Anger grows over Mnangagwa’s amnesty

Pressure is piling on President Emmerson Mnangagwa to reconsider the release of dangerous criminals, including rapists, who benefited from an amnesty that saw the release of 4 000 prisoners.

Rapists who are over 65 years and had served two thirds of their prison terms were released under the amnesty that was meant to reduce overcrowding in Zimbabwe’s 47 prisons.

Lawyers and rights groups say those convicted of rape should not have been released as their offences are classified as "specified," which do not qualify for presidential pardons, according to a government clemency order issued before the pardons.

Women's and children’s advocacy groups in particular were incensed by a local television interview with four recently released inmates, who confirmed they had been serving sentences for rape or statutory rape.

The Adventist Lawyers Association (ALA) said the release of sexual offenders was in contravention of sections 19 and 81 of the constitution that protect the rights of children and women.

“Whilst we believe in the biblical imperative to forgive, we also believe that society must be protected from those who violate the rights of young girls,” the lawyers said.

“In recent years, there has been a spike in child marriages that has not been just concerning, but alarming because of the slow rate at which the state seems to act on the perpetrators.

“The release of sexual offenders does not bode well with the constitutional imperatives as expressed in sections 19 and 81 of the constitution to protect children and women."

“Such release directly contradicts the express terms of the instrument relied upon.”

ALA added: “There has been reform in child marriage laws, which is a welcome development.

“However, the release of sexual offenders on the very low bar of having served just a tenth of their sentences when other beneficiaries had to meet the high bar of at least a third is retrogressive to the fight against child marriages.

“The government must walk the talk and be deliberate in protecting girls and women,” ALA said.

Admire Huniuswa, a legal expert, said the amnesty to rapists was potentially unconstitutional.

"The amnesty to rapists raises significant legal concerns and questions the adherence to international human rights standards,” Huniuswa said.

“While the issue of prison overcrowding is a legitimate concern, it is crucial to prioritise the rights and safety of survivors and ensure that justice is served.

“Granting amnesty to rapists undermines the principle of accountability and sends a detrimental message to both survivors and potential offenders.”

Pamellah Musimwa of Justice for Children said those convicted of rape or statutory rape should not be eligible for pardons and should be required to serve their full sentences.

“It is very concerning that convicts of rape and other sexual offenses were also released through the amnesty,” Musimwa told VOA.

“These offences involve trauma and shock on the survivors … who … at least felt safe after the accused had been convicted and imprisoned.

“Their wounds, which were probably healing because of the sentence, are now being reopened,” she added.

“They now have to interface with unrepentant perpetrators.

“Besides affecting the survivor, the convicts’ release seems to trivialize the offences.”

The released rapists, she said, were bragging about their releases during the interview.

“As a nation, have we done good? ... Are we saying the commission of rape is now trivial, such that the perpetrators could be released anyhow without fully serving their sentences?” Musimwa

said, adding that she feared the released offenders might strike again.