.png)
Zimbabwe: Ethnic cleansing probe ‘micromanaged’ by perpetrators, say critics
- Farai Shawn Matiashe, African Report
- Jun 25
- 5 min read
Media blackout, testimonies, and a victim focus stall Zimbabwe’s 1980s massacres inquiry as Mnangagwa seeks closure for Ndebele survivors.
Zimbabwe’s inquiry into the Gukurahundi massacres will now be conducted behind closed doors, sparking fears of intimidation and a state-controlled process. Chief Fortune Charumbira confirmed the shift at a press briefing, following President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s directive for traditional leaders to lead the effort.
Intimidating inquiry
The traditional leaders, primarily from Matabeleland — where the majority of the Gukurahundi massacres occurred in the 1980s — outlined how the consultations would be conducted. Gukurahundi is a Shona word meaning ‘the early rain that washes away the chaff before the spring rains’.
The process was initially intended to follow an open, public testimonial format, allowing more people — including those from urban areas — to attend the hearings. However, the chiefs have since shifted their stance, citing privacy and the sensitivity of the massacres. The changes have made the inquiry more intimidating, reducing it to an individualised experience.
On 16 June, while addressing journalists, Charumbira revealed that the process will now be conducted behind closed doors, with only private witness testimony. Charumbira also said that only victims would appear before the panel, led by a traditional chief, and could be accompanied by a few close relatives. It remains unclear whether the traditional chiefs’ decision was influenced by Mnangagwa or his ruling party.
‘Removing social support for victims’
Between 1983 and 1987, an estimated 20,000 people — mostly Ndebeles — were killed in the Matabeleland and Midlands regions. The atrocities included mass killings, torture, sexual violence, and rape, carried out by about 4,000 North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade soldiers, an elite unit of the Zimbabwe National Army.
According to a Bulawayo-based civic leader, who requested anonymity, forcing victims to testify solely before the panel and the chief strips away the social support many would feel when speaking in front of their community.
The civic leader noted that in the past, only rape victims were allowed to testify in private, since discussing sexual assault in front of in-laws would be difficult for many.
Another concern was that turning the initiative into an individual experience would deny its communal nature. Victims were primarily targeted for being part of the Ndebele community, in contrast to then-president Robert Mugabe’s government, dominated by the Shona majority.
“They are turning what happened in the Gukurahundi [massacres] into an individualised experience when [in fact] the collective was targeted [and] the collective continues to suffer. Most people living in rural Matabeleland [still] fear the state because of a lack of accountability and truth,” says the civic leader.
Media blackout
Even the media is barred from covering the Gukurahundi hearings — a continuation of a long-standing pattern, as most Zimbabwean journalists did not report on the original killings, leaving coverage largely to foreign media.
Mbuso Fuzwayo, a Bulawayo activist and coordinator of the pressure group Ibhetshu LikaZulu, says the media blackout reminds him of 1980s massacres. “It is a way of the perpetrator micromanaging the process,” he tells The Africa Report.
“The media blackout is not a new thing, even during the time they were raping and killing, they made sure the media [was] barred from [reporting it],” says Fuzwayo, whose grandfather is believed to have been abducted during the massacres and never seen again.
The problem with a process curated by perpetrators, behind closed doors and away from public or media scrutiny, is that it mirrors the way the original atrocities were committed, says Siphosami Malunga, a human rights lawyer and defender.
I do not feel safe. I think they will come after me for exposing them
“A public process is necessary to ensure accountability, transparency, and credibility. It also provides necessary protection for victims and witnesses,” he says.
The ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), widely regarded as responsible for the massacres, will control all information released to the public.
“Naturally, they are bound to be alert and therefore wish to contain the direct publication of the hearings,” Methuseli Moyo, a political analyst and university lecturer, tells The Africa Report.
These hearings are meant to investigate and establish an official account of the 1980s massacres.
In 1983, Mugabe’s ZANU-PF launched a state-sponsored reign of terror, accusing ‘dissidents’ from the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU), led by Joshua Nkomo, of rebellion.
President Mnangagwa, who was state security minister at the time, was also head spymaster at the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO), and in charge of the military. He has denied involvement in the killings.
Mnangagwa proposed the hearings in 2019 after assuming leadership in 2017 through a military coup that deposed Mugabe.
Slow start
Originally set to begin on 16 June, the Gukurahundi hearings were postponed to 26 June, with Charumbira attributing the delay to a lack of resources.
The hearings were initially meant to start a few weeks after the launch in July last year, but they have faced repeated postponements due to a lack of resources. Fuzwayo says there is still no clear budget.
“There must be a timeframe and legislation. Before the commencement, we were expecting an open acknowledgement,” he says.
“We were expecting to hear the side of the perpetrator on why they killed people, and what was the instruction during their deployment, because the army works on orders.”
A predetermined outcome
Fuzwayo says it is not a programme led by traditional chiefs, but rather one driven by individuals who are exploiting traditional leaders.
“Some victims will not participate because they do not trust the process, especially if it is now one person going to appear before a panel; they are afraid of their government,” he says.
Malunga agrees. “With Zimbabwe’s history of persecution and victimisation by the security sector, this closed process is incurably flawed. [Which] victim will want to risk it?” he says.
One Gukurahundi survivor expressed unwillingness to participate, citing fear of victimisation. “I do not feel safe. I think they will come after me for exposing them,” the survivor tells The Africa Report.
No mourning allowed
Malunga says he will not give any testimony in the current process, calling it “flawed and not transparent.” He adds that people in Matabeleland are still not allowed to mourn and commemorate the Gukurahundi massacre.
Several memorial plaques erected in honour of the victims have been destroyed, allegedly by state security agents.
Critics argue that this process is worse than earlier inquiries — including the Simplicius Chihambakwe-led commission of 1983, which, though public, never had its findings released.
Similarly, the report of the Gukurahundi Compensation Commission — led by former magistrate Johnson Mkandla under the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC) — was also withheld from the public.
Moyo remains sceptical that the findings of this latest investigation will ever be made public while Malunga questions the government’s approach.
“It is baffling [that] the government would waste this golden opportunity. The world now knows what the Gukurahundi was. It cannot be whitewashed. Victims yearn to have it addressed so they can move past it,” Malunga says.
(c) 2025, African Report
Comentários