Opinion / Columnist
Zimbabwe’s persecution of Blessed Mhlanga is more damaging to national interests than any speech
2 hrs ago |
159 Views
There are times when not reacting is the highest form of maturity.
The hallmark of a self-assured and truly democratic state is its ability to withstand criticism without reaching for the handcuffs.
If you value my social justice advocacy and writing, please consider a financial contribution to keep it going. Contact me on WhatsApp: +263 715 667 700 or Email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com
A government that believes in its own legitimacy and its commitment to the rule of law does not tremble when a single journalist stands before an international audience to narrate his personal experiences of state-sponsored hardship.
Yet, as we have seen with the escalating and vindictive campaign against Blessed Mhlanga following his presentation at the 18th Geneva Summit for Human Rights and Democracy, the authorities in Harare remain trapped in a cycle of pathologically intolerant behavior.
In their frantic attempt to “defend” the image of Zimbabwe, they are paradoxically doing more damage to our national interests than any twenty-minute speech in Switzerland could ever have achieved.
By turning a seasoned journalist into a fugitive and, according to media reports, deploying counterintelligence teams to the airport like he is a high-level security threat, the government is essentially providing a live-action demonstration of exactly what Mhlanga warned the world about in Geneva.
He spoke of “lawfare”—the calculated manipulation of legal systems to stifle dissent.
He spoke of a “war on the press” and the evolution of repression under the so-called Second Republic.
If there were any skeptics in that Geneva hall who thought he might have been exaggerating for dramatic effect, the state’s subsequent actions have surely converted them into believers.
The warrant of arrest, the public threats from Minister Zhemu Soda, and the legislative grandstanding by Senator Sengezo Tshabangu regarding passport revocation are not signs of strength; they are the desperate flailings of a regime that manages to shoot itself in the foot with remarkable precision.
Consider the irony of the situation.
Blessed Mhlanga did not go to Geneva to call for economic sanctions or to advocate for an armed insurrection.
He went there to tell the story of a man who spent 73 days in pre-trial detention for the “crime” of conducting an interview.
He spoke as a father and a professional whose life was upended by what many believe was an unjustified and cruel use of state power.
This was a human story, a narrative of personal resilience in the face of systemic injustice.
Under any normal democratic establishment, such a speech would have been an opportunity for the state to showcase its reformist credentials.
The authorities could have simply ignored the address, or better yet, they could have welcomed him home with an open assurance that his concerns were noted and that the government is committed to protecting the fundamental rights of all its citizens.
Such a move, even if insincere, would have immediately neutralized the international impact of his testimony.
It would have portrayed the government as mature, tolerant, and vastly different from the caricature presented in Geneva.
Instead, the regime chose the path of maximum friction.
By launching a high-powered police manhunt and threatening him with the draconian “Patriot Act,” they have ensured that Blessed Mhlanga remains in the global headlines.
They have transformed a scheduled court appearance into a cause célèbre for international human rights organizations.
In a world where the news cycle moves with dizzying speed—where the attention of the international community is currently consumed by the high-stakes conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran—Mhlanga’s speech would likely have faded into the background within days.
Surely who still remembers the other speakers at Geneva, an event I was also privileged to have been invited to attend?
Even for those who followed the proceedings, who can still remember what Bobi Wine from Uganda or Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya of Belarus or Leopoldo López from Venezuela said at the same summit in February?
Most people move on to the next crisis.
But the Zimbabwe government’s irrational and heavy-handed reaction has granted this story an extended shelf life.
They have inadvertently created a hero and forced the world to keep its eyes fixed on Harare for all the wrong reasons.
The use of Section 22A of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act is perhaps the most glaring example of this legal and diplomatic malpractice.
To charge a journalist with “wilfully injuring the sovereignty and national interest” for speaking at a summit is a logical fallacy of the highest order.
Sovereignty is not injured by a citizen exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression; it is injured by a state that refuses to abide by its own supreme law.
It is especially egregious when one considers that parts of this very “Patriot Act” were deemed unconstitutional by the High Court in June 2025.
By reaching for a legally discredited weapon to punish a critic, the state only adds weight to the assertion that the judiciary and the law are being weaponized against the people.
The tragedy of this situation is that the government is its own worst enemy.
They claim to be engaging in a “re-engagement” exercise to bring Zimbabwe back into the community of nations, yet they behave like a pariah state at every opportunity.
Every time a detective is reportedly sent to the airport to wait for a journalist, the “Open for Business” sign on our national door gets a little dustier.
Investors and diplomats look for stability and the predictable application of the law, not a country where a speech in Geneva can trigger a national manhunt.
The national interest is best served by a Zimbabwe that is perceived as a stable, law-abiding democracy where human rights are respected.
By relentlessly hounding Mhlanga, the state is broadcasting a message of volatility and insecurity to the entire world.
Furthermore, the attempt to revoke a citizen’s passport or strip them of their rights because they participated in an international forum is a direct violation of the inalienable rights guaranteed in our own Constitution.
The right to assemble and the right to express oneself are not gifts from the government; they are inherent rights that the state is mandated to protect.
When the state becomes the primary violator of these rights, it loses the moral authority to speak about patriotism.
If we are to be honest about who is truly harming the national interest, we must look at those who are dragging the country’s name through the mud by practicing the very repression they claim does not exist.
In the end, Blessed Mhlanga’s speech in Geneva was just words—an emotional and truthful account of his lived reality.
It was the state’s reaction that turned those words into a powerful indictment of the current administration.
They have validated every critique and confirmed every fear.
They have proven that they are still pathologically intolerant of divergent views and that the “dark past” they claim to have left behind is, in fact, their present reality.
If the goal was to protect Zimbabwe’s image, the mission has failed spectacularly.
The international community is now more convinced than ever that Mhlanga was right all along.
If anyone should be held accountable for tarnishing the image of the country and harming our national interests, it is the very officials who thought that persecuting a journalist was a sensible way to show the world how much they love their country.
True patriotism involves building a nation where no one is afraid to speak, not a nation where the state is afraid of the truth.
- Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. To directly receive his articles please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08
The hallmark of a self-assured and truly democratic state is its ability to withstand criticism without reaching for the handcuffs.
If you value my social justice advocacy and writing, please consider a financial contribution to keep it going. Contact me on WhatsApp: +263 715 667 700 or Email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com
A government that believes in its own legitimacy and its commitment to the rule of law does not tremble when a single journalist stands before an international audience to narrate his personal experiences of state-sponsored hardship.
Yet, as we have seen with the escalating and vindictive campaign against Blessed Mhlanga following his presentation at the 18th Geneva Summit for Human Rights and Democracy, the authorities in Harare remain trapped in a cycle of pathologically intolerant behavior.
In their frantic attempt to “defend” the image of Zimbabwe, they are paradoxically doing more damage to our national interests than any twenty-minute speech in Switzerland could ever have achieved.
By turning a seasoned journalist into a fugitive and, according to media reports, deploying counterintelligence teams to the airport like he is a high-level security threat, the government is essentially providing a live-action demonstration of exactly what Mhlanga warned the world about in Geneva.
He spoke of “lawfare”—the calculated manipulation of legal systems to stifle dissent.
He spoke of a “war on the press” and the evolution of repression under the so-called Second Republic.
If there were any skeptics in that Geneva hall who thought he might have been exaggerating for dramatic effect, the state’s subsequent actions have surely converted them into believers.
The warrant of arrest, the public threats from Minister Zhemu Soda, and the legislative grandstanding by Senator Sengezo Tshabangu regarding passport revocation are not signs of strength; they are the desperate flailings of a regime that manages to shoot itself in the foot with remarkable precision.
Consider the irony of the situation.
Blessed Mhlanga did not go to Geneva to call for economic sanctions or to advocate for an armed insurrection.
He went there to tell the story of a man who spent 73 days in pre-trial detention for the “crime” of conducting an interview.
He spoke as a father and a professional whose life was upended by what many believe was an unjustified and cruel use of state power.
This was a human story, a narrative of personal resilience in the face of systemic injustice.
Under any normal democratic establishment, such a speech would have been an opportunity for the state to showcase its reformist credentials.
The authorities could have simply ignored the address, or better yet, they could have welcomed him home with an open assurance that his concerns were noted and that the government is committed to protecting the fundamental rights of all its citizens.
Such a move, even if insincere, would have immediately neutralized the international impact of his testimony.
It would have portrayed the government as mature, tolerant, and vastly different from the caricature presented in Geneva.
Instead, the regime chose the path of maximum friction.
By launching a high-powered police manhunt and threatening him with the draconian “Patriot Act,” they have ensured that Blessed Mhlanga remains in the global headlines.
They have transformed a scheduled court appearance into a cause célèbre for international human rights organizations.
In a world where the news cycle moves with dizzying speed—where the attention of the international community is currently consumed by the high-stakes conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran—Mhlanga’s speech would likely have faded into the background within days.
Surely who still remembers the other speakers at Geneva, an event I was also privileged to have been invited to attend?
Even for those who followed the proceedings, who can still remember what Bobi Wine from Uganda or Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya of Belarus or Leopoldo López from Venezuela said at the same summit in February?
Most people move on to the next crisis.
They have inadvertently created a hero and forced the world to keep its eyes fixed on Harare for all the wrong reasons.
The use of Section 22A of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act is perhaps the most glaring example of this legal and diplomatic malpractice.
To charge a journalist with “wilfully injuring the sovereignty and national interest” for speaking at a summit is a logical fallacy of the highest order.
Sovereignty is not injured by a citizen exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression; it is injured by a state that refuses to abide by its own supreme law.
It is especially egregious when one considers that parts of this very “Patriot Act” were deemed unconstitutional by the High Court in June 2025.
By reaching for a legally discredited weapon to punish a critic, the state only adds weight to the assertion that the judiciary and the law are being weaponized against the people.
The tragedy of this situation is that the government is its own worst enemy.
They claim to be engaging in a “re-engagement” exercise to bring Zimbabwe back into the community of nations, yet they behave like a pariah state at every opportunity.
Every time a detective is reportedly sent to the airport to wait for a journalist, the “Open for Business” sign on our national door gets a little dustier.
Investors and diplomats look for stability and the predictable application of the law, not a country where a speech in Geneva can trigger a national manhunt.
The national interest is best served by a Zimbabwe that is perceived as a stable, law-abiding democracy where human rights are respected.
By relentlessly hounding Mhlanga, the state is broadcasting a message of volatility and insecurity to the entire world.
Furthermore, the attempt to revoke a citizen’s passport or strip them of their rights because they participated in an international forum is a direct violation of the inalienable rights guaranteed in our own Constitution.
The right to assemble and the right to express oneself are not gifts from the government; they are inherent rights that the state is mandated to protect.
When the state becomes the primary violator of these rights, it loses the moral authority to speak about patriotism.
If we are to be honest about who is truly harming the national interest, we must look at those who are dragging the country’s name through the mud by practicing the very repression they claim does not exist.
In the end, Blessed Mhlanga’s speech in Geneva was just words—an emotional and truthful account of his lived reality.
It was the state’s reaction that turned those words into a powerful indictment of the current administration.
They have validated every critique and confirmed every fear.
They have proven that they are still pathologically intolerant of divergent views and that the “dark past” they claim to have left behind is, in fact, their present reality.
If the goal was to protect Zimbabwe’s image, the mission has failed spectacularly.
The international community is now more convinced than ever that Mhlanga was right all along.
If anyone should be held accountable for tarnishing the image of the country and harming our national interests, it is the very officials who thought that persecuting a journalist was a sensible way to show the world how much they love their country.
True patriotism involves building a nation where no one is afraid to speak, not a nation where the state is afraid of the truth.
- Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. To directly receive his articles please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08
Source - Tendai Ruben Mbofana
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.
Join the discussion
Loading comments…
