60 years after the UN Convention - Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

220 development dialogue december 2008 – revisiting the heart of darkness growth of tourism in the 1990s and the erection of new hotels and lodges was not matched by an increase of housing for workers. A large shack town of plastic sheeting structures arose just next to the formal high-density township, and back-yard shacks were built on almost every property. From 2000 when the farm invasions began, the situation became much worse. 4 In the fi rst place, farms surrounding Harare became targets, not for acquisition by aspiring farmers, but for places to build houses. War veterans 5 occupied several and parcelled out plots for building. Many of these went to members of the uniformed services, others to party faithful or hangers-on. The infl ux of displaced workers from the occupied farms of Mashonaland saw a fl ood of migration towards Harare and the explosion of informal settlements as well as an increase in the construction of ‘back-yard shacks’. Some of these settlements were given the blessing of the Harare City Council, even launched by government ministers. Hatcliff e Extension, a settlement which was initially created in 1993 by a politically-motivated farm eviction, had qualifi ed for World Bank funding for its water and sanitation system, after it had been ‘legalised’ by resolution of parliament. It was razed to the ground, along with its orphanage and AIDS clinic run by the Catholic Church. 6 The government’s own fi gures put the total of households ‘aff ected by dwelling destroyed’ at 133,534 – meaning at a minimum 570,000 individuals had their homes destroyed (Solidarity Peace Trust 2005b: 19, footnote 11). We can assume that the government’s fi gures are conservative and that the real numbers are substantially higher. Add to these the numbers aff ected by their breadwinner’s loss of income in the informal sector and we reach a total of over a million. While there was duplication, as some families lost both their homes and their livelihoods, the fi gures are impossible to verify. Nevertheless it is reasonable to suggest that 10 per cent of the population of the country were directly aff ected. 7 4 A government-inspired programme of land distribution in which white commercial farmers were driven off their land by extra-legal means, and many hundreds of thousands of farm workers were also displaced. 5 Former fi ghters of the liberation war 1965-80. 6 For a discussion of Hatcliff e Extension see Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2005b: 15), and Solidarity Peace Trust (2005a: 29). 7 For a full discussion of the various estimates of numbers aff ected, see Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2006: 5).
Immediate consequences mass violence in zimbabwe 2005 – murambatsvina 221 According to UN fi gures, based on government estimates, at least 700,000 people lost their homes in the space of six weeks – about the same number of Croatians were driven from their homes by the Serbian army over a period of seven months in 1991. Whole communities were broken up. Up to 100,000 families directly lost their livelihoods. However, many of those in formal employment who lost their homes lost their jobs as a result, as they had no place to stay or could no longer easily get to their work. Children could no longer go to school as they were moved from place to place. The Ministry of Education gave fi gures of 300,000 children in Harare alone who did not attend school in the weeks following the blitz. Many of these later found places in schools elsewhere, or eventually returned, but many others never continued with their education. Several thousand of the displaced were AIDS patients taking antiretroviral drugs; many lost contact with their source of medicine at their local clinic, and were thus exposed to a rapid deterioration in their health, leading to death for uncounted hundreds if not thousands. 8 Where did the displaced go? Some returned to their rural homes, or sent their children there while looking for another place to stay. Many of the occupiers of back-yard dwellings simply moved into the main house, aggravating already seriously overcrowded conditions. Others moved in with friends or relatives, with the same result. Many thousands lived for varying periods in the open, trying to protect their property until they found a place to move it to, or because they were simply too traumatised or too destitute to manage a relocation. For these, exposure in a bitter winter resulted in illness and death. In Bulawayo, those evicted from squatter camps moved into churches where they were accommodated and fed, until the police swooped in late July, forced them into trucks in the middle of the night, and dumped them at a farm, from where they were quickly distributed to various rural centres. Others simply waited for the storm to pass, and used the building materials they had salvaged to rebuild a structure on the same site. Generally these rebuilt structures were absolutely minimal, pathetic, low, just big enough to crawl into in order to sleep. The owners have not been free of police harassment, and some have been chased away several times, thus living a life of hide and seek with the police. 9 8 A full discussion of the consequences can be found in the various reports; a useful summary is given by Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2006: 5-8) while the Executive Summary of the ActionAid Report is included as Appendix B (pp. 35-42) in the same publication. 9 A study of what happened to the displaced is included as Part II of a report by Solidarity Peace Trust (2005b).
Page 1 and 2:
no. 50 | december 2008 Revisiting t
Page 3 and 4:
Revisiting the heart of darkness -
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgements The larger part of
Page 7:
Dennis Brutus, born 1924 in then Rh
Page 10 and 11:
8 development dialogue december 200
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173: 170 development dialogue december 2
Page 262 and 263: In short, both the understanding of
Page 273 and 274:
Behind most mass violence lurk econ
Page 275 and 276:
ehind most mass violence lurk econo
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Is there a south perspective on gen
Page 283 and 284:
is there a south perspective on gen
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 299:
The Voksenåsen Statement Genocides
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304:
Page 308:
This Development Dialogue is publis
show all

60 years after the UN Convention - Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?