Home

Details: Written by: Joint Petition with Chief Ndiweni; Category: Beyond CAB and Dictatorships; Published: 01 July 2026; Hits: 1

1st july 2026 Chiefs and other traditional leaders are unelected, hereditary figures who serve as the primary local governance structure in rural areas, acting as custodians of cultural values, customs, and communal land while also performing administrative and judicial functions within their communities. In rural Zimbabwe, chiefs control land allocation and access to communal resources and resolve disputes.

Section 281(2) of the 2013 Constitution emphatically provides that traditional leaders must not be members of any political party or in any way participate in partisan politics or act in a partisan manner or further the interests of any political party. Clause 20 of CAB3 would repeal s 281(2).

However, what you may not know or appreciate, is that the Lancaster House agreement was never fully 'completed' as the petition clearly makes plain to the readers of both history and the corruption of CAB3.

Chief Ndiweni frames the present moment as the irrevocable breakdown of the Lancaster House Agreement of 21 December 1979. Industrial-scale corruption, the collapse of the rule of law, and — decisively — the current administration’s shredding of the 2013 Constitution have, in his account, nullified the settlement on which independent Zimbabwe was built. He records that the proposition of a two-state solution is not new: it was raised at Lancaster House itself by the late Paramount Chief Khayisa Ndiweni, who warned that a unitary state forced upon two historically distinct nations risked “crafting another failed African state.”

Within three years of independence, that warning was vindicated by genocide.

A Nation with a History and a Lineage

The Matabele Nation is part of the greater Nguni grouping of Southern Africa. Chief Ndiweni traces its foundation to King Mzilikazi of the Royal House Khumalo, who departed the Zulu kingdom in 1823 and, over a seventeen-year journey through what are now South Africa, Botswana and Zambia, built a nation by assimilation before establishing his kingdom between the Zambezi and the Limpopo by 1840. He was succeeded by King Lobengula, whose reign was overtaken by the discovery of gold, the fraudulent Rudd Concession, and the war with Cecil Rhodes’s British South Africa Company. Lobengula was never captured, killed or made to surrender; he disappeared into the landscape in 1893 — a fact, Chief Ndiweni argues, that has sustained the Nation’s sense that it was never truly defeated.

The Jameson Line and the Historical Two-State Reality

Central to Chief Ndiweni’s argument is that the territory was, in historical fact, two states divided by the Jameson Line — Matabeleland and Mashonaland — a division reaffirmed by the peace negotiated between the Matabele and Rhodes after the 1896 uprising. Even under colonial administration, he records, the two retained separate high courts, reserve banks, state houses, economic systems and traditional-leadership structures. The unitary state of 1980 was therefore an imposition upon a pre-existing dual reality, not a natural unit.

Details: Written by: Shorayi Spencer Guzha; Category: Beyond CAB and Dictatorships; Published: 05 June 2026; Hits: 184

Beyond Zimbabwe's Borders: The Human Cost of Governance Failures

Any assessment of Zimbabwe's Security Council membership must also consider the experiences of millions of Zimbabweans beyond the country's borders.

For years, economic hardship, unemployment, and political uncertainty have contributed to large-scale migration from Zimbabwe to neighbouring countries, particularly South Africa. Many Zimbabweans have sought opportunities, safety, and economic stability across the Limpopo River. Yet their search for a better life has often exposed them to a different form of insecurity: xenophobia.

Recent anti-immigrant violence in South Africa has once again drawn attention to the vulnerability of foreign nationals, including Zimbabweans. Reports of attacks, displacement, intimidation, and even deaths linked to anti-migrant unrest have shocked the region and revived concerns about the protection of African migrants. South African authorities have condemned the violence, while neighbouring governments have expressed concern over the safety of their citizens.

The situation raises uncomfortable questions for both Harare and Pretoria.

For South Africa, recurring xenophobic violence challenges the country's long-standing image as a champion of African solidarity and human rights. For Zimbabwe, the continued exodus of citizens reflects unresolved domestic challenges that drive migration in the first place.

The irony is striking. Zimbabwe will soon occupy a seat on the United Nations Security Council, helping shape discussions on international peace, security, and human dignity. Yet many ordinary Zimbabweans continue to experience insecurity not in distant conflict zones but in their daily struggle for economic survival, political expression, and personal safety, whether at home or abroad.

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This joint position paper is submitted to the Joint Committee on Human Rights by seven organisations representing the United Kingdom’s Zimbabwean diaspora community. It is presented in the context of the JCHR’s report HC 681 (July 2025), which found that current UK protective frameworks for those facing transnational repression are “inadequate,” and the Government’s response committing to ongoing review.

We submit that Zimbabwe presents one of the most fully documented cases of state-directed transnational repression operating on UK soil that the Committee has yet received. We call on the Committee to formally name Zimbabwe as a state conducting transnational repression in the United Kingdom and to press the Government to act accordingly.

This submission addresses four interconnected concerns:

The systematic use of transnational repression instruments — including the Varakashi digital militia, Zanu PF UK & Europe, the Patriotic Act, and a new dimension of coordinated digital inauthentic behaviour — against diaspora activists on UK soil.
Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) and the fabricated consensus that has been deployed to present it internationally as a legitimate democratic process.
The irreconcilable contradiction at the heart of current UK foreign policy toward Zimbabwe, as evidenced by the Government’s own parliamentary statements.
The inadequacy of current Home Office country guidance on Zimbabwe, which fails to account for the documented infrastructure of transnational repression and the specific criminalisation of diaspora political activity under Zimbabwean law.
Read more: Diaspora Evidence to JCHR

Details: Written by: Milton Bingwa; Category: CAB3 Implications; Published: 22 April 2026; Hits: 186

Zimbabwe’s CAB3: why a petition at Downing Street matters

LONDON, 21 April 2026

Zimbabwean activists gathered outside 10 Downing Street this week to witness the handover of a petition opposing the Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), a proposal by Emmerson Mnangagwa widely criticised as a threat to democratic governance in Zimbabwe. Although I was not physically present, as a Zimbabwean human rights activist I recognise the significance of that moment. It reflects a growing concern among Zimbabweans, both at home and in the diaspora, about the direction of constitutional reform.

A diaspora stepping into the space

The petition, organised by the Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation (ZHRO) under John Burke, represents a coordinated effort by Zimbabweans in the United Kingdom to challenge what they view as a dangerous constitutional shift. It took organisers four weeks of persistence to reach the doors of 10 Downing Street, an indication of both the determination behind the campaign and the realities of engaging even within established democratic systems.

Importantly, this petition forms part of a broader, sustained strategy. Prior to this, submissions were made in response to CAB3 through detailed technical arguments, alongside proposals for an updated constitutional framework. Taken together, these efforts reflect a long-term approach to activism, one that combines advocacy, legal analysis and institutional engagement. For many in the diaspora, such action has become a necessity. There is a widely held view that diaspora voices help amplify concerns that cannot always be expressed freely within Zimbabwe itself.

As activists, we are acutely aware that we speak for our sisters and brothers in Zimbabwe who are unable to do so openly due to fear of being targeted by the state. The risks of arrest, harassment, violence or worse, remain real.

The petition and its authors

The petition submitted at Downing Street was supported by a group of individuals:

John Burke (Organiser only)
Charles Kanyimo
Phylis Melody Magejo
Elizabeth Chitengo
Genius Khatazile Mamwadhu
Josephine Sipiwe Jenje-Mudimbu
Kelvin Thembinkosi Mhlanga

The document itself is a comprehensive and fully referenced critique, setting out detailed arguments as to why CAB3 is considered fundamentally undemocratic.

It is publicly available, including the full written submission, at:
zhro.org.uk - 21st April 2026 petition delivered

Details: Written by: John C Burke; Category: ZEXIT; Published: 01 May 2026; Hits: 254

Wicknell Chivayo — SA High Court Asset Freeze: Confirmed ✅

The Tweet's claim is accurate and well-corroborated. Here's what can be confirmed: [SEE TWITTER Post HERE @Devro_Amplified] -

The Court Order

The Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria issued an order on 23 April 2026 freezing bank accounts and key assets linked to Chivayo, including his private jet, which he has now been barred from accessing. Justice Teffo revived an earlier interim anti-dissipation order first granted on 20 January 2026, effectively reinstating restrictions that prevent Chivayo and associated entities from accessing or dealing with the listed assets. allAfrica.com

The inclusion of multiple major banks, the deeds registry, and corporate entities in the order suggests a broad financial trail is being pursued, aimed at preventing the dissipation of funds across accounts, properties, or complex corporate structures. ZimEye

What Triggered It

The applicant is Chivayo's ex-wife, Louise Sonja Madzikanda, who is seeking to secure her share of the couple's estate while divorce proceedings continue before the Harare High Court. This is a civil divorce matter — not a criminal prosecution — but the scale of what is being claimed is remarkable. allAfrica.com

Page 1 of 19