| A Consolidated Report on the Food Riots 19 - 23 January, 1998 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contents « Prev Next » 4. Analysis of Arrests, Charges and Convictions
after the Food Riots It is worth recapping here on the reports emanating from the press. The reports show very conflicting numbers of arrests. According to the Herald (22 January 1998), a police spokesman reported that 2,300 person had been arrested in Harare and Chitungwiza alone. A court official (Herald, 22 January 1998) reported that over 1,000 persons had been arrested in Harare alone. No Government official has indicated subsequent to these newspaper reports what the final figures were. The ZRP report indicates that 3,000 persons were arrested, but gives no indication of the number finally charged and sentenced. 27Harare Table 2
As can be seen, the great majority were discharged either before pleading or at the remand hearing. In fact, 14% were discharged before pleading, 5% were discharged after pleading, and 54% had their remand refused at the remand hearing, making in all 73% being released after periods in excess of three weeks already in remand. In addition, a further 6% were acquitted of the charges. Of the remainder, 13.1% were convicted of the charges, with the great majority receiving custodial sentences. The sentences were generally severe, about 12 months on average, whilst the fines imposed were rather moderate, about Z$250 on average. The data did not allow us to determine the charges for which sentence was imposed, which is a pity as it would be useful to know whether custodial sentences were being imposed for theft or for public violence. Table 3
As can be seen from Table 3 above, there are considerable differences between the different areas, but the general trend is the same: many more people are discharged than convicted. In the cases from Hatfield, virtually everyone arrested was released unconditionally or remand refused, which was also true for Marimba. There were higher conviction rates in cases from Mabvuku and the Unspecified cases. 28 However, the general trend remains similar in the cases from all the suburbs: many more people were arrested than were convicted, with the vast majority having applications for their remand refused at the remand hearing. There is no data on the outcome for those who had their remand refused, and thus it is not possible to determine how many persons have been subsequently discharged or convicted from this sub-group.Chitungwiza Table 4
Firstly, there is a complete absence of information on whether remand was refused for those charged. This would tie in with the press reports of large numbers of persons being brought swiftly before Magistrates in Chitungwiza. Secondly, the state withdrew cases or had cases dismissed against the overwhelming majority (73%) of the cases, so that the arrests were not sustainable on the evidence produced by the ZRP. Thirdly, there were a very high number of persons given custodial sentences (17%), and this is of great concern if these sentences were given on the basis of warned and cautioned statements produced under duress. This deserves review at the soonest possible date. It is distressing to see that no-one was given the option of a fine, or at least no-one was able to take advantage of this option if it was offered. Fourthly, the number of persons given cuts were all juveniles. No breakdown was available for the areas of Chitungwiza involved, so the data cannot reflect any distribution for these cases. Conclusions Table 5
The number detained is of great concern when it is learned subsequently that so few - only 18% overall - could be convicted in a court of law. Firstly, there are prima facie cases of unlawful arrest and illegal detention that need to be considered. Many of these people were detained for periods in excess of two weeks, and suffered considerable hardship during that time and even afterwards. It is important to point out here that a prima facie allegation of being a criminal can result in people losing their jobs, being shunned by neighbours and their community, quite apart from the actual hardship experienced during incarceration.Secondly, detention may well have lead to further human rights abuses. There is virtually no data about the conditions in the prisons at the time of the Food Riots, but it is not difficult to imagine that the injection of a further 2,300 persons into the prisons in and around Harare must have aggravated the existing overcrowding and produced extreme discomfort for all. The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum has seen only a single person who was imprisoned after the Food Riots, so we do not have good data on the situation in the prisons. However, according to the one report that we do have, this person alleges that there was widespread torture and ill-treatment at the hands of the ZRP in particular. Thirdly, this leads to concerns about those convicted. Bearing in mind that 78% of those convicted were given custodial sentences this is not a trivial issue. There has been no attempt to establish how many persons may have been subjected to torture or duress, and, since the NGO Forum has received credible reports of persons being convicted on warned and cautioned statements obtained under duress, there must be considerable concern that many persons who were convicted were convicted inappropriately. Fourthly, there are credible reports that there was interference with the justice process by members of the Government. It is reliably reported that a meeting was held between senior members of the ZRP, the Attorney-General’s Office, senior magistrates and possibly some Ministers, at which it was agreed that bail hearings would be delayed and remand hearings postponed. This is given additional significance by the decision of the Attorney-General not to proceed against the Mayor-Elect of Chitungwiza, Mr Macheka, a decision that was roundly condemned by civic society groups and legal groups. The inference here is that there could have been some kind of cover-up for human rights violations. In conclusion, this analysis of very scanty data gives considerable cause for concern. The allegations of drag-net arrests seems borne out by the very high rate of discharges by the justice machinery, more than 70% having the cases against them dismissed. There is also the concern that the lengthy periods of incarceration, apart from being an infringement of civil liberties, may have led to experiences of torture and ill-treatment and much more serious infringements of human rights. There is finally the concern that there may have been political interference in the justice machinery. All of these concerns need to be dispelled by an open investigation into the events around the Food Riots, as was requested by the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum and the UN Human Rights Committee. 30
|