Zimpapers Logo

A woman stands next to what remains of her house after it was demolished in Chitungwiza recently in violation of Section 74 of the Constitution says: “No person may be evicted from their home, or have their home demolished, without an order of court made after considering all the relevant circumstances.”

Lloyd Gumbo Mr Speaker Sir
The demolition of illegal houses in Chitungwiza and Epworth, and the intention to apply the same heavy-handedness in Harare, have dominated news headlines in recent weeks, only playing second fiddle to factionalism within political parties in competing for catchy headlines. Chitungwiza and Epworth municipalities destroyed some structures, while Harare intended to follow suit, only to be blocked by daring residents in Glen Norah.

Government is said to have approved the demolitions which invoke memories of Operation Murambatsvina of 2005.
And now eight years later, another operation is launched against residents with only a month from the rainy season.
The demolitions are targeting illegal structures that are sprouting in the cities, we are told.

Authorities claim these structures have been built on wetlands, recreational facilities or under power lines. As such, they have to be removed at all costs, they insist.
Mr Speaker Sir, no one disputes the fact that there must be order in the cities and that illegal construction should not be condoned at all.
But why should demolitions wait until someone has put up a structure?

Some of the structures were built several months if not years back amid indications that those residents had been paying rates to the local authorities concerned.
It is understood that some of the victims actually bought the stands from council officials and land barons who don’t lose anything when these shelters are pulled down in this rainy season.

No one supports the construction of illegal structures under whatever circumstances but let us follow the law in dealing with such cases.
Mr Speaker Sir, Section 74 of the Constitution says: “No person may be evicted from their home, or have their home demolished, without an order of court made after considering all the relevant circumstances.”

Obviously this section found itself in the Constitution out of the horrendous effects of Operation Murambatsvina.
The same Constitution on Section 119 aptly prescribes the role of Parliament.
It reads in sub section (1): “Parliament must protect this Constitution and promote democratic governance in Zimbabwe.

“(2) Parliament has power to ensure that the provisions of this Constitution are upheld and that the State and all institutions and agencies of Government at every level act constitutionally and in the national interest.

“(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), all institutions and agencies of the State and Government at every level are accountable to Parliament.”
The question is, are local authorities above the law that they can disregard the supreme law of the land by going on a rampage razing people’s homes without a court order as outlined in the Constitution?

Where is Parliament when all this is happening yet the legislature is supposed to defend the Constitution?
MPs must uphold the Constitution by virtue of being people’s representatives, as such they must act in the interest of the citizens.
The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Local Government, Public Works and National Housing must be at the forefront pushing for respect of the Constitution.

These municipalities must be charged with contempt of the Constitution because they are supposed to uphold the supreme law of the land by acting constitutionally and in the national interest.
Municipalities are not above the law and, as such, should abide by what Zimbabweans voted for at the referendum.

A local lobby group, Heal Zimbabwe Trust, has come out guns blazing on the recent demolitions in Chitungwiza, accusing the municipality of acting in bad faith at a strategic planning meeting held in Mutare last month, where it was agreed that it would include illegal homes in the formal billing system.

“To worsen the matter, the municipality further presented the strategic planning document at the all stakeholders’ meeting indicating no intentions to proceed with demolitions.
“Both the meetings were fairly attended by all stakeholders including civic representatives as well as members from the alleged illegal settlements.

“Whilst the houses were demolished on grounds of being illegal, some of the families have been expressing heart touching issues stating that they have been paying water bills to the council.

“It is also on record that this bed-time horror was implemented against the Chitungwiza Magistrates’ Court order granted on April 24, 2014. It is even an action ahead of the approval of the High Court after the council appealed under case number HC 5231/14 seeking an order to continue demolishing these houses,” said HZT.

Mr Speaker Sir, it should be noted that the sprouting of illegal structures in urban centres is a clear indication of underlying problems that have not been adequately addressed for a very long time.

Desperate home seekers in cities and towns have lost money to land barons and developers whose terms of reference and role in housing have been shrouded in secrecy.
Housing strategies have so far failed because of lack of transparency and the capitalist behaviour of land developers, financial institutions and housing co-operatives.
Land barons and developers are fleecing residents of their hard-earned money by charging exorbitant prices for housing stands beyond the reach of many.

Allocations of housing stands by municipalities has been chaotic, to say the least. As such, housing co-operatives and land developers end up appearing as the most viable way of getting a housing stand.

It is from these co-operatives and dubious land developers that residents are then subjected to abuse as they are allocated housing stands on illegal sites.
Building societies have also failed to address the housing problems in Zimbabwe because of the spirit of profiteering where financial institutions are getting housing stands for a song on the pretext of making the completed house affordable to low-income earners.

But then they go on to charge high prices as if they bought the housing stands at commercial rates.
In all fairness, most of the houses under the mortgage system are not affordable to most people especially low-income earners.

This results in the same land barons and land developers accumulating land for speculative purposes, making it difficult for ordinary people to afford a housing stand.
I am afraid the recently launched National Housing Delivery Strategy will not achieve the intended goals as long as financial institutions, housing co-operatives and land developers are not controlled.

The capitalist system that defines most of these institutions does not have a human heart but is profit- oriented.
These institutions will do what they have always been doing – getting land at concessionary rates but selling it at commercial rates when fully developed taking advantage of desperate home seekers.

Parliamentarians must protect citizens by upholding the Constitution if they want to justify their existed.

Feedback: [email protected]