerk, Mandela and Mbeki were a part of it. Zuma, for the sake of his own survival, is playing a game of duplicity with them.

This should give you all some idea of Globalism. I will explain the links to business later. Globalism is a Govt level policy. It has a proper rationale behind it, and it is the supreme strategy of the West. The West knows Mugabe is a communist terrorist just as they know that Nelson Mandela is a terrorist too. But they’re playing a bigger game, and that game is for INFLUENCE of the world and to keep America and the West at the No 1 spot. That’s the game, and that’s the objective. The UN is just one of the tools they created. So don’t think that Globalism is based on any particular value, except that it is about keeping the West in first place and seeing to it that Russia, the No 2 challenger, doesn’t win the entire world on to its side. Jan]

Hi All

The story below is what has been happening to all white farmers in Zimbabwe since year 2000, for many it has been a lot worse and resulted in death from stress or just murder.

Stopping the invasions of the last farms and the persecution of whites is the one thing that he will not relent on, this all was mostly just revenge for loosing the 1999 referendum and the financial support given to the then new MDC party.

The International Communitee must not give financial support to anything but health care matters and to the legal defence funds that have been set up to pay for the legal costs of farmers and the people who have been abused by the ZANU PF government, this until we have irreversible unbiased law and order back.

Gerry Whitehead


2nd June 2009

Last week, on the 27th May, my husband, Ian-Guy Campbell-Morrison, and his company, Vumba Coffee Estates (Pvt) Ltd, were found guilty, sentenced to 12 months in prison and fined US$800 for contravening Section 3(3) of the Gazetted Lands (Consequential Provisions), Act, Chapter 20:28.. His crime, "occupying state land without a permit (very few of which have been given to white farmers) from the lawful authority". His trial started in March 2009 and was heard by magistrate Mr Billard E. K. Musakwa and State prosecutor, Malvern Musarurwa. This all when the government of national unity (GNU) has said it wants farmers to prepare for the coming winter season and the country is appealing for food aid.

The State prosecutor (Musarurwa) blatantly read from a paper called "Handling Land Cases" written by the Chief Magistrate, Mr H Mandeya on 30th January 2009. This is the outline for how all land cases should be handled, what evidence can be permitted and what will be considered and what questions to ask the accused. There is a chapter called "lawyer's tactics".

Included here is " Reports received show that the following tactics have been used to delay finalisation of prosecutions under Chapter 20.28 and to confuse courts" It is frightening enough that the Chief Magistrate can be so blatant as to write and distribute a paper like this but there are comments in it like.. "An uphill struggle indeed!" and "Another trick is to refer to case law which properly speaking is distinguishable on the facts of the case at hand. Watch out!" The State case clearly followed the paper and no other defences were considered

Prosecutor Musarurwa got very agitated when the lawyer brought up the fact that these cases are racial and that according to Amendment number 19 all citizens, no matter what race, creed or religion should be treated equally and allocated land. He said there were no "white" people unless they were sick and no "black" people unless they were dead. The magistrate agreed with him and they had many giggles about this.

Mr Musakwa appeared rather confused on several occasions. The prosecution had been talking about Amendment number 17 (upon which the whole land eviction is based) and then our lawyer mentioned Amendment number 19 and Musakwa said "Why are you now talking about number 19 when we are only considering Amendment 17?" And the lawyer had to politely say that number 19 superseded 17 (a basic understanding of the law!). After many mentions of the Beattie case in Musakwa's final summing up he talked about the Beetle case! Does he not even remember the proper case names. After finding my husband guilty he put him in the holding cell at the court till after lunch for the sentencing. After lunch, in a packed courtroom (a lot of our friends were there) he said he had not had time to work out the sentence and that we should return the next morning for sentencing and in the meantime my husband was to spend the night in remand. Now this is not part of the law and there were several lawyers in the court (including a human rights lawyer) who were horrified with this unnecessary action by Musakwa. It is not a requirement of the law and was designed to frighten us and to send a clear message to the other 3 farmers facing trial for the same "crime" in Mutare with Musakwa

That one night in remand was an awful experience for him. He was shackled to another criminal at the court, taken in the back of an open bakkie to the remand prison where he was put into a filthy cell with about 80 other criminals. The cell was designed to hold 30-40 people. They had to line up to sleep and turn over at the same time as there was very little space. The ablutions were disgusting, the cell full of lice and the food uncooked mealie meal and very little of it. The next morning I had to pay $30 to the area prosecutor to use his bakkie again to collect the prisoners from the jail as the jail had no transport. My husband spent most of the next day inside the holding cell at the court until he was returned to remand to be released. The prison officers were very polite and helpful.

From 2000 when the land reform programme started our family has lost 900ha of land in the Vumba and were left only with 100ha property known as Eggardon Hill. No compensation has been paid by the govt for the developments on any of these properties.

Musakwa's judgement also comes after the SADC Tribunal ruled in Windhoek in November 2008 in favour of Mike Campbell (Pvt) Ltd and 78 other farmers that joined him. SADC declared that the Zimbabwean government may not continue with the eviction of white farmers, must pay them compensation for farms taken and also declared Amendment no 17 (and thus the basis of the land grab) illegal. It also declared the Fast Track land Reform Programme racist.

The Deputy AG Prince Machaya acknowledged before the SADC tribunal that
the treaty was binding to the Zimbabwean government, but the Acting
Attorney General, Johannes Tomana, has chosen to ignore this

It was against this background that we went into court on 20th March

Our lawyer asked for the case to be recused from Magistrate Musakwa and Prosecutor Musarurwa as they had both attended a meeting (along with the state witness, Nixon Kutsaranga) at 3 Brigade army barracks in Mutare on 10th Feb 2009. Although Mr Musakwa did not commit perjury by denying he was at that meeting, he did say it was pure speculation and hearsay and he could not recuse the case on these grounds. The lawyer also asked if the case could be referred to the Supreme Court (denied by Musakwa) and deferred awaiting a ruling of a similar case (Thomas Beattie (Pvt) Ltd) which was before the Supreme Court, case SC 32/09 (also denied by Mr Musakwa). Trial commenced on 23rd March 2009.

The State called Nixon Kutsaranga as their witness. What proceeded was a frightening display of acting between this witness, Magistrate Musarurwa and Prosecutor Musakwa. It was as though they had all rehearsed together what to say and how to act out a comedy. Lots of giggling, sneering, jeering and rubbing together of fat hands. Kutsaranga mentioned the "former owner, illegally occupying state land" whenever he could. The State tried to prove that the property in question was indeed gazetted in Oct 2003 and that despite it being withdrawn by the government in August 2004 (thereby setting aside all previous gazettings), Amendment number 17 meant it was declared state land. No argument from our lawyer was entertained here.

Mr Kutsaranga did admit to the court that the company had not been compensated for the developments on the property and that the state was at fault here as this was a condition of acquisition. He did not however see it as a problem and said " Our door is always open, .this matter can be followed up later with our Compensation Department. They will be paid.." We are not sure how a broke government can pay farmers compensation when it can't even pay its civil servants wages.

Mr Kutsaranga was presented with letters from the District Administrator (DA), Zimbabwe Tourism Authority (ZTA) recommending that the Campbell-Morrisons stay at Eggardon Hill Farm. Kutsaranga said these were mere recommendations and the magistrate agreed with him and so they were not binding.

In 2005, a lands officer, Mr Simon Matendera, had verbally told my husband that if he gave up our farm and home (Sub-division A of Witchwood) that the state would leave us with Eggardon Hill. This was denied by Kutsaranga and he said it was not binding anyway as the State had now decided it required Eggardon Hill for resettlement purposes. This is despite taking 900ha already, none of which are being farmed commercially. Of the 6 new beneficiaries on our farms, none of them live here, 1 has died, 2 have left and handed over to other people, 1 has disappeared and left the country and none are doing anything worthwhile or viable. The roads are barely passable due to no maintenance being done on them, the building are falling down, doors and roofing have been stolen and also pumps, motors, electrical cables and switches, doors, metal tanks, taps, etc

Eggardon Hill is already partly occupied by a Julias Tobaiwa on an illegal subdivision the government came up with. He has most of the arable land, we being left with only about 10ha of ploughable land which we used for pastures, grazing and a bit of maize. The real prize on this property is the house, a magnificent homestead built by an American in the 1950s with the most amazing views. The acquiring of this property has nothing to do with the land but is all about the house.

Mr Musakwa refused the lawyer's appeal for the proceedings to be taped and he only took detailed notes when the defence brought up points which favoured the State and were against us. When we said things to prove that we had been told to stay on the property by several high ranking government officials, including the DA and Governor Chigudu (Provincial Lands Committee Chairman) and Flora Boka (deputy Minister of Lands), he conveniently neglected to make notes so he could not recall these facts in his summing up and judgement. I took copious notes of each days proceedings which Musakwa did not like and in fact told me on judgement day that I was not allowed to take notes in court unless I was an accredited journalist. This according to the lawyers is not at all correct.

The courtroom was filthy and dusty, the windows dirty, no light worked when it got dark, prison officers ate their lunch in there. The chairs were broken. The policeman or woman meant to be guarding was generally asleep during proceedings. Cell phones went off inside (even Musakwa's) and were used outside the courtroom despite signs saying they were prohibited.

The State prosecutor, Malvern Musarurwa, was something else. He is an ex-policeman with almost no knowledge of the law. He talked over the magistrate, interrupted him, argued against his rulings especially when it came to trial delays and was downright rude to him It was only after our lawyer had asked them both to a meeting in the magistrate's chambers that he started to follow court procedures. It was a disgraceful disregard for the law and it made a mockery of the court. It also clearly showed that the magistrate was prepared to let him get away with this behaviour as long as it was against the accused (my husband).

After being found guilty, Musakwa and Musarurwa discussed "a hefty sentence and fine for this horrendous crime". You would think my poor husband had murdered someone! They talked about a level 11 fine AND a jail sentence and eviction from the farm. They then had a good giggle when the magistrate pointed out that if my husband was in jail he could not be evicted from the farm. In his final judgement he fined my husband US$400, his company US$400 and gave him a 12 month suspended sentence on condition he vacates the farm and does not occupy state land for the next 5 years. This final statement is totally unreasonable as it means he cannot farm in Zimbabwe for the next 5 years. This at a time when the country needs experienced qualified farmers to try fed the nation.

We were led to believe that a young government doctor, Nduna, was the so called new beneficiary. He has no farming knowledge and already owns a smallholding just outside Mutare on the Vumba road where he keeps pigs. We were told by certain government officials that he had not gone through the proper channels to receive his so called "offer letter", the document that gives you the right to occupy a farm. The saga took a new twist when the local press the Manica Post (29th May-4th June) on reporting the story of my husband's case (under "Former white farmer fined"), said Mr Nixon Kutsaranga has been allocated the farm. Now he is the Chief Lands Officer Manicaland and was the state witness in the case!

Farmers all over Zimbabwe are being prosecuted in a similar manner but most of the magistrates are deferring the cases as they see it is not right or are frightened to go against the SADC ruling. I believe there is a pending "contempt of SADC Tribunal" court case being prepared against the likes of Musakwa and Musarurwa and the people on the ground evicting farmers from their homes and farms. I hope it can be done and implemented soon before even more chaos ensues.

There is also a strong calling for AG Johannes Tomana to be dismissed and all his rulings to be reviewed. If this does not happen my husband will forever have a criminal record for merely trying to stay on his farm.

The government of national unity and their GPA (Global Political Agreement) promised an immediate land audit to assess the situation on the ground as they realised there has been huge abuse of the allocation system and that not much is happening on the ground. However, this has been ignored by AG Tomana and his colleagues in an attempt to get rid of the few remaining white farmers and to grab what little remains on the commercial farms in Zimbabwe

My husband is second generation Zimbabwean and I am third. This is our home and we have nowhere else to go. We have no intention of going anywhere else but the Zimbabwean government is making sure we cannot stay to farm. We have lost 2 homes now and have had to seek employment outside of agriculture to survive. We are both qualified and experienced in agriculture in Zimbabwe.

We also had a viable tourist business on Eggardon Hill Farm with 2 self-catering holiday cottages and horses for trekking. This has all been lost as well and at a time when the ZTA is trying very hard to revive tourism, a valuable money earner for Zimbabwe, especially in time for the World Cup soccer in 2010.

We have applied for land to farm under the government's A2 scheme in which one receives an offer letter but despite our qualifications, knowledge and experience have not been allocated land by the government. We are clearly the wrong colour!

Our case is not unique although my husband is one of only a few farmers to actually be sentenced and evicted by the court. (Most other forced evictions have been by the thugs on the ground). We have not had the horrific intimidation, beatings and threats, and the vandalisation of other cases, but it was frightening in that it all occurred in the open, in the courthouse under the name of the law. We have appealed against the sentence to the High Court. This will have the effect of stopping the eviction but not the jail sentence, an anomaly in itself because if we stay my husband goes to jail anyway!

We have moved off the farm as my husband cannot spend a year in jail. Already some people from the land's office in Mutare, some thugs from the War Veterans Association to protect them and 2 policemen (1 high ranking) have visited the farm (on Monday 1st June) and climbed over the security fence into the homestead yard. They told an employee that "they came to see if we had vacated and to make sure we had not vandalised the property".

According to our appeal, as per the law, they and the new beneficiary (whichever one) should not enter the property. So it is clear that not even the police have any regard for the laws of Zimbabwe.

A very sad day for our beautiful Zimbabwe!
Posted By: Gairk
*AfricanCrisis Volunteer*

AllAfrica News: Latest

Pambazuka News :Comment & analysis