In Zimbabwe, a glaring paradox unfolds as President “Scarfmore” urges citizens to oust corrupt councillors while conveniently omitting members of parliament and senators from this crusade against corruption. This stance raises eyebrows, especially considering the rampant corruption within his own party, Zanu PF. Scarfmore, often accused of evading by-elections that could potentially dethrone corrupt officials, including MPs, appears to suffer from selective memory loss, a condition that mirrors his broader political strategies.
His hypocritical call to action against council corruption starkly contrasts with his leniency towards the higher echelons of government. This contradiction is not merely a matter of oversight but a calculated move to preserve the status quo that benefits him and his allies. In a country plagued by skyrocketing inflation, service deprivation, and high unemployment, such selective anti-corruption rhetoric only adds to the public’s woes.
Scarfmore’s apparent forgetfulness extends to his denial of Zimbabwe’s status as a militarized authoritarian state, far from the democratic ideals it professes. He turns a blind eye to the role of the military in maintaining his power, a force so impoverished that its struggles became public when Air Vice Marshal Moyo couldn’t afford private school fees. Yet, this same military has been instrumental in suppressing the popular will of the people, as evidenced by their response to protests with gunfire.
Moreover, Scarfmore’s narrative conveniently ignores the deep-seated corruption within Zanu PF, a party that has led the country into crippling debt with little to show for it. Factionalism, power jostling, and a culture of impunity facilitated by a partisan, militarized judiciary further entrench this corruption. The irony is stark when Scarfmore, whose tenure is riddled with allegations of gold smuggling and opaque tender processes benefiting his family and cronies, fails to acknowledge his role in these corrupt practices.
The President’s selective amnesia also extends to the strategic collusion between the military, the electoral commission, and the judiciary. This unholy alliance has mutated into a vanguard for Zanu PF’s interests, ensuring unconstitutional retention of power and the erosion of rule of law and separation of powers. Scarfmore’s failure to recognize the military’s role in propping up opportunistic and corrupt political figures reflects a deliberate attempt to mask the realities of Zimbabwe’s political landscape.
Despite these glaring issues, Scarfmore stops short of suggesting his own removal from power. The irony is palpable when the man at the helm of a government responsible for human rights violations, property rights infringements, and economic mismanagement positions himself as an anti-corruption crusader. His selective approach to corruption, targeting only low-level officials while shielding those in higher offices, underscores the deep-rooted hypocrisy and self-serving nature of his governance.
In conclusion, Scarfmore’s call to vote out corrupt councillors while sparing corrupt MPs and senators epitomizes the selective justice and hypocrisy rampant in Zimbabwe’s political sphere. His failure to address the systemic issues within his party and government not only undermines the fight against corruption but also jeopardizes the nation’s democratic foundations and the welfare of its people.