Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:52:09 +0200 (MET DST) From: skolander@bahnhof.se (Bjoern Skolander) Subject: REPORT AUGUST 1, 1996 FROM HARARE REPORT AUGUST 1, 1996 FROM HARARE, Report nr 5 by Mai Palmberg, co-author of the report "Human Rights and Homosexuality in Southern Africa" VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY-VICTORY *********************************************************************** Galz came to their book stand this morning, Thursday, two hours after the Zimbabwe International Book Fair opened to the public (after two days for traders in the book business). Their stand had already been given to a late-comer, but since Galz had paid they were given their rightful stand. Galz did not, however, bring any material. When the Galz spokesman Keith Goddard appeared in the stand, the press and a crowd of people assembled around the stand so that you could not see the small man. (I haven't seen such a mass media crowd since I saw Winnie Mandela come to the South African parliament). With Keith Godard were some other members of Galz, including at least two black gay activists. The High Court yesterday ruled the government prohibition order on Galz putting up a stand and exhibiting material invalid. The government has appealed to the Supreme Court to have this overturned. If they succeed it must be because of political pressure or considerations, because the government is referring in its appeal to the very censorship laws that the High Court ruled that could not be the basis of an order to bar Galz from participating. One does not have to be a lawyer to realise that it is absurd to censure something that you have not seen. As it is now, Galz has occupied their stand, but does not exhibit material. They had intended to bring some few pamphlets on homosexuality, including one written by a Catholic bishop. It would have been interesting to see thisCatholic material served with a government prohibition order. Many other publishers have brought literature on homosexuality, which makes the censorship exercize a bit silly. It would be difficult for the government to ban material brought by foreign publishers, if it does not contain insulting or inciting material on the Zimbabwean government and president. The effect so far of the Galz affair is an enormous publicity for Galz, and also quite a lot of sympathy for that little group. As I am writing this, the Galz stand is a vigorous discussion point, where people assemble to ask questions of Galz and argue with them. No other stand is getting this kind of crowd. Many Zimbabweans are genuinely curious and want to know who they are and why they are homosexuals etc. The violence from students that has been feared has not so far materialised. I doubt that it will. The student demonstration on Wednesday was definitely not about Galz, but about bread and butter issues for the students, whose fees go up while loans dwindle in value and in many cases have not been paid out. The particularly vicious riot police has been set in against the students (both from the university and the college of technology), tear gas has been used, and in one instance tear gas was shot into a women's dormitory. The students unions at both institutes for higher education have passed resolutions against Galz and the book fair management, but at least one of the groups felt they more or less had to pass these resolutions, but they were not going to take any action. One can ask - as some students do - why the government uses riot police against students and arrests some of their leaders, while in the Galz issue they have not arrested Galz leaders, nor have they banned Galz as an organisation. My interpretation of the situation is that the government knows very well that GALZ are not a threat to them or the country, they are a small group, but after last year's book fair drama it would be unwise to ban them. The students, however, are a threat, they are many more, and whereas Zimbabwe can see themselves as living happily without homosexuals they cannot live without students. The Galz issue at the book fair is a matter of prestige for the government and president of the country, and the verbal gay-bashing has been a scapegoat for whipping up political support for the ruling party at a time when common people are suffering from rising costs and lesser services, low prices for their crops and growing and glaring disparities between the few rich and the many poor. It is very moving to see the number of Zimbabweans, among them many young people, pour into the book fair to look at all the books - despite the fact that prices are far too high for ordinary people. It is also moving to see that many people are taking the opportunity to seek information from Galz - the very information that is needed to combat ignorance. In some international mass media there has been much talk about the threat of violence. While fears have been there because of the violent verbal attacks on gays from one organisation, Sangoma Monomotapa, by an expelled student, Chakeredza,the fact of the matter is that the book fair is heavily guarded by police and security guards, and rioting cannot easily take place in the book fair itself. There can still be demonstrations outside the grounds, but demonstrations is not the same as violence. My reading of the situation is that the attempts to whip up agression against Galz and the book fair have failed. In some mass media (the Swedish radio August 1 in a report filed from Cape Town) a participant in the book fair has been quoted as saying that this is like in Hitler's Germany.The report also said that this might be the last book fair in Zimbabwe. I think the comparison is misleading. There is no comparison at all to Hitler's annihilation policies against Jews and homosexuals - all attacks on gays (except one instance last year when a gay black's home was burnt down) have been verbal, and the state apparatus has not been put into force to round up and arrest homosexuals. The government has behaved in a very authoritarian manner, but Zimbabwe is not like Hitler's totalitarian state. Without the book fair an immportant meeting place and source of many-sided knowledge would be lost. Only the authoritarian elements in the ruling party could rejoice in that eventuality. Mai Palmberg