Dear Crime Watch Zimbabwe, I am writing as an employee of Richmark Zimbabwe, which is Chinese-owned company contracted by Prospect Lithium Zimbabwe (PLZ). I kindly request that my identity be kept strictly confidential because employees fear victimisation and retaliation.
I wish to bring to your attention serious health and safety concerns affecting excavator operators at the mine. One of the excavators currently in operation has a broken front windscreen, yet the company has shown no intention of repairing it. Operators are being instructed to continue working despite being directly exposed to large amounts of lithium dust and other hazardous mining conditions.
Whenever workers raise concerns about these unsafe conditions, management reportedly responds by telling employees that if they are not satisfied, they are free to leave. This creates an environment where workers are afraid to speak out while their health and safety are being compromised.
What is particularly disturbing is that officials from the Ministry of Mines visited the site yesterday. However, instead of thoroughly investigating the conditions faced by workers, they appeared more interested in taking photographs and selfies inside the pit. Meanwhile, the dangerous conditions affecting employees continue unchecked.
We appeal for urgent intervention and an independent investigation into these workplace conditions before lives are put at risk. Workers deserve safe equipment, proper protection, and fair treatment regardless of who owns or manages the company.
Please keep my identity confidential for my own safety.
Concerned Employee,
Richmark Zimbabwe
There were only three straight red cards in the 2018 World Cup and 2022 World Cup combined.
We've just had three in the space of 43 minutes. 🤯
https://t.co/HwemfzarrG
Chamisa loyal MPs are fighting CAB3 In Parliament, they are clear they don't want it to pass. Why are Chiwenga loyal MPs from ZANU PF not fighting CAB3 in Parliament? Ko iye Chiwenga kungomuka 1 day obva ati pasi ne CAB3?
The Constitution is not a mere relationship between the governors and the governed; it is, more fundamentally, a relationship between governance and the governed. It is not a text held at the disposal of those who happen, for the time being, to occupy office. Rather, it is the normative architecture of our democratic order: the legal and political framework that defines the social contract and delineates what the people are entitled to expect from the state, as opposed to what they must expect from the temporary holders of state power.
It follows, therefore, that any claim by temporary office-holders to possess dominion over the Constitution, or to treat it as an instrument subject to their will, is constitutionally impermissible. Those who exercise temporary public power do not stand above the Constitution, nor do they derive from it a licence to convert it into a mechanism for the consolidation of authority. They are instead bound to use it as the measure of their duties, the limit of their powers, and the standard by which their conduct is judged.
The constitutional difficulty with CAB3 lies precisely in this inversion. It displaces the primacy of the governed and recasts the Constitution from a charter of public accountability into a reservoir of advantages to be harvested by those in temporary office. In doing so, it distorts the constitutional order: it transforms a system designed to secure the expectations of the people into one that privileges the immediate interests of transient rulers.
In constitutional jurisprudence, that inversion cannot be sustained. A Constitution is not the possession of power; it is its restraint.
See it the right way!
GET YOUR HEADS EXAMINED…Some people really amaze me.
Do you honestly believe that if the Chamisa you constantly gaslight and vilify had agreed to be co-opted by ED, there would have been any need to hire that Chabangu as the manufactured face of a government-sponsored opposition?
Do you think they would have needed CAB3 to deal with the fallout from a disputed presidential election? Would CAB3 have been necessary?
Do you think they would have spent billions in taxpayers' money buying off individuals, organizations, and institutions, including some within the region, to discredit and destroy the very person they were supposedly working with? Why spend billions of taxpayers' dollars buying influence, recruiting allies, mobilizing institutions and giving cars, to destroy the credibility of someone who was supposedly on your side?
Why would an ally cause you sleepless nights.
Give us a break! Kwanai! Miswai! The logic simply does not add up. If someone is part of your project, you do not expend enormous resources undermining, isolating, and dismantling them. You do not wage a sustained campaign against an ally. The very existence of these efforts points to entrenched animosity.
We’re chalk and cheese, oil and water. We can’t mix! And I’m proud of that record! #TheNew
I think heartbreak is having an opposition MP whom you actually spent the night waiting for ballot papers to arrive to vote for , standing tall in Parliament saying CAB3 Bho Zvekuti😭😭. But mother ….