Chiefs demand truth and apology from Mnangagwa over Gukurahundi

President Emmerson had a rude awakening after the Chiefs from Midlands and Matabeleland bluntly told him that their people need a national apology preceded by truth telling about what happened during the Gukurahundi genocide.

The Chiefs who submitted a joint presentation said the state was to blame for the murder pf more than 20 000 Zimbabweans in Midlands and Matabeleland.

They told Mnangagwa that as the Head of State he must apologise on behalf of the state.

Read the summary below:
 
The state committed the atrocities and therefore the state should assume responsibility for the atrocities and issue an official apology and, in our constitutional architecture, the state is represented in the office of the Head of State. Your Excellency, it is important to distinguish between an official apology and a personal apology. Personal responsibility is irrelevant when considering an official apology. It is not you apologising for your personal acts or omissions but the state apologising for the actions of its agencies. It is irrelevant whether the Head of State is in any way personally responsible for the atrocities. It is irrelevant whether or not he was even there at the time of the commission of the atrocities. An apology is a moral obligation of the occupant of the office of the Head of State where atrocities or wrongs of one form or another are committed in the name of government or state and not necessarily an admission of personal responsibility on the part of the Head of State as a person.

Your Excellency, lest we be accused of making a bald and wild allegation on the responsibility of the State, it is important to say we have assumed that the state is culpable for Gukurahundi atrocities because the perpetrators were employees of the state, were paid and housed by the state, were funded by the state, were transported by the state, carried state-issued weapons and ammunition, flew the Zimbabwean flag in their bases and offices, were promoted after the atrocities, are earning retirement benefits from the state, and were not arrested or in anyway punished by the state for the crimes they committed, and, most importantly, the state did not at the time and since that time distance itself from the crimes. The state, as a unit, is therefore liable and should be held responsible for the actions of its employees unless it demonstrates on evidence that the crimes committed were solely the actions of specifically named individuals or unless a truly independent body has determined otherwise. As far as we know, at all material times, the government of the day had the right, ability and duty to control the actions of those who committed Gukurahundi atrocities on the ground because they were acting in its name and were accountable to it. It chose not to exercise this power.

The truth telling process, for example, enables victims and survivors to know about the circumstances of gross violations of their human rights, to know the fate of their disappeared loved ones or at least know the circumstances under which they disappeared or were killed. It also serves to inform the nation about what happened to their fellow citizens. Acknowledgment of the occurrence of the deaths, injuries, rape and related suffering that took place during Gukurahundi is therefore key to closure. When one reads Section 252 (c) of the Constitution, it is clear that truth telling is contemplated in pursuit of justice, healing and reconciliation. Truth telling is not important only for victims but also for perpetrators. They too need to be freed from the tremendous bondage of the burden of unacknowledged injurious conduct in respect of having killed, raped, tortured, starved and disappeared fellow citizens directly or through the agency of someone else.