Disenfranchisement of ‘aliens’ xenophobic
http://www.theindependent.co.zw/
May 24, 2013 in Opinion
IT has been argued that in today’s world where countries are increasingly
racially and culturally diverse, progressive nations are, among other key
indicators, judged by their treatment of minorities.
Candid Comment with Stewart Chabwinja
It is thus baffling Zimbabwe is systematically disenfranchising a
substantial minority, effectively rendering them second-class citizens.
The prolonged battle by the country’s so-called “aliens” to (re)gain
citizenship and voting rights is a serious indictment of the country’s
attitude towards a large chunk of its population some estimate to be well
over a million.
The word “alien”, stamped on the minority’s identity documents, is as
derogatory as it is a misnomer for by definition it refers to anyone who
does not belong in the environment in which they are found; or a person who
comes from a foreign country and does not owe allegiance to the country
he/she is in. How Zimbabwe can call those born within its borders aliens
defies logic.
That the “alien” shambles persists despite provisions in the new
constitution signed by President Robert Mugabe on Wednesday which recognises
citizenship by descent and birth, and contrary to recent cabinet
pronouncements, is testimony to deep-seated official xenophobia.
Zimbabwe has third-generation immigrants and those born in the country, but
of foreign parents falling under the alien branding. They have made and
continue to make indelible contributions to the entire spectrum of the
nation’s endeavours.
The irony of this situation is that millions of Zimbabweans are currently
economic refugees in neighbouring countries and overseas, having fled a
mostly self-inflicted socio-economic crisis wrought by a Zanu PF regime bent
on maintaining its increasingly tenuous grip on power by all means.
The “alien” status, courtesy of the amendment of the Citizenship of Zimbabwe
Act (Chapter 4.1) in 2002 resulted in many people losing Zimbabwean
citizenship, forcing them to identify with the nationalities of their
parents despite, in many cases, never having set foot outside Zimbabwe.
In a 2008 research document titled A Right or a Privilege: Access to
Identity and Citizenship in Zimbabwe, the Research and Advocacy Unit noted
that the long birth certificate which became mandatory in 2001 prior to the
2002 presidential election introduced a new section detailing the country of
origin of parents, effectively stigmatising all those of foreign descent
born in or out of Zimbabwe.
It is quite clear the objective of this requirement was to disenfranchise
all those of foreign origin, including farmers and farm workers perceived to
have voted for the then opposition MDC in the 2000 parliamentary elections
in which Zanu PF was almost defeated.
With high-stakes elections imminent, “aliens” attempts to secure documents
to facilitate voter registration face institutional resistance from a Zanu
PF political elite which dreads payback time.
For a country that purports to subscribe to the founding principles of the
OAU and the AU’s vision of “an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa,
driven by its own citizens …”, Zimbabwe remains woefully out of touch with
the dynamics of its population.