ZBC board appointments: Some animals are more equal than others

So the circus at the ZBC, the national broadcaster continues and while the Professor tries valiantly to spin it he fails dismally and ends up sounding unintelligent, which is not an impression he likes to propagate. If you are going to be stubborn, it's probably better to not say anything at all.

Apparently two of the individuals appointed to the ZBC Board, a Dr Mutisi and a Mr Kausiyo, have a few problems of their own. This comes after Dr Magaya who had been appointed Board Chairman of ZBC picked up the gong for the shortest reigning chairman of a corporation in Zimbabwe (and probably anywhere else) after he was appointed and fired within a space of 24 hours. His crime? It was discovered that Dr Magaya had some messy corruption-related issues hanging over his head. It was an unceremonious end to a very short tenure at the top.

He was promptly replaced by a Roman Catholic priest. It must have dawned on the Professor that what ZBC needs is divine intervention and how better than to select one of the faithful servants to lead that mission? Although we are surprised that the Professor did not consider the miracle prophets, because a miracle is probably what the national broadcaster needs right now. After all, do they not say they can raise men and women from the dead?

Now it turns out that this Dr Mutisi is facing a murder charge. A young boy of 13 (technically a child) died after an assault by two soldiers allegedly instructed by Dr. Mutisi to beat the child, who was her nephew. We are told that Dr Mutisi is the wife of Brigadier General Mutisi, whose title before his name tells us that he is senior military officer. We hope this is a minor fact in the greater scheme of things.

The media has raised the issue of the inconsistency in the treatment of the two learned doctors. If Dr Magaya had to be fired so unceremoniously because he was facing allegations of corruption, how come Dr Mutisi has not suffered a similar fate on account of the murder charges?

Professor Moyo, the appointing authority, has tried to justify the decision to carry on with Dr Mutisi, the murder charge notwithstanding. He has suddenly discovered the principle of natural justice (which is cemented in the Constitution) that a person is innocent until proven guilty. All well and good. Hail the law!

But even a casual observer would ask, how come this principle applies only to Dr. Mutisi but not to Dr Magaya? It is helpful to note that Dr Magaya is not facing formal charges as yet - they are mere allegations in the media. But on the other hand Dr Mutisi is actually facing a formal charge. In other words, strictly speaking, Dr Mutisi's situation is by comparison more serious than Dr Magaya's. Yet Dr Mutisi is spared the rod and according to Professor Moyo, her constitutional rights must be protected. But why the difference in approach?

Could it be that murder, in the appointing authority's eyes, is less serious than corruption? Or that there is a strategic advantage in selecting marriage partners? Or is it simply that in this Orwellian world, some animals are more equal than others?

But all this leaves us with the same question that we raised a few days ago: what exactly is the procedure for the appointment of directors to the boards of state corporations? Does someone with power just wake up, place calls to phone friends and associates then draw up a list and submits the list to the President, for approval? What's the procedure to do due diligence; are there any checks and balances? If anything, this circus at the ZBC should cause a debate and yield a clear policy on the transparent and robust procedure for the appointment of board members.

Then again perhaps the more spiritually inclined among us might see some light in all this darkness. They might say that it is the spirit of the boy refusing to be smothered, that all this is proof that it is fighting valiantly to be heard; and in thrusting Dr Mutisi into the spotlight, circumstances of her appointment are simply part of a spiritual conspiracy to ensure that justice is not only done but is actually seen to be done.

Certainly many of us did not know about her serious charge. Now we do, thanks to the controversial appointment. From what is being said of the matter already we sense that the wheels of justice have been moving in a suspiciously crooked manner. Hopefully, the media will pay closer attention - lest there is any hint of corruption in the handling of the matter and we also hope child rights activists will take more interest in this matter (even though the affected child was a boy).