Tommy’s story all began in Lesotho where he lived with his birth parents. Shortly after Tommy was born his father moved to Johannesburg to work on the mines. When Tommy was ten months old he and his mother travelled from Lesotho to Johannesburg to visit his father. On arrival in Johannesburg Tommy’s mother discovered her husband with a girlfriend.

She attempted to stab her husband and his girlfriend, which led to her arrest. Tommy was then left at a shebeen for three months until a woman eventually phoned Thea who ran an orphanage called TLC. Tommy was taken in by Thea and TLC.

Tommy was constantly sick and his doctors had done various tests but were unable to come up with a diagnosis. He was admitted to hospital. The doctors said that he had three weeks to live.

Tommy was then diagnosed with HIV at the age of three. This changed Tommy’s life as he was put on ARVs. Tommy now had the chance to be a “normal kid”; he finally had the chance to go to school. He had previously been unable to attend school because he had been too ill. “I had a lot of catching up to do and I thank God every day for my medicines because they are the only way I can live a normal life.”

Tommy found it extremely frustrating to go to school with people who are completely ignorant about AIDS and HIV. Who would have thought that in this day and age teachers would be advising their students not “share lunch boxes with people with AIDS”. They advised his fellow students to “cover their mouths with a shirt when you are around people with AIDS.” Tommy is currently a prefect at Randor School and is involved in talking to children at various different youth centres about living with HIV. He shares his story with other youths his age in the hope that it may help them.  Tommy believes that he can help and teach others from his experiences.

Human rights lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa, pictured above, was honored for her outstanding contributions in defending human rights, people’s freedoms and promoting peace in Zimbabwe at a recent event held by the NGO, Restoration of Human Rights Zimbabwe.

“That wire mesh is really glass,” he told his child.
She looked at him with disbelief.  “It is,” he smiled.

“Feel it… no, not like that, silly… not with fingers.
Fingers are for touching, probing… fingers pick, point,
accuse.  Feel it with both hands pressed, as if in prayer
- one on either side of the mesh.  Now, gently, move….

She looked at him, his little girl, with bold surmise,
and something atavistic flickered in her eyes.

In Friday’s Zimbabwe Independent, co-Minster of Home Affairs, the MDC’s Theresa Makone, boldly claims that the police have “turned over a new leaf.”

The article quotes her as saying:

“As I speak right now everything is being effected – all court orders are being implemented, work is being done as the country moves forward. We are doing our job.”

Makone went further to say that: “The ZRP (Zimbabwe Republic Police) is doing what it was mandated to do.”

Among those disputing that is W. Ferguson, Managing Director of Denlynian game ranch in Beitbridge, as noted in the below letter to Minister Makone. If a leopard can’t change its spots, are the police’s new leaves likely to still be rotten?

To: Co-Home Affairs Minister Theresa Makone

Dear Madam,

RE: Police have turned over a new leaf. Article in Independent 3rd Sept.2010

I wish to respond to certain claims you made as reported in the Independent of the 3rd September 2010 that “all court orders are being implemented” and the assurance that the “Zimbabwe Republic Police are now carrying out what they were mandated to do”.

Further, that, and I quote “the ZRP is now doing its job and we intervene where the Messenger of court is afraid and we go and assist”.

Lastly I would comment on your reported statement that, and I quote “there is no more hiding behind a finger of someone powerful”.

With all due respect, and although I can’t comment on what is happening in other areas of Zimbabwe, what is happening in the Beit Bridge District, is in direct contradiction and worse, than the claims in the quotes in the three paragraphs above.

Certain Officers of the ZRP Beit Bridge Rural and District Office have refused to provide the Messenger of the High Court any assistance to carry out a High Court Order and even worse have pursued a policy of arrests and harassment in defiance of the order granted by the High Court.

These same Officers have refused to accept reports and provide RRB numbers for serious criminal acts of theft of company assets, poaching and assault of company staff as they claim it is political.

Details, including, the Officers names is provided below for your perusal.

In regard to the statement of hiding behind someone powerful, certain members of our staff were told by Police and National Parks Officers and numerous Communal Farmers that there is a Senior Govt. Minister behind the Police behaviour and responsible for the crusade over the past 10 years to remove the Companies from the Wildlife Conservation Farm.

Assistant Inspector Michael Mamunye (spelling) the Police Officer in Charge Beit Bridge Rural.      This man is the fourth Respondent in the order and was served with a copy of the High Court Order personally as confirmed in the Deputy Messenger of the High Court’ in his return of service.

• This man has pursued a policy of arrest and incarcerating the Company Staff in Police Cells over night on trumpet up charges and for poaching which is all tantamount to deliberate harassment.
• This Officer is in deliberate breach of the order contained in paragraph two which directs quote “determined the applicants and all those who occupy the properties through them are entitled to continue their safari and hunting operations on the property”.      The arrest for poaching is in breach of this order.
• This man is also in breach of the order in paragraph four as he refused to provide an escort to the Deputy Messenger of the High Court who was to enforce the High Court Order.

Superintendent Manai (spelling) who was served with a copy of the High Court Order and as Acting District Police Officer refused to provide the Deputy Messenger of the High Court with any assistance or escort in breach of paragraph 4 and quote “to enforce the terms of the order the fourth Respondent (Police) is ordered to render to the appropriate officer of court all such assistance as may be necessary to execute his duties.”The arrests and harassment has increased and being pursued with greater vigour, this in spite of certain Police Officers being warned, that they are acting in serious contempt of the Gwanda Magistrates Court Judgement, “dismissing” the States Application for an “Eviction Order against the Company’s”, as well as the “Spoliation Order” granted by the High Court in Bulawayo in our favour.

The Final Spoliation Order was granted by The High Court, (“AFTER” the Judgement was handed down by the Provincial Magistrates Court in Gwanda), which in law.

The Judgement grants the eviction of all occupants other than Company Staff from the properties, and interdicts the Police to assist in the removal of all illegal occupants and to further to assure that the Company’s Safari’s and General and Trophy Hunting operations are not interfered with by any one.

It would seem that these Police Officers and National Parks, don’t, or don’t want, to understand the true legal position which lays out clearly that the Company’s are in law the Legal Occupants and the Appropriate Authority in terms of the Wildlife Act.

The Company Staff were instructed to arrest a War Vet. Who is one of the main and most arrogant and troublesome illegal invaders, one Julias Siziba (alias Julias Maramani) for severely assaulting two of our Game Scouts Wives and for illegally netting fish in the Mazunga pools.

The man threw a shovel at the Scouts and ran away and went to Beit Bridge and made a report to the Police that he had been threatened with violence by my staff.

The next day Sunday the 15th August, all our staff were arrested by the Police on the instructions of the same Police Officer mentioned above and carted off to Beit Bridge and charged with public violence.     There being no Public Prosecutor present the case was remanded to the 6th of September.

No sooner were the staff back on the Properties when the total company staff, were rounded up on the 18th.August by the police and transported to the Beit Bridge Police Station and charged with poaching.     The charge, apparently for a Wildebeest, that had been shot by a friend of ours for Biltong and rations, for our Staff.

Once again the arrests were made by the Police Officer in Charge, and disappointingly the Officer in Charge of National Parks, who should know better, one Ranger or Warden Ngapawe.

The charge, being for poaching on, “in name only”, the so called Zhove Conservancy, sic., whose members are subject to a High Court eviction order and have previously asset stripped and vandalised the properties and slaughtered the Wildlife.

In spite of it being pointed out to Inspector Mamunye that he could be charged for contempt if he pursued this line of harassment, by certain CID Officers, and our Lawyer Mr Tchakalisa, he apparently said he couldn’t care.

He is in fact in contempt of the Gwanda Provincial Magistrates Court Judgement, dismissing the States Application for an Eviction Order against the Company’s, as well as the Spoliation Order granted by the High Court in Bulawayo in our favour,

The next afternoon the Staff were taken to court with their wrists tied with “shoe laces” and there being no Public Prosecutor present were remanded by the Police Prosecutor to the 28th of September.

On the advice of Legal Council it is our intention to have this man charged for contempt in his personal capacity, and it is our intention to institute civil proceedings against him and a number of others, as well as the illegal invaders in their personal capacity.

Apparently this Officer in Charge told one of my staff that the judgement by the magistrate in Gwanda only dismissed the case against my Son only and that when I returned to Zimbabwe, I would be arrested by him immediately.

The actual judgement dismissed the case against my Son, as well as the Company and denied the application for the eviction order.

This is disgusting and uncivilised behaviour and a serious infringement of ones Legal and Civil rights with distinct racial overtones, and it’s about time action is taken to rein in this culture of belligerent behaviour by the Police.

The Lawyer said he spent over an hour arguing with the Police, pointing out that they were in contempt of the Court Rulings. But they just brushed him off.

Yours Faithfully.

W.A.I.Ferguson
Managing Director

We received this email and soundclip from SW Radio Africa, regarding the jamming of their broadcast to Zimbabwe – specifically during the news broadcast. What difference is the inclusive government – with features like an MDC co-Minister of Home Affairs, and an MDC Minister of Information, Communication, and Technology – really making if this kind of blatant censorship still occurs?

For the past few weeks we have been concerned that jamming tests were being carried out on our broadcasts as various radio hams around the world have been sending us regular reports of a faintly audible music loop.

Unfortunately it was confirmed that these were tests, as jamming began in earnest last night (1st September – attached please find an MP3 of the jamming).
It appears to be specifically targeting our news bulletin. This could be because there are power shortages/lack of funds to target the entire broadcast.

Last time we were so severely jammed only ZANU PF were in power and we had no one to complain to. This time we have a ‘unity government’ and I do hope the jamming will be a topic for discussion at the media conference in Harare and that all media organisations – such as MISA/MAZ/MMPZ – will take this issue up at every government forum available to them.

We will, of course, be relentless in trying to get hold of the various ministers from both the MDC and ZPF to hold them to account for the fact that we are supposed to be moving forward to greater media and information freedom – we hope all other media will do the same and not let the matter drop.

Listen to the sound clip of the jamming here (23 seconds, 555 KB, MP3 format)

This weekend I read one Jonathan Kadzura’s article in the Sunday Mail titled: Time to reclaim what is ours. He was rightfully bemoaning the fact that opportunities for growth of local businesses by local people were increasingly shrinking because of “petty so-called international investors” who have invaded our retail industry. According to Kadzura, we are in a really pathetic situation where this has seen foreigners sell our very own orange crush (Mazoe) to us at astronomical prices. I agreed with him until a few paragraphs later he started waxing lyrical about the nobleness of the indigenization drive that our “educated but colonized minds” don’t seem to be interested in upholding, but that is another story. Talk about having one’s own stuff sold to you at astronomical prices, I was reminded of an incident that happened with my cell phone last Friday.

I was on my way to a popular lodge in Glen Lorne for a meeting when I stopped briefly at Town and Country supermarket for a few supplies. Flustered and in a major hurry because I was already 15 minutes late, I never realised that I didn’t have my cell phone only until I was getting ready to settle for the meeting.  I searched everywhere, from my laptop bag to the car until that panicked feeling you seem to get especially when you can’t find your phone set in. I immediately borrowed a phone and dialled my number; meanwhile I was listening hard for it in the car. For a long time, it alternately rang continuously, was engaged or the call was rejected. I started to really panic, but I kept dialling.

Eventually, a man’s voice came on the phone and my mind suddenly went blank. What do you say to someone who evidently picked up your phone? Did I drop it or he nicked it off me? In that same moment, I managed to squeeze in a thought that this was probably just one of those annoying cross-lines that have recently become a regular accompaniment to dialling Econet numbers. Somehow I managed to mumble that I was looking for my phone and I would like it back please.

What followed was a conversation I am bound to remember for a long time. He acknowledged that yes he had my phone, provided his name and address and said I should know he was just an honest man, simple man – a security man at that and he had done me a huge favour. He was therefore requesting that I bring a monetary reward for it. Nothing less than $20, he said.

Cleary, the man underestimated my ability and capability to thank him sufficiently and therefore sought to lay out terms well in advance. My next thought was; what kind of a Good Samaritan was this who demands ransom for the return of my phone?

Initially, I didn’t know how to react. Obviously, my phone – a Sony Ericson W350 was worth a whole lot more than $20 and certainly, I was grateful that the man had been honest enough to give it up. But for him to demand payment for it was just something else. I mean, I think if one has been humble enough to recover somebody’s property, they can extend that humility to waiting for that person to offer a reward as and when they feel like, and for an amount they are comfortable with. In the end I just thought to give him the money and get it over with. However, because I couldn’t leave my meeting, I gave the details to my partner and asked him to go and get the phone, and of course, remember to carry $20. Less than an hour later, the police had somehow been involved and I found myself in a position where I had to provide evidence that the man had indeed demanded payment. Knowing men and their big egos, a dispute had somehow erupted between my partner and the Good Samaritan, with the former insisting that he shouldn’t have demanded any specific payment but should have just waited to be rewarded accordingly. The police had it that according to the law, if one picks up valuable property like a phone; they are supposed to hand it in at the nearest police station. It is also illegal to demand a reward for recovering lost property. They called it solicitation. The police were particularly interested in this case because, from their reasoning, it was important to discourage such behaviour to avoid situations where people nick valuables off others only to demand payment for their safe return. By this time the man had realised the folly of what he had done and handed over my phone, claiming that he had just been joking. Clearly in bad taste.

Later on I went back to my meeting and left the police dealing with the issue. No sooner had I started settling back in did I receive a text message from someone claiming they were the phone-picker’s employer. They were essentially accusing me of being an ingrate who let the police loose on an innocent old man who had jocularly asked for money for a drink. Well, first of all I had nothing to do with his ending up at the police and secondly, the man had demanded payment and prescribed an exact amount too. However, I just texted back and told her she could go to hell for judging me and that next, the police would be coming for her for harassment. But then again, under any circumstances, does it make any sense to pay heavily for what is already yours to someone else who somehow managed to get their hands on it?