Zimbabwe is in a difficult situation as it gets ready for important general elections on August 23, 2023. The trouble started because of a controversial presidential amnesty deal that freed Bobby Makaza, a convicted rapist, from prison. Makaza not only got out of jail but also received a house and money from Zanu PF, the ruling party. Now, he is campaigning for the party and President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
Makaza, 60 years old, was serving a 16-year sentence for raping a 10-year-old girl in 2019. President Mnangagwa decided to release him and many other inmates to reduce prison overcrowding and because of Makaza’s age. This decision has caused a lot of public anger. People are asking serious questions about the country’s morals and the ethical standards of its leaders.
The release of rapists and murderers has upset women, children, and human rights groups. They say this decision breaks legal principles and causes more trauma for the victims and their families. The connection between Makaza, Mnangagwa, and Zanu PF shows a worrying trend of putting political gain above justice and human decency.
Critics argue that the reasons given for Makaza’s release are not good enough. They say that while age and prison overcrowding were used as excuses, the government ignored the wider impact and the psychological effects of letting dangerous criminals go free. The victim’s parents are fighting hard to reverse the release and make sure Makaza faces justice for his actions.
This situation raises a bigger question: can a President and a ruling party in a democratic country justify using criminals as political tools? Does the need for power come before basic moral principles?
Looking at this from a philosophical angle, we can compare Aristotle and Machiavelli. Aristotle believed politics should create good citizens capable of noble actions. Machiavelli, on the other hand, believed in keeping power, even if it meant acting against common morals.
From these ideas, it is clear that a political party without ethical foundations is just a tool for gaining power, not a force for positive change. A true political party should be guided by values that reflect the common good and respect human rights.
As Zimbabwe approaches these important elections, the country’s morals are being tested. The idea of a convicted rapist becoming a political campaigner casts doubt on the integrity of the political scene. The big question remains: should politics follow a higher moral standard, or should practical considerations lead the way?
These upcoming elections are not just about different ideas, but about testing the nation’s commitment to ethical governance. Zimbabweans must choose whether to let the tactics of realpolitik overshadow their collective conscience or to demand a political environment that follows strong moral principles.
This situation in Zimbabwe is part of a larger global debate about the role of ethics in politics. It’s a debate that goes beyond time and place. The outcome of these elections will show if Zimbabwe is a real democracy with a moral compass, or if it will become just another example of power politics without ethical direction.