In recent times, the world has watched in astonishment as Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa makes decisions that disregard principles of merit, good governance, and ethical leadership. Mnangagwa’s actions have shocked many, as he fills key government positions with close relatives, friends, and allies, raising serious concerns about the future of Zimbabwe’s governance.

Mnangagwa’s nepotism is clear with the appointment of his son, Kudakwashe Mnangagwa, as the Deputy Finance Minister, and his brother’s son, Tongai Mnangagwa, as the Tourism Deputy Minister. These roles are crucial for the country’s progress, but these appointees have no notable qualifications or track records to justify their positions. This trend extends beyond his immediate family to include many clan members and associates in significant government roles.

One glaring example is the appointment of Cabinet Secretary Misheck Sibanda, initially appointed by the late former President Robert Mugabe. This continuation of the old guard shows that the cabinet operates more like a close-knit circle of relatives, friends, and political allies, all bound by their clan ties.

When comparing Mnangagwa to his predecessor, Robert Mugabe, it is clear that the level of nepotism has grown significantly. Mugabe, despite his flaws, rarely appointed his relatives to key positions, except for a few instances towards the end of his career. In contrast, Mnangagwa’s appointments are numerous and blatantly nepotistic.

The potential impact of this nepotism on Zimbabwe’s governance and service delivery is alarming. The President should be professionalizing government institutions to ensure efficient service delivery for the benefit of citizens. Instead, Mnangagwa has turned public service into a family affair, raising concerns about competence, transparency, and accountability.

This form of favoritism raises critical questions about meritocracy, corruption, governance, leadership succession, and the rise of family dynasties in Zimbabwean politics. It also reflects poorly on Mnangagwa’s ethical standing as a leader.

While some may argue that as long as the appointees are qualified, nepotism may not be an issue, the reality remains that the President or another official makes the final decision. This discretion opens the door to potential nepotism, even when qualifications are used as a facade to justify such appointments.

The history of dictators and their tendency to place family members in high-ranking government positions is well-documented. Many tyrants aim to establish dynasties that last for generations, often at the cost of their countries’ progress and development.

To counter such practices, some countries have laws prohibiting the appointment of relatives to government positions. The United States, for instance, has an anti-nepotism law from 1967 that bars government officials from hiring family members within their own agencies. Zimbabwe could benefit from similar laws or guidelines to curb nepotism in public service.

Mnangagwa’s blatant nepotism is a grave concern for Zimbabwe and its citizens. It threatens the principles of meritocracy, good governance, and ethical leadership that are essential for the nation’s progress. To safeguard Zimbabwe’s future, it is crucial to address and rectify this issue, whether through legal reforms or a collective commitment to uphold the highest standards of public service. The destructive consequences of nepotism and other harmful practices have already hurt the country, making it essential to move towards a more just and transparent government.