Opinion / Columnist
Chamisa to be arrested
25 Jul 2018 at 19:32hrs | Views
Reports from MDC Alliance rallies in recent days echo a common theme: if their candidate loses there will be anger, despair, and even revolution. Chamisa's supporters site the election as being rigged – of which there is no evidence – and a corrupt system. It's language the Chamisa himself uses. While political reporters note most .
Chamisa supporters are not calling for "revolution" the words from the campaign this season have many asking what constitutes dangerous political speech and how it can incite people to act. Chamisa is a terrorist trying to play democracy, he describes free and fair elections as the winning of his Alliance, and He makes a bold statement now that if he does not win then the elections are rigged. He is already preparing his supporters for a war and disobedience of a civil nature as to cause a civil strife.
Hate Speech which Chamisa spreads Given the evils of hate, any argument for protecting is, at best, an uphill effort and, at worst, simply misguided. MDC members are now conditioned not to accept or, at least, wonder whether they should accept, results of the coming elections. Anyone sensitive to the horror of genocide knows that hate pervades the atmosphere at this time.. Moreover, it is difficult to find any value in the freedom to engage in no defeat mentality in the times of elections and when the supporters are easily excitable.
When does heated political rhetoric stop being protected speech and instead become incitement? Chamisa's speech could, in fact, constitute incitement to riot, especially given the MDC's history of similar comments encouraging violence at other events.
Yet, the line between what is freedom of expression and what is incitement hasn't always been clear, especially in Zimbabwe. . "The stakes in these cases are high - balancing free speech with public safety - yet there is no incitement law in Zimbabwe thus the playing child Chamisa goes scot free.
.: International criminal tribunals, such as those established at Nuremberg and for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia, successfully convicted politicians and media figures for inciting their followers to commit genocide and crimes against humanity. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, certain European countries such as Germany and France created strict incitement laws that punish not only speech that incites violence, but also speech that incites hatred against a protected social group. Germany has recently enacted legislation that permits the government to fine social media companies tens of millions of dollars for failing to remove content that violates their laws in a timely manner.
In these times of elections where the whole world is focusing on us Chamisa exposes his illness at the risk of plunging the nation into civils war. MDC believes that free elections are only when they win. They have repeated several times that they will not accept any result which is not in their favour. They are literally saying to the nation vote for us or for war. Such speeches by the opposition are disgusting and indeed suffocating.
According to observer's statistics, there has been a sharp uptick in reported hate crimes in the last two months, particularly against women and against President Mnangagwa. .This is normally perpetrated by the MDC and other pockets of the opposition. Because many hate crimes are accompanied by denigrating speech, we can safely assume that an increase in hate crimes will also mean an increase in inciting speech. The opposition has taken the freedom given to them as weakness on the part of Zanu pf.
The record of prosecutions for incitement is relatively meagre, and this results in part from the fact that the freedom of speech granted to the opposition is heavily misinterpreted. Test for incitement is quite demanding and requires that the prosecution show that the defendant intended to directly advocate a crime and that crime was likely to occur imminently. Further, there is no insufficient guidance from the courts regarding the elements of "imminence" and "likelihood." This has left prosecuting attorneys in the dark about what kind of speech might qualify as incitement to imminent lawless action. Prosecutors have limited resources and therefore they tend to avoid indicting an offence when they are unsure that they possess the necessary evidence to secure a conviction. However, the speeches of the opposition are so inciting, so damaging and indeed destructive and a danger to our peace and our stability in Zimbabwe, such that if left untendered we will be sliding in a civil war very fast. What is the result of impunity? Individuals inciting hate crimes are emboldened and may even ramp up their rhetoric.
Nearly forty years after independence, courts have still not provided a systematic framework for determining the categories and contexts of speech acts that are most likely to cause imminent harm or injury. Judges and prosecutors are left to rely on their intuitions and personal hunches, and this is not a sound basis for law or policy. It makes the opposition think that freedom of speech is freedom after wrong speech.
On the other hand, we can offer evidence-based guidance about the kinds of speech and circumstances that are most likely to produce undesirable effects. For instance, we know that speech from political authority figures is more likely to influence behaviour, especially if a figure is perceived by their audience as charismatic and if their speech is characterized by graphic imagery that draws on powerful historical narratives. An audience that is experiencing economic and political uncertainty is more vulnerable to language that scapegoats a minority population. Speakers that cultivate fear and resentment against target out-groups can motivate some followers to acts of violence, especially when the speaker identifies specific forms of action that can be taken immediately. Chamisa declared that they will all be in the roads and will not listen or obey the courts. He declared that he will use the people's court meaning he will demonstrate the legitimate government out. Chamisa is seeking to abuse the peace and turn the country into a chaotic outfit.
Furthermore, contemporary social science studies demonstrate a strong correlation between social media incitement and hate crimes in the .Zimbabwean election campaign. Incitement is always an empirical question and each case must be decided on its own merits, and yet No one can provide courts with a protocol for a context-specific analysis of political speech. . It is possible to allow free and robust political speech and at the same time protect vulnerable social groups from those who encourage hate crimes and violence.
MDC Alliance is now playing in the dip end of the river. They cannot realise that when a crocodile is opening its mouth it is not crying. When the crocodile is quite it is not a sign of weakness.
The opposition is far from that. Freedom of speech is no longer a value. It has become a loophole exploited with impunity by trolls, racists and ethnic cleansing advocates. And misguided fellows like Chamisa, Freedom of speech is a neutral principle uncontaminated by history or social bias. There are hard choices here. Too often, those who should know better argue for the wrong ones. They fight to their deaths to defend the rights of MDC and the other peddlers of hate – but not mine.
Zimbabwe does not need this now. We are a nation of peace and we do not want any civil disobedience. History tells us that the history of demonstrations was born by the MDC and Chamisa is taking it further to a violent demonstration. In his speech which is echoed by his supports Chamisa insults women, he insults elders and he claims to be the only God given leader thereby insulting God.
Chamisa is a time bomb and if he is not cautioned the nation will plunge into its death, The MDC T has a history of threatening to boycott elections. They threaten the nation with violence and they become the first ones to declare the elections not free and not fair. They castigate anybody who is near the elections and threaten the electorate to voting.
The playing field is not level but ZANU PF will prevail. Zimbabweans have a strong sense of pride in their heritage and no amount of threat will disturb the. Victory is certain. do not be scared or threatened by the opposition Vote for peace vote ED, Allow ED to do his best he must steer the country to prosperity. he is not fake pastor who cries at a rally and calls the name of the Lord in vain.
vazet2000@yahoo.co.uk
Chamisa supporters are not calling for "revolution" the words from the campaign this season have many asking what constitutes dangerous political speech and how it can incite people to act. Chamisa is a terrorist trying to play democracy, he describes free and fair elections as the winning of his Alliance, and He makes a bold statement now that if he does not win then the elections are rigged. He is already preparing his supporters for a war and disobedience of a civil nature as to cause a civil strife.
Hate Speech which Chamisa spreads Given the evils of hate, any argument for protecting is, at best, an uphill effort and, at worst, simply misguided. MDC members are now conditioned not to accept or, at least, wonder whether they should accept, results of the coming elections. Anyone sensitive to the horror of genocide knows that hate pervades the atmosphere at this time.. Moreover, it is difficult to find any value in the freedom to engage in no defeat mentality in the times of elections and when the supporters are easily excitable.
When does heated political rhetoric stop being protected speech and instead become incitement? Chamisa's speech could, in fact, constitute incitement to riot, especially given the MDC's history of similar comments encouraging violence at other events.
Yet, the line between what is freedom of expression and what is incitement hasn't always been clear, especially in Zimbabwe. . "The stakes in these cases are high - balancing free speech with public safety - yet there is no incitement law in Zimbabwe thus the playing child Chamisa goes scot free.
.: International criminal tribunals, such as those established at Nuremberg and for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia, successfully convicted politicians and media figures for inciting their followers to commit genocide and crimes against humanity. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, certain European countries such as Germany and France created strict incitement laws that punish not only speech that incites violence, but also speech that incites hatred against a protected social group. Germany has recently enacted legislation that permits the government to fine social media companies tens of millions of dollars for failing to remove content that violates their laws in a timely manner.
In these times of elections where the whole world is focusing on us Chamisa exposes his illness at the risk of plunging the nation into civils war. MDC believes that free elections are only when they win. They have repeated several times that they will not accept any result which is not in their favour. They are literally saying to the nation vote for us or for war. Such speeches by the opposition are disgusting and indeed suffocating.
According to observer's statistics, there has been a sharp uptick in reported hate crimes in the last two months, particularly against women and against President Mnangagwa. .This is normally perpetrated by the MDC and other pockets of the opposition. Because many hate crimes are accompanied by denigrating speech, we can safely assume that an increase in hate crimes will also mean an increase in inciting speech. The opposition has taken the freedom given to them as weakness on the part of Zanu pf.
The record of prosecutions for incitement is relatively meagre, and this results in part from the fact that the freedom of speech granted to the opposition is heavily misinterpreted. Test for incitement is quite demanding and requires that the prosecution show that the defendant intended to directly advocate a crime and that crime was likely to occur imminently. Further, there is no insufficient guidance from the courts regarding the elements of "imminence" and "likelihood." This has left prosecuting attorneys in the dark about what kind of speech might qualify as incitement to imminent lawless action. Prosecutors have limited resources and therefore they tend to avoid indicting an offence when they are unsure that they possess the necessary evidence to secure a conviction. However, the speeches of the opposition are so inciting, so damaging and indeed destructive and a danger to our peace and our stability in Zimbabwe, such that if left untendered we will be sliding in a civil war very fast. What is the result of impunity? Individuals inciting hate crimes are emboldened and may even ramp up their rhetoric.
On the other hand, we can offer evidence-based guidance about the kinds of speech and circumstances that are most likely to produce undesirable effects. For instance, we know that speech from political authority figures is more likely to influence behaviour, especially if a figure is perceived by their audience as charismatic and if their speech is characterized by graphic imagery that draws on powerful historical narratives. An audience that is experiencing economic and political uncertainty is more vulnerable to language that scapegoats a minority population. Speakers that cultivate fear and resentment against target out-groups can motivate some followers to acts of violence, especially when the speaker identifies specific forms of action that can be taken immediately. Chamisa declared that they will all be in the roads and will not listen or obey the courts. He declared that he will use the people's court meaning he will demonstrate the legitimate government out. Chamisa is seeking to abuse the peace and turn the country into a chaotic outfit.
Furthermore, contemporary social science studies demonstrate a strong correlation between social media incitement and hate crimes in the .Zimbabwean election campaign. Incitement is always an empirical question and each case must be decided on its own merits, and yet No one can provide courts with a protocol for a context-specific analysis of political speech. . It is possible to allow free and robust political speech and at the same time protect vulnerable social groups from those who encourage hate crimes and violence.
MDC Alliance is now playing in the dip end of the river. They cannot realise that when a crocodile is opening its mouth it is not crying. When the crocodile is quite it is not a sign of weakness.
The opposition is far from that. Freedom of speech is no longer a value. It has become a loophole exploited with impunity by trolls, racists and ethnic cleansing advocates. And misguided fellows like Chamisa, Freedom of speech is a neutral principle uncontaminated by history or social bias. There are hard choices here. Too often, those who should know better argue for the wrong ones. They fight to their deaths to defend the rights of MDC and the other peddlers of hate – but not mine.
Zimbabwe does not need this now. We are a nation of peace and we do not want any civil disobedience. History tells us that the history of demonstrations was born by the MDC and Chamisa is taking it further to a violent demonstration. In his speech which is echoed by his supports Chamisa insults women, he insults elders and he claims to be the only God given leader thereby insulting God.
Chamisa is a time bomb and if he is not cautioned the nation will plunge into its death, The MDC T has a history of threatening to boycott elections. They threaten the nation with violence and they become the first ones to declare the elections not free and not fair. They castigate anybody who is near the elections and threaten the electorate to voting.
The playing field is not level but ZANU PF will prevail. Zimbabweans have a strong sense of pride in their heritage and no amount of threat will disturb the. Victory is certain. do not be scared or threatened by the opposition Vote for peace vote ED, Allow ED to do his best he must steer the country to prosperity. he is not fake pastor who cries at a rally and calls the name of the Lord in vain.
vazet2000@yahoo.co.uk
Source - Dr Masimba Mavaza
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
