COUNCIL COMMON POSITION 2009/68/CFSP of 26 January 2009 Renewing Restrictive Measures Against Zimbabwe
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Canada Sanctions Zimbabwe
Canadian Sanctions and Canadian charities operating in Zimbabwe: Be Very Careful! By Mark Blumberg (January 7, 2009) Canadian charities operating in Zimbabwe need to be extremely careful. It is not the place for a new and inexperienced charity to begin foreign operations. In fact, only Canadian charities with substantial experience in difficult international operations should even consider operating in Zimbabwe. It is one of the most difficult countries to carry out charitable operations by virtue of the very difficult political, security, human rights and economic situation and the resultant Canadian and international sanctions. This article will set out some information on the Zimbabwe Sanctions including the full text of the Act and Regulations governing the sanctions. It is not a bad idea when dealing with difficult legal issues to consult knowledgeable legal advisors. Summary On September 4, 2008, the Special Economic Measures (Zimbabwe) Regulations (SOR/2008-248) (the “Regulations”) came into force pursuant to subsections 4(1) to (3) of the Special Economic Measures Act. The Canadian sanctions against Zimbabwe are targeted sanctions dealing with weapons, technical support for weapons, assets of designated persons, and Zimbabwean aircraft landing in Canada. There is no humanitarian exception to these targeted sanctions. There are tremendous practical difficulties working in Zimbabwe and if a Canadian charity decides to continue operating in Zimbabwe it is important that the Canadian charity and its intermediaries (eg. Agents, contractor, partners) avoid providing any benefits, “directly or indirectly”, to a “designated person”. Canadian charities need to undertake rigorous due diligence and risk management to ensure that a “designated person” does not financially benefit from the program. -
University of St. Thomas Presents Morgan Tsvangirai and Roy Bennett Walk with Me: ‘The Struggle for Freedom and Hope in Zimbabwe’
News Release Contact: Sandra Soliz 713-906-7912 [email protected] University of St. Thomas presents Morgan Tsvangirai and Roy Bennett Walk with Me: ‘The Struggle for Freedom and Hope in Zimbabwe’ WHAT: University of St. Thomas presents two of the most effective opposition leaders in Zimbabwe today, Morgan Tsvangirai and Roy Bennett, discussing the current political and social situation in Zimbabwe. WHEN: 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 9 WHERE: Cullen Hall, 4001 Mt. Vernon University of St. Thomas Parking available in the Moran Center, Graustark and West Alabama BACKGROUND: • Zimbabwe, 10 years ago the breadbasket of Africa, now faces mass starvation. Land seizures, slum “clearance” and price controls have left fields brown, stores empty and cities dark. People have no jobs, no transport, and no food. • Life expectancy for men has fallen from 60 to 37, lowest in the world. For women, it is lower, 34. Twelve million people once lived in Zimbabwe; more than three million have fled. • The Movement for Democratic Change, led by former union leader Morgan Tsvangirai, opposing these policies, won 58 of the 120 elected seats in Parliament in the last largely free elections of 2000. The Government of President Robert Mugabe closed newspapers, banned political meetings, arrested its opponents. • Today Zimbabwe’s African neighbors, as well as the nations of Europe and America are calling for free and fair elections, but Mugabe stubbornly clings to power. more University of St. Thomas… A Shining Star in the Heart of Houston since 1947 3800 Montrose Blvd. Houston, TX 77006 713.522.7911 www.stthom.edu University of St. -
Zimbabwe Is Open for Business
ZIMBABWE IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS An Economic Appraisal of the ‘New Dispensation’ Dale Doré May 2018 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. THE ECONOMIC MELTDOWN 2.1 The Road to Ruin 2.2 The Cost of Displacement 2.3 The Collapse of Production 2.4 How Markets Work 2.5 The State-controlled Economy 2.6 Command Agriculture 3.7 The Economy 3. ZIMBABWE IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS 3.1 Operation Restore Legacy 3.2 Guidelines and Opportunities 4. BUSINESS AS USUAL 4.1 Actions speak louder than words 4.2 Governance and institutions 4.3 The New Economic Order 4.4 Political Capital 4.5 Sound Economic Principles 4.6 Protection of Investment and Property 4.7 Property Rights and the Rule of Law 4.8 Being Zimbabwean 5. CONCLUDING REMARKS REFERENCES 1. INTRODUCTION The gist of the Government’s Investment Guidelines and Opportunities in Zimbabwe1 can be summed up by the title of the first chapter: “Towards a New Economic Order: Investment Policy Statement and Action Plan of the Government of Zimbabwe.” The guidelines promise investors an economic reform agenda based on a sound market economy in order to build a competitive private sector. The main policy thrusts also include the payment of compensation to commercial farmers, whose land was seized; a commitment to repay the government’s domestic and foreign debts; and respecting international obligations under Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreements (BIPPAs). Corruption, it avers, will be dealt with severely. These issues clearly illustrate that the economic fortunes of nations not only depend on the application of sound economic principles and public financial management; they are also inseparable from matters of politics and governance. -
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa a Politically Vulnerable President
POSTED JUNE 23, 2008 JOHANNESBURG, South Africa A politically vulnerable President Robert Mugabe and his administration have unleashed the harshest news media crackdown in their notoriously repressive tenure. Startled by March 29 election results that favored the opposition, Mugabe’s government has arbitrarily detained at least 15 journalists and media workers, intimidated sources, obstructed the delivery of independent news, and tightened its grasp on state media. “This is the worst time for journalists in Zimbabwe’s history,” Geoff Hill, an exiled Zimbabwean reporter and author, told the Committee to Protect Journalists. Several other veteran journalists, both local and foreign, offered the same characterization during interviews conducted here and in areas bordering Zimbabwe. The press crackdown comes as police, soldiers, and militants with the ruling ZANU-PF party have orchestrated a campaign of violence aimed at crushing the opposition and ensuring that Mugabe, 84, will remain in power as he has since 1980. On Sunday, opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) withdrew from a runoff scheduled for Friday, saying he could not ask supporters to cast a ballot when “that vote could cost them their lives.” A spike in journalist arrests immediately after the March 29 election—among them the detention of Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Barry Bearak—drew worldwide attention. But CPJ’s investigation has found that throughout the run-off election period, Mugabe’s government has engaged in an ongoing pattern of press harassment. Police have arrested journalists without basis and charged them under nonexistent laws. State radio has been filled with pro-Mugabe propaganda. -
B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/101/CFSP of 15 February 2011 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Zimbabwe (OJ L 42, 16.2.2011, P
2011D0101 — EN — 20.02.2014 — 004.001 — 1 This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents ►B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/101/CFSP of 15 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (OJ L 42, 16.2.2011, p. 6) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Council Decision 2012/97/CFSP of 17 February 2012 L 47 50 18.2.2012 ►M2 Council Implementing Decision 2012/124/CFSP of 27 February 2012 L 54 20 28.2.2012 ►M3 Council Decision 2013/89/CFSP of 18 February 2013 L 46 37 19.2.2013 ►M4 Council Decision 2013/160/CFSP of 27 March 2013 L 90 95 28.3.2013 ►M5 Council Implementing Decision 2013/469/CFSP of 23 September 2013 L 252 31 24.9.2013 ►M6 Council Decision 2014/98/CFSP of 17 February 2014 L 50 20 20.2.2014 Corrected by: ►C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 74 (2011/101/CFSP) 2011D0101 — EN — 20.02.2014 — 004.001 — 2 ▼B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/101/CFSP of 15 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof, Whereas: (1) On 19 February 2004, the Council adopted Common Position 2004/161/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Zimb abwe (1 ). (2) Council Decision 2010/92/CFSP (2 ), adopted on 15 February 2010, extended the restrictive measures provided for in Common Position 2004/161/CFSP until 20 February 2011. -
The Case for Imposing Targeted United Nations Sanctions Against Zimbabwean Officials
Fordham Law Review Volume 76 Issue 1 Article 8 2007 Operation "Drive Out the Trash": The Case for Imposing Targeted United Nations Sanctions Against Zimbabwean Officials Katherine Hughes Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Katherine Hughes, Operation "Drive Out the Trash": The Case for Imposing Targeted United Nations Sanctions Against Zimbabwean Officials, 76 Fordham L. Rev. 323 (2007). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol76/iss1/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Operation "Drive Out the Trash": The Case for Imposing Targeted United Nations Sanctions Against Zimbabwean Officials Cover Page Footnote J.D. Candidate, 2008, Fordham University School of Law; M.A. Candidate, 2008, International Political Economy and Development, Fordham University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. I extend my deepest gratitude to the many Zimbabweans who welcomed me into their country. I would also like to thank Jim Leitner; Professors Rachel Vorspan, Jeanmarie Fenrich, and Susanna Chung; and Alasdair Ferguson for their invaluable support and comments. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol76/iss1/8 OPERATION "DRIVE OUT THE TRASH": THE CASE FOR IMPOSING TARGETED UNITED NATIONS SANCTIONS AGAINST ZIMBABWEAN OFFICIALS KatherineHughes * In May 2005, representatives of PresidentRobert Mugabe's government initiated a slum-clearance campaign entitled Operation Murambatsvina, which displaced nearly one million Zimbabweans. -
AC Vol 44 No 22
www.africa-confidential.com 7 November 2003 Vol 44 No 22 AFRICA CONFIDENTIAL KENYA 2 ZIMBABWE The best money can buy No chance, Mr President Party officials and military commanders are ignoring President ‘Why hire a lawyer when you can buy a judge?’ is a well-worn joke Mugabe’s orders to surrender their farms that the younger reformers in Several government ministers and senior military officers accused of grabbing farms are refusing to hand President Kibaki’s government want to make redundant. But their efforts them back to the state, according to a new report on land reform ordered by President Robert Mugabe. are being undermined by veteran Information Minister Jonathan Moyo, Local Government Minister Ignatius Chombo and 13 other politicians and business people who ministers have secured several farms in violation of the government’s ‘one man, one farm’ rule, the report are using the purge of the judiciary says. Details of ministers’ and officers’ holdings are contained in a confidential annexe to the main report, to destroy their opponents. which has been discussed in cabinet. Mugabe asked former Secretary to the Government Charles Utete to investigate the findings of an GHANA 3earlier land audit by the Minister of State in Deputy President Joseph Msika’s office, Flora Buka. This had found major abuses of the land resettlement programme by senior officials (AC Vol 44 No 4). Buka’s Politics get crude audit reported that some of the worst violations of the land reform policy were perpetrated by Mugabe’s The row over crude oil supplies to closest political allies, such as Air Vice-Marshall Perence Shiri, Minister Moyo and Mugabe’s sister, the state-owned Volta River Sabina Mugabe. -
The Mortal Remains: Succession and the Zanu Pf Body Politic
THE MORTAL REMAINS: SUCCESSION AND THE ZANU PF BODY POLITIC Report produced for the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum by the Research and Advocacy Unit [RAU] 14th July, 2014 1 CONTENTS Page No. Foreword 3 Succession and the Constitution 5 The New Constitution 5 The genealogy of the provisions 6 The presently effective law 7 Problems with the provisions 8 The ZANU PF Party Constitution 10 The Structure of ZANU PF 10 Elected Bodies 10 Administrative and Coordinating Bodies 13 Consultative For a 16 ZANU PF Succession Process in Practice 23 The Fault Lines 23 The Military Factor 24 Early Manoeuvring 25 The Tsholotsho Saga 26 The Dissolution of the DCCs 29 The Power of the Politburo 29 The Powers of the President 30 The Congress of 2009 32 The Provincial Executive Committee Elections of 2013 34 Conclusions 45 Annexures Annexure A: Provincial Co-ordinating Committee 47 Annexure B : History of the ZANU PF Presidium 51 2 Foreword* The somewhat provocative title of this report conceals an extremely serious issue with Zimbabwean politics. The theme of succession, both of the State Presidency and the leadership of ZANU PF, increasingly bedevils all matters relating to the political stability of Zimbabwe and any form of transition to democracy. The constitutional issues related to the death (or infirmity) of the President have been dealt with in several reports by the Research and Advocacy Unit (RAU). If ZANU PF is to select the nominee to replace Robert Mugabe, as the state constitution presently requires, several problems need to be considered. The ZANU PF nominee ought to be selected in terms of the ZANU PF constitution. -
A Week of Protests - from Beitbridge to The
A week of protests - From Beitbridge to the shutdown How was the conflict reported? 1 Contents 1.Background 2. The Beitbridge protest 2.1 The events 2.2 Who were the protesters? 2.3 Why did they protest? 3. The Monday Protests 4. The Shutdown 4.1 Who was behind it? 4.2 The ruling party's response 4.3 What happened on the 6th? 4.4 SADC and the protests 5. The official narrative 5.1 The Zimbabwe Republic Police 5.2 POTRAZ 5.3 The Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe 6. Conclusion 2 1. Background The events in the seven days beginning 1 July 2016, starting with the protests in the border town of Beitbridge have been momentous in the history of Zimbabwe. The reportage of these events show that there is no one story on Zimbabwe, but several stories, told from various perspectives, and the citizen is found in the middle, battling to decipher the truth. These narratives presented by the traditional media houses, social and alternative (mainly online) media as well as official statements make truth a tenuous concept, as facts are sometimes lost in a sometimes-tinted view of the world. Questions that arise include, after all the stories have been told, does the world have a clear idea of the current crisis in Zimbabwe, its root causes, possible impact, key players and what the possible resolution will look like? Do we have a clear idea of what the Zimbabwean story is? What is the role of the media in all this? Professional journalism is called upon to be truthful, fair, accurate and balanced, playing a critical role in informing the public and promoting public accountability, two critical preconditions for democracy. -
B COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 314/2004 of 19 February 2004 Concerning Certain Restrictive Measures in Respect of Zimbabwe
2004R0314 — EN — 03.03.2010 — 010.001 — 1 This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents ►B COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 314/2004 of 19 February 2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe (OJ L 55, 24.2.2004, p. 1) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/2004 of 20 August 2004 L 273 12 21.8.2004 ►M2 Commission Regulation (EC) No 898/2005 of 15 June 2005 L 153 9 16.6.2005 ►M3 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1272/2005 of 1 August 2005 L 201 40 2.8.2005 ►M4 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1367/2005 of 19 August 2005 L 216 6 20.8.2005 ►M5 Council Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006 of 20 November 2006 L 363 1 20.12.2006 ►M6 Commission Regulation (EC) No 236/2007 of 2 March 2007 L 66 14 6.3.2007 ►M7 Commission Regulation (EC) No 412/2007 of 16 April 2007 L 101 6 18.4.2007 ►M8 Commission Regulation (EC) No 777/2007 of 2 July 2007 L 173 3 3.7.2007 ►M9 Commission Regulation (EC) No 702/2008 of 23 July 2008 L 195 19 24.7.2008 ►M10 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1226/2008 of 8 December 2008 L 331 11 10.12.2008 ►M11 Commission Regulation (EC) No 77/2009 of 26 January 2009 L 23 5 27.1.2009 ►M12 Commission Regulation (EU) No 173/2010 of 25 February 2010 L 51 13 2.3.2010 Corrected by: ►C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 46, 17.2.2009, p. -
Zimbabwe's Liberation Struggle Era Conflicts and the Pitfalls Of
TITLE: Zimbabwe’s Liberation Struggle Era Conflicts and the Pitfalls of Reconciliation after Independence: A Case Study of Bikita District 1976-2013. By Dorothy Goredema A Thesis submitted to the Midlands State University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History. Faculty of Arts Midlands State University 2015 i Declaration I Dorothy Goredema, hereby declare that this thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy in History at the Midlands State University, hereby submitted by me, has not been previously submitted for a degree at this or any other institution, and that this is my work in design and execution, and all reference materials contained herein have been duly acknowledged. ………………………………………… …………………………………….. Signature Date I hereby certify that the above statement is correct. Main Supervisor, Prof. N.Bhebe………………. …. ………………………… Signature Date Co-Supervisor, Dr.T.M Mashingaidze…………….. …………………………… Signature Date i Acknowledgements I owe a special debt of gratitude to my main supervisor, Professor Ngwabi Bhebe, and Dr. T.M Mashingaidze. Firstly, Professor Bhebe, I will be forever indebted to you. Despite your busy schedule as Vice-Chancellor of a university, you would always make time for me as a student and for my work. You took an interest in my topic and gave direction to many of my disjointed ideas that marked the genesis of the study. You continuously assessed my work, giving me feedback on time and went an extra mile to facilitate co-supervisors and funds that supported my work. I will forever be indebted to your efficiency, wise counsel and critical mind. Thank you Professor for your mentorship and intellectual support. -
Media Coverage 10 Days After Nomination Court June 14 - 24 2018
MEDIA COVERAGE 10 DAYS AFTER NOMINATION COURT JUNE 14 - 24 2018 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is produced by Media Monitors under the programme “Support to media on governance and electoral matters in Zimbabwe”. The programme conducted by International Media Support and the Media Alliance of Zimbabwe is funded by the European Union and the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. International Media Support (IMS) is a nonprofit organisation working with the media in countries affected by armed conflict, human insecurity and political transition. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of Media Monitors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union or the Norwegian Ministry of foreign Affairs ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... iv CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ......................................... 1 1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Context ............................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER TWO: FAIRNESS AND BALANCE ......................................................... 2 2.1 Space and time allocated to political parties and candidates ........................... 2 2.2 Analysis of different media’s performance in representing