WRITTEN QUESTION P-3523/01

by Emma Bonino (NI) to the Council

(13 December 2001)

Subject: Situation in Zimbabwe

The situation in Zimbabwe is continuing to deteriorate, with an escalation being seen in the level of intimidation and threats directed at opposition parties, human rights organisations, the media and diplomatic missions of countries and international organisations accredited to Harare. Those responsible for systematically instigating the violence are the President of the Republic, Mr Mugabe, and members of his

government. During a visit by a delegation of 20 representatives of the European Union to Harare on 23 November, President Mugabe overstepped the bounds imposed by diplomatic courtesy and simple good manners by leaving the meeting room after having very bluntly refused to reply to all questions concerning the United Nations report on the exploitation of natural resources in the DRC and dismissed the proposal to send observers to the forthcoming presidential elections.

What measures does the European Union, and in particular the Council, intend to take to step up the political dialogue provided for under Article 96 of the Cotonou agreement with a view to defending, in a concrete way, democratic principles and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms in Zimbabwe, as well as safeguarding the prestige and dignity of European institutions?

Does the Council not consider that the time is ripe to consider, jointly with the United States and other countries, urgently imposing targeted sanctions directed personally at the President, members of his government and their families such as the withdrawal of visas and residence permits and any other measures which would not have a negative impact on the civilian population?

Reply

(25/26 March 2002)

The European Union is deeply concerned about the poor human rights situation in Zimbabwe, in particular since early 2000 and about the prevailing climate of violence and intimidation and the apparent impunity with which crimes have been and continue being perpetrated. The harassment of the opposition, especially in the run up to the presidential elections scheduled for 9 and 10 March 2002, the intimidation of the judiciary, limitations to the right to freedom of expression for all, including the press and illegal farm occupations are also a matter of deep concern.

In the light of the provisions on respect of human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law contained in Art. 9 (2) of the Cotonou Agreement, and pursuant to Art. 96 of that Agreement, the entering into consultations with Zimbabwe and the ACP party was decided on 29 October 2001.

The consultations took place on 11 January 2002 with the participation of a number of SADC countries which play an important role in the process.

In concluding the meeting, the EU outlined the areas in which the Zimbabwean authorities expressed a willingness to go some way towards meeting the EU concerns with concrete actions. The EU announced, however, that it was not satisfied and asked the Zimbabwean Government to send a letter to the President of the Council of the EU, within a week, detailing its actions on all points covered by the discussion. The EU insisted in particular on an invitation and accreditation of international observers, including from the EU, at least six weeks before the elections and on full access to national and international media. The EU Heads of Mission in Harare were invited to report urgently on the progress made in view of an assessment by the GAC on 28 January 2002.

The General Affairs Council of 28 January 2002 expressed its serious concern about the situation in Zimbabwe, in particular the recent escalation of violence and intimidation of political opponents and the harassment of the independent press. It noted that the Government of Zimbabwe has not taken effective measures to improve the situation as called for by the European Council in Laeken last December.

The Council deplored the statement by the Chief of the armed forces of Zimbabwe, General Vitalis Zvinavashe, on 9 January 2002, as a threat to overturn the democratic process if military commanders did not agree with the result of the Presidential elections.

The Council expressed serious concern about recent legislation in Zimbabwe which, if enforced, would seriously infringe on the right to freedom of speech, assembly and

association, mainly the Public Order and Security Act and the General Laws Amendment Act (both of which violate the norms and standards for free and fair elections as agreed by SADC Parliamentarians in March 2001) and the proposed legislation to regulate the media.

The Council took note of the assurances given by Zimbabwe at the consultations on 11 January and confirmed in the letter from Foreign Minister Mudenge of 18 January 2002 that the Government of Zimbabwe will i. a. do its utmost to stop violence, that the elections will be free and fair, that international election observers including those of EU Member States will be invited, that national and international Journalists will be allowed to cover the elections, that the Government of Zimbabwe upholds the independence of the judiciary and that there will be no more occupation of farms or properties. The Council however remains concerned that serious violations of human rights continue to occur and that little progress has been made in allowing access for international election observers and for media. The Council underlined that the Government of Zimbabwe is judged by its actions on the ground.

The Council will continue to co-ordinate with international partners, especially the SADC partner countries of Zimbabwe.

The EU concludes that the essential elements defined in Article 9 of the Cotonou Agreement are not being respected. It regrets that despite all efforts so far, the Article 96 consultations have not remedied this situation.

Therefore the EU has decided it will close the Article 96 consultations and implement targeted sanctions if:

- the Government of Zimbabwe prevents the deployment of an EU observation mission starting by 3 February 2002, or if it later prevents the mission from operating effectively. Likewise, if the Government of Zimbabwe prevents the international media from having free access to cover the election; or

- there is a serious deterioration in the situation on the ground, in terms of a worsening of the human rights' situation or attacks on the opposition; or

- the election is assessed as not being free and fair.