Kegul The Forum Member organisations. However, these 30 days can be extended on the grounds of various reasons with the agreement of the Media and Information Ziimbabwe. Any application made under ATI legislation is subject to fees that cover the costs of obtaining access or services rendered in connection to providing access, but may not extend beyond these costs s. In this context, terms such as public morality are not further defined. Land and Natural Resources.
|Published (Last):||17 December 2013|
|PDF File Size:||5.29 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.50 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Under Posa, public demonstrations and protests are effectively illegal. The majority of the meetings are deemed illegal or disrupted. It is supposed that Zimbabwe is a constitutional State and, therefore, becomes imperative that the concept of constitutionalism is well grasped.
Constitutionalism means that a government adheres to a constitutional system of governance. A government, under constitutionalism, derives its power from and is limited by a body of fundamental law. A constitutional State is, therefore, one in which the exercise of governmental power is constrained by the law and this concept is very much an integral part of the rule of law.
A constitutional State is the exact opposite of a State based on the arbitrary use of power. In a constitutional State, the power of the State is limited in order to protect citizens from the capricious exercise of authority. The citizenry share legally-based civil liberties and can use the courts to seek recourse.
Against this backcloth, the question of whether Zimbabwe can be described as a constitutional State depends as much on the whether the government is indeed bound by the Constitution and whether or not the judiciary enjoys independence. Now, if we define Zimbabwe as a State in which the Constitution reigns supreme, every legal person ought to be bound by the law.
Every institution must be subject to the Constitution. Zimbabwe, as a country, cannot embrace Posa and Aippa and still fall under the banner of a constitutional democracy.
Both Posa and Aippa crush basic human freedoms of association and expression. Many will remember, a few years ago, how even the church became a victim of the draconian law when 80 parishioners were ejected from holding an annual retreat at Peterhouse School near Marondera.
The Anglican Church, led by Archbishop Chad Gandiya, was kicked out of school grounds by the police, ostensibly because they had not sought clearance to congregate as required under the repressive Posa. Many, including journalists, can testify how much they have suffered under both Posa and Aippa. While Posa, on the one hand, had opposition political parties and non-governmental organisations, as its targets, Aippa, on the other, blocks the opening of airwaves by ensuring huge operating fees that stifle access to information.
In fact, it befuddles any legal mind why a repulsive law like Posa, which can be manipulated to arrest anyone for anything, was not repealed during the Government of National Unity. The opposition had, at the time, seen its catastrophic effects and one would have hoped its repealing was a given. Under the current Constitution, there can be no two ways: Posa and Aippa are manifestly against the spirit and letter of the Constitution, which expressly guarantees to citizens the very things the laws seek to throttle.
The grouping of 18 opposition political parties — under the banner National Electoral Reform Agenda — which is fighting for the repealing of these repressive laws is, therefore, on the right path. It is heartening that their High Court chamber application was successful, leading to the overturning of the ban.
The right to demonstrate is unreservedly granted in the Bill of Rights and it is a simple legal fact that a statute cannot override the Bill of Rights. It is the function of the courts to interpret the law while theirs is to enforce.
Posa and Aippa are indeed alien to the democratic society that we all seek and the abrogation of these unconstitutional laws is long overdue.
Do you have a coronavirus story? You can email us on: news alphamedia.
AIPPA ZIMBABWE PDF
Mauk How far did the world leaders succeed in combating climate change? While it is understandable why government would rush to revive a section of Posa through a statutory instrument, its actions are patently disproportionate to the concept of constitutionalism, which Zimbabwe assumes. Now, if we define Zimbabwe as a State in which the Constitution reigns supreme, every legal person ought to be bound by the law. Critics of the Media and Information Commission span from its comprehensive authority and competences to its organisation.
Posa, Aippa have no place in democracy
Dugul Posa, Aippa have no place in democracy Any application made under ATI legislation is subject to fees that cover the costs of obtaining access or services rendered in connection to providing access, but may not extend beyond these costs s. Repeal restrictive provisions of AIPPA and POSA Align all media laws with the Zimbsbwe Allow for self-regulation of the Media Repeal criminal defamation laws, which curtail freedom of the media Licence community radio stations to enhance access to information Protect journalists in the line of their work, especially with the impending harmonised elections We hold the firm belief that media freedom akppa a Constitutional right and should be respected. However, these 30 days can be extended on the grounds of various reasons with the agreement of the Media and Information Commission. Everything about us, without us? Govt, doctors in crunch meeting. Due to the non-transparent nature of the Information and Media Commission it is rather difficult to gather reliable data regarding the number of people who were granted access to information under AIPPA. Generally speaking it is difficult to get an accurate picture of the number of people who use the AIPPA to access government information, as the Commission is responsible for implementing the regime, and it is far from transparent itself.