In a nation striving for open dialogue, citizen engagement, and democratic progress, the principles of civic space serve as a cornerstone of Zimbabwe’s evolving society. These guiding principles form the bedrock upon which citizens, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), and policymakers work to foster an environment of free expression, participation, and accountability.
Central to the concept of civic space is the freedom of expression and association. Zimbabweans are entitled to express their opinions, engage in public discourse, and associate with groups of their choosing. This legal safeguard is enshrined within the Zimbabwe Constitution’s Declaration of Rights, precisely located in Chapter 4, Section 61. This fundamental principle encourages open dialogue, diverse perspectives, and the ability to collectively address societal challenges.
Civic space embodies the principle of inclusivity, ensuring that every citizen’s voice matters. It is from this realisation that the principle of ‘Leaving No One and No Place Behind’ was coined. Participation extends beyond casting votes during an election process—it includes involvement in decision-making processes, public consultations, and community initiatives. By involving citizens from various backgrounds, the aim is to create policies that resonate with the needs and aspirations of Zimbabwe’s diverse population.
Accountability is a central piece of civic space. Public officials and institutions are expected to be transparent in their actions, decisions, and resource allocation. This principle empowers citizens to hold those in power accountable for their actions, fostering a culture of trust between the government and the governed.
In an unsettling turn of events, attempts made by the public to hold the government accountable have taken a distressing path marred by harassment, intimidation, and censorship in the case of the media. The dynamics between the governed and the government have grown increasingly strained. A recent and alarming development fuelling is the enactment of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Amendment Bill 2022. This bill, upon enactment, would criminalise actions deemed “subversive activities” and “economic sabotage.” This development raises substantial apprehensions, as it could potentially be used to target CSOs, pressure groups, and activists among others that are critical of the government or advocate for much-needed social and economic changes.
The introduction of such legislation has sparked debates about the extent to which it could contribute to the restriction of civic space and hamper the role of CSOs in ensuring transparency and democratic values. As citizens and activists grapple with these challenges, the evolving relationship between governance and accountability remains at the forefront of public concern.
Civic space necessitates the protection of human rights. Citizens are entitled to basic rights, such as freedom from discrimination, access to education, healthcare, and more. Upholding human rights ensures that individuals can engage in civic activities without fear of persecution, enabling a thriving civil society.
An essential component of civic space is the adherence to the rule of law. This ensures that legal frameworks are applied consistently, and no one is above the law. Judicial independence guarantees that citizens can seek recourse if their rights are violated, contributing to a just and fair society. However, alarming reports have emerged of individuals being arrested and detained without formal charges or under questionable circumstances, raising significant human rights concerns. A prominent case that underscores these issues is the prolonged detention of Job Sikhala, who has spent nearly a year behind bars.
Mr. Sikhala’s extended confinement without a clear legal basis has ignited debates over the extent to which citizens’ rights are being safeguarded within the judicial system. Advocates argue that such detentions without proper charges not only infringe upon individuals’ rights but also undermine the principles of justice and fairness.
Civic space acknowledges the significance of CSOs as essential actors in creating an open society. These organisations work to amplify citizens’ voices, advocate for rights, and promote social change. Ensuring the protection of CSOs is vital to maintaining a vibrant civic space.
The consequences of the shrinking civic space are already evident in the country, including a dilution of commitments to the rule of law, social accountability, good governance, and upholding democratic principles and values. An enabling operating environment is urgently required to facilitate the effective implementation of CSOs’ actions, which will have positive downstream multiplier effects on the communities they serve. A vibrant, strong, and free civil society is necessary to ensure sustainable development and provide incentives for democracy and good governance.
The majority of these challenges stem from a prevailing lack of comprehensive information concerning the geographic distribution, impact, and experiences of CSOs This deficiency undermines the effective consolidation and profiling of their narratives, impact, and overall legitimacy. These concerns were notably underscored by state actors during the Social Lab process conducted by NANGO under the Action to Protect and Enhance Civic Space in Zimbabwe (APECS) initiative.
In this regard, the APECS initiative seeks to enhance coordination and decision-making through the development and management of a comprehensive CSO database resulting from rigorous due diligence, profiling, and accreditation needs. This also requires strengthening CSO data protection protocols to safeguard sensitive data, managing data access permits, and capacity strengthening as part of decision-making tools and risk management.
Presently, leveraging the APECS initiative, NANGO has successfully engaged with diverse observer missions as the nation moves closer to the 2023 harmonised elections. These missions encompass renowned entities such as the European Commission, COMESA, Africa Council of Churches, ECF-SADC, and the Commonwealth Observer Group. Beyond observer missions, the association has also fostered connections with media platforms, including Newsroom Africa and SABC. Throughout these interactions, NANGO has shared pertinent issues contextualizing the nation’s electoral and civic space landscape, aiming for these matters and suggestions to reach other essential stakeholders such as the government and electoral institutions in forthcoming engagements.
Furthermore, the APECS initiative assumes the crucial role of monitoring and tracking instances of violence, intimidation, harassment, and arbitrary arrests. This vigilant focus extends particularly to incidents directly involving the civil society sector, pressure groups, activists, and human rights defenders, forming an integral assessment of their safety as elections draw near. The initiative’s scope also encompasses scrutinising media reports and narratives surrounding civil society, recognising its significance. The initiative is also tracking the number of non-state actors accredited to participate during the 2023 harmonised elections as observers. One key incident to note is the refusal to approve the accreditation of Zimbabwean lawyer and human rights activist, Dr. Musa Kika by The Zimbabwe Election Commission.
In December 2022, the Zimbabwean government took a significant step by establishing a Structured Dialogue Platform that convenes creditors and development partners. This establishment aims to institutionalise structured dialogues regarding economic and governance reforms integral to arrears clearance and debt resolution. Within this framework, the participation of the civil society sector remains under watchful observation. This inclusive platform presents an opportune avenue for the APECS initiative to highlight challenges tied to Zimbabwe’s civic space and formulate effective resolutions.
CIVICUS speaks about a proposed NGO bill and the threat it represents for Zimbabwean civil society with Ernest Nyimai, the Acting Executive Director of Zimbabwe’s National Association of Non-Governmental Organisations (NANGO).
NANGO is the umbrella body of civil society organisations (CSOs) operating in Zimbabwe, mandated by its membership to coordinate CSO activities, represent the sector and strengthen its voice.
How do you think the proposed NGO bill would affect civic space in Zimbabwe?
In our view as the umbrella body of CSOs operating in Zimbabwe, the proposed Private Voluntary Organization (PVO) Amendment Bill presents the danger of further shrinking civic space should it sail through in its current form. The bill will put at further risk the fundamental freedoms that civil society is supposed to have to be able to do its work to improve people’s lives. This is due to quite significant proposed amendments that in our view are repressive.
Currently, more than 60 per cent of NANGO members are legally registered as trusts, and some are registered under Common Law Universitas. If this bill is passed as it is, they will be automatically deregistered and required to apply for re-registration under the new proposed PVO guidelines.
The PVO Amendment Bill proposes to criminalise CSOs that support, oppose or finance a political party or candidate. The clause does not clearly specify what supporting or opposing a political party or candidates entails. If a CSO opposes a party’s policy or governance practice, does this amount to opposing a political party? If a CSO gives legal support in an election challenge, does this amount to supporting a political party or candidate? This provision can be abused, especially against CSOs that work on democracy, governance and human rights issues. This provision is contrary to the right to the freedom of association provided for in section 58 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. The imposition of harsh penalties such as imprisonment for violation of this provision without any justification or regard to civil remedies or administrative fines is grossly arbitrary.
Another reason the PVO bill can affect civic space is that it is phrased in a way that would make room for selective application during its administration. If an organisation is deemed to be operating outside its mandate, its board can be immediately suspended and an interim one can be appointed to act in its stead while a final decision is made. But procedures are not clear, so there is room for the responsible minister, the Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare, to arbitrarily suspend an organisation’s board due to personal interests. This kind of interference in the operation of CSOs would limit their independence and autonomy.
The PVO bill was prompted as a way to ensure compliance with Recommendation 8 of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which requires governments to review the adequacy of laws and regulations that govern non-profit organisations so that these organisations cannot be abused for money laundering and financing of terrorism. But in my view, the government deployed an omnibus approach to pursue many other interests besides the fulfilment of FATF Recommendation 8 requirements.
The bill in fact violates the FATF’s balanced approach, which stipulates the need to maintain an enabling operating environment to fulfil FATF requirements. The government has not concluded a risk assessment indicating which CSOs are at risk of being used for money laundering and financing terrorism. This is the ideal procedure as required by FATF to ensure the application of the risk-based approach to mitigating vulnerabilities to money laundering and financing of terrorism.
How would the PVO Bill, if implemented, affect NANGO’s work?
NANGO is registered under the existing PVO Act. But if the amendment bill goes into effect, many of our members will be automatically deregistered, which will have immediate repercussions on NANGO, whose greatest strength is precisely our membership. Besides, there are various clauses that impose sanctions and restrictions in terms of programming areas and NANGO is of no exception to this potential criminalisation of CSO work.
The new legislation will also weaken our eligibility for funding due to increased government interference in the operations of CSOs. The donor agencies we work with require recipient organisations to be independent and autonomous for the purposes of grant compliance. But the implementation of the new proposed PVO Amendment bill will potentially affect our independence and limit our autonomy. Development partners and donors may decide to stop funding CSOs in Zimbabwe if they view it as becoming too risky.
As CSOs we exist to protect the rights and dignity of people. If the new bill forces many CSOs to stop operating, the vulnerability of communities they serve and human rights abuses will likely increase. We need CSOs to continue working and defending people’s rights in an enabling operating environment. CSOs promote and protect human rights, but through the increased surveillance of CSO operations by security agencies, many activists, human rights defenders and civil society members will be abducted and tortured, and the security threat will increase.
How is civil society responding to this threat?
We have used a multifaceted approach, taking advantage of the various strengths we have as a large and diverse group of organisations. In the initial stages, we tried to push back against the PVO bill in many ways, including through litigation to expose the ways in which it would violate constitutional provisions. We also assessed the bill against the core humanitarian standards that we adhere to as CSOs.
Unfortunately, the bill has nonetheless progressed, so we are currently conducting scenario planning in which the law might be passed. Most of our efforts are focused on engaging, having a dialogue and negotiating with government officials for revision of repressive clauses of the bill. The bill is currently being debated in parliament following its second reading, so we are also advocating with parliamentarians to get them to really understand how this bill is going to affect the work of CSOs and those they work with.
We are also engaging with the body that administers the PVO Act, the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare, which played a key role in drafting the bill. We are trying to engage it in discussing the potential political, social and economic impacts of the bill. CSOs are a significant contributor of foreign currency in Zimbabwe: close to one billion dollars per year are coming in the form of official development assistance that is channelled towards various programmes implemented by CSOs. CSOs employ around 18,000 people. If they shut down or their activities are limited, barriers to overcoming unemployment will rise. Our desire and hope is to have an enabling instrument guaranteeing the space for civil society to continue its good work.
How can the international community help Zimbabwean civil society?
Zimbabwe is a member of various regional and continental organisations, which we have used to our advantage. We have engaged with regional and continental pressure groups, and especially the FATF, and they have shared their technical expertise on advocacy and lobbying, while also leveraging their convening power to help us engage with our government.
The international community should continue to assist us as mediators, especially in light of the hostility and limited confidence and trust between civil society and the government. It is very important that they highlight how the bill will affect the general role of CSOs in Zimbabwe. There is also politicisation of CSO work due to misinterpretation of the general role of CSOs in the national development discourse. For example, civil society has the key responsibility of holding the government accountable and advocating for people’s rights, and this bill threatens our ability to fulfil it. We need regional, continental and global organisations to help us advocate with the Zimbabwean government to ensure an enabling operating environment for civil society in line with the ‘whole of society’ approach that the government subscribes to.
Civic space in Zimbabwe is rated ‘repressed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with NANGO through its website or Facebook page, or by emailing , and follow @ErnestNyimai and @nangozimbabwe on Twitter.
