By O'brian Munashe Gutu
In
a previous article (Cabo Delgado atrocities: A call for humanitarian
regulation, dated 16 April 2021), I
outlined the human rights violations in relation to the extremist raids and
armed conflict in Mozambique. The article was a call for international peace
keeping organizations and the Southern Africa Development Committee (SADC) in
particular to ensure human rights are protected while international
humanitarian law (IHL) is implemented in the Northern region of Palma,
Mozambique.
After
observing recent developments surrounding Zimbabwe’s long-awaited input towards
peace and stability, the Zimbabwe National Army (ZNA) is set to join South
Africa, Rwanda and Botswana troops in the neighboring country. Among other
duties, the Zimbabwean army has been tasked to train fellow armed forces of
Mozambique and to proffer strategic assistance to the Mozambican army in their bid to stop the sporadic terrorist
attacks that have led to 3,000
fatalities and the displacement of citizens in the range of 800,000 (half in
the statistics being children). It is within this sudden deployment of 304
Zimbabwe troops that this excerpt assumes weight.
Bloc commitments
Every
country owes an international duty to contribute towards world peace and
stability. Moreover, this obligation gets more compelling when the region in
which a country/member state is situated in experiences terrorist attacks. More
often than not, armed conflicts in the south of the Sahara have resulted in a spillover
effect, leading to heated military frontiers developing in neighboring states
(Nigeria and Niger – Boko Haram conflict) or concentration of sovereign defence
forces (DR Congo Civil war – Zimbabwe, South Africa, Uganda, and Rwanda took part
in the war) in solidarity to enforce law
and order (stability). Extremism in Mozambique is a cause for concern for
Zimbabwe especially on the eastern parts close to Mozambique. Understanding the
spillover effect of armed conflict of this nature, it was high time Zimbabwe,
by virtue of section 213(3) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, weighs into the
protracted military efforts.
The SADC Protocol and the Mutual Defence Pact
Signed
in 2001, the SADC Protocol on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation is a
legally binding treaty to which Zimbabwe is a party. In solidifying the
commitment, the state parties to the protocol reaffirmed their commitment
through the SADC Mutual Defence Pact with a thrust in conflict resolution.
Zimbabwe, being a party to the protocol and in terms of Section 327(1) of the
supreme law [Constitution], owes a reciprocal peace keeping duty to fellow
state members in the SADC body especially in times of hostilities such as the
one led by Al Shabab jihadists in Northern Mozambique. Article 2 of the SADC
protocol provides that, the region has a mandate to intervene whenever a conflict
arises, which conflict may lead to regional instability. However, the fundamental
international law principle of non-interference [that sovereignty is
sacrosanct) owed much to the region’s hesitance towards deployment of troops
into Mozambique. The imminence of another catastrophic attack has however led
to a mutual agreement that the SADC body assigns peacekeeping troops to ensure
law and order . Be that as it may, the ZNA deployment and fellow SADC troops
are not exempted from the guidelines of international humanitarian law in both
their functions and operations.
The role of SADC and International humanitarian law (IHL)
The
SADC Security Organ has developed more as an administrative body than a
military one since its inception in 1992. Most of its military ventures have
resulted to massive looting and pillaging of resources in the conflict zones or
host countries. While a few positives
have been noted (considering that Southern Africa is relatively a peaceful
region in Africa), there is need for military intervention that focuses on
protecting fundamental human rights during armed conflict. The Geneva
Conventions, the Hague laws and the Roman Statute [governing the International
Criminal Court] prohibit the extraction of resources in host countries.
It
is therefore imperative that the SADC body on Peace and Security ought to
operate within the confines of IHL frameworks. International customary law Rule
52 makes pillaging a punishable offence under the Roman Statute and thus, the
SADC Standby office ought to operate in a legal manner with respect for IHL in
the counter terrorism efforts in order to avoid harm to civilians, protected
public properties such as religious centers, hospitals and schools.
Conclusion
The
civil society call for intervention by SADC has been finally heed and the fact
that Zimbabwe has contributed its troops signals commitment towards a peaceful
Southern Africa. This is key in so far as upholding treaties and regional
policy is concerned since, instability in Mozambique creates a recipe for
instability in Zimbabwe.
Munashe
O’brian Gutu is a Law student at the University of Zimbabwe. He blogs in his
personal capacity.
Twitter
@barrister_gutu
FB
page : Human rights and the law with M. O Gutu
0 Comments