Opinion / Columnist
Chiefs' diplomatic passports: A clear case of bribery
25 Jul 2023 at 03:32hrs | Views
The call for granting diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe ahead of the 2023 elections presents both opportunities and challenges.
THE call for granting diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe has sparked debate on the sensibility and implications of such a move, particularly in the context of the upcoming 2023 elections. Chief Clemence Nembiri of Mt Darwin made this request during a workshop held by the National Council of Chiefs, arguing that traditional leaders should be treated as leaders and granted this privilege for ease of travel across borders. However, the proposal raises concerns about potential perceptions of bribery and the abuse of power among some traditional chiefs.
Traditional chiefs play a significant role in Zimbabwe's governance and societal structure. They are recognised as custodians of our cultural heritage and are often considered as important local leaders, especially in rural communities. Their primary responsibilities include settling disputes, overseeing communal affairs, and maintaining order within their respective villages. Many chiefs enjoy deep respect and loyalty from their communities.
Chief Nembiri's request for diplomatic passports stems from the perception that traditional chiefs are also leaders and should be granted the same privileges as other government officials. He argues that temporary leaders, such as politicians elected by the people or appointed officials, often receive diplomatic passports despite having limited terms in office. In contrast, traditional chiefs hold hereditary positions and remain in their roles throughout their lives, yet they do not enjoy the same travel privileges.
One of the main concerns surrounding the granting of diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs is the potential perception of bribery. Diplomatic passports are typically reserved for government officials and diplomats who represent the country's interests abroad. Providing such passports to traditional chiefs could be seen as an attempt to buy their loyalty or secure their support for political purposes, especially in the lead-up to the 2023 elections. This perception could undermine the credibility of the electoral process and erode public trust in the government.
Moreover, there have been instances of abuse of power by certain traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe. Reports of corruption, misuse of authority, and failure to act impartially have marred the reputation of some traditional leaders. Granting diplomatic passports to chiefs without appropriate checks and balances might exacerbate these issues, leading to increased exploitation of power and privileges.
On the other hand, proponents argue that diplomatic passports could enhance the chiefs' ability to engage in regional and international matters on behalf of their communities. Facilitating their travel could enable them to participate in conferences, workshops and cultural events, fostering cross-border collaboration and enhancing cultural exchanges.
Instead of automatically granting diplomatic passports to all traditional chiefs, a more prudent approach would involve assessing each individual case based on merit and necessity. Chiefs with a proven track record of promoting community development, preserving cultural heritage, and fostering regional co-operation could be considered for diplomatic passports, provided there are transparent guidelines and stringent accountability mechanisms in place.
The call for granting diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe ahead of the 2023 elections presents both opportunities and challenges. While it could enable chiefs to represent their communities on the international stage, it also raises concerns about potential perceptions of bribery and exacerbation of power abuse among some chiefs. Striking a balance that considers merit and transparency in the selection process is crucial to ensure the move, if implemented, promotes responsible leadership and benefits Zimbabwe as a whole. Ultimately, the decision rests with the relevant authorities, hence, careful consideration of all implications is essential before any action is taken.
THE call for granting diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe has sparked debate on the sensibility and implications of such a move, particularly in the context of the upcoming 2023 elections. Chief Clemence Nembiri of Mt Darwin made this request during a workshop held by the National Council of Chiefs, arguing that traditional leaders should be treated as leaders and granted this privilege for ease of travel across borders. However, the proposal raises concerns about potential perceptions of bribery and the abuse of power among some traditional chiefs.
Traditional chiefs play a significant role in Zimbabwe's governance and societal structure. They are recognised as custodians of our cultural heritage and are often considered as important local leaders, especially in rural communities. Their primary responsibilities include settling disputes, overseeing communal affairs, and maintaining order within their respective villages. Many chiefs enjoy deep respect and loyalty from their communities.
Chief Nembiri's request for diplomatic passports stems from the perception that traditional chiefs are also leaders and should be granted the same privileges as other government officials. He argues that temporary leaders, such as politicians elected by the people or appointed officials, often receive diplomatic passports despite having limited terms in office. In contrast, traditional chiefs hold hereditary positions and remain in their roles throughout their lives, yet they do not enjoy the same travel privileges.
One of the main concerns surrounding the granting of diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs is the potential perception of bribery. Diplomatic passports are typically reserved for government officials and diplomats who represent the country's interests abroad. Providing such passports to traditional chiefs could be seen as an attempt to buy their loyalty or secure their support for political purposes, especially in the lead-up to the 2023 elections. This perception could undermine the credibility of the electoral process and erode public trust in the government.
Moreover, there have been instances of abuse of power by certain traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe. Reports of corruption, misuse of authority, and failure to act impartially have marred the reputation of some traditional leaders. Granting diplomatic passports to chiefs without appropriate checks and balances might exacerbate these issues, leading to increased exploitation of power and privileges.
On the other hand, proponents argue that diplomatic passports could enhance the chiefs' ability to engage in regional and international matters on behalf of their communities. Facilitating their travel could enable them to participate in conferences, workshops and cultural events, fostering cross-border collaboration and enhancing cultural exchanges.
Instead of automatically granting diplomatic passports to all traditional chiefs, a more prudent approach would involve assessing each individual case based on merit and necessity. Chiefs with a proven track record of promoting community development, preserving cultural heritage, and fostering regional co-operation could be considered for diplomatic passports, provided there are transparent guidelines and stringent accountability mechanisms in place.
The call for granting diplomatic passports to traditional chiefs in Zimbabwe ahead of the 2023 elections presents both opportunities and challenges. While it could enable chiefs to represent their communities on the international stage, it also raises concerns about potential perceptions of bribery and exacerbation of power abuse among some chiefs. Striking a balance that considers merit and transparency in the selection process is crucial to ensure the move, if implemented, promotes responsible leadership and benefits Zimbabwe as a whole. Ultimately, the decision rests with the relevant authorities, hence, careful consideration of all implications is essential before any action is taken.
Source - online
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.
