Telling it how it isn't

Peter Chingoka: an eloquent defence of his board's conduct © Getty Images

In the latest issue of The Wisden Cricketer, Peter Chingoka, the Zimbabwe Cricket Union's chairman, makes an eloquent defence of his board's conduct and handling of cricket inside Zimbabwe. But, as is the case with most public bodies in Zimbabwe, what is painted as fact often pays only lip service to the truth.

Those who have met Chingoka agree that he is a reasonable and pleasant man. He played cricket to a good standard, albeit with very limited opportunity under the old white regime in southern Africa, and he represents the respectable face of the ZCU. But of late he has increasingly peddled the party line, and adopted the style of his government.

The two main issues he addresses are biased reporting of the situation in Zimbabwe, and the racial divide.

First the reporting. The fundamental strategies of Robert Mugabe's media machine are denial and accusation. Deny (and often ridicule) what you are being accused of, and then launch into a stinging counterattack claiming that comments are based on racist thinking or a plot to overthrow the regime. And that is just what Chingoka has done.

He claims that the ZCU has been labelled by "sections of the British media of being a politically influenced organisation" and that "some of its directors, notably Ozais Bvute and Macsood Ebrahim, have been typecast by journalists as hard-liners with dark agendas... on the basis of other people's views rather than first-hand evidence".

The ZCU is a politically influenced organisation, but in a totalitarian state where every aspect of life is tainted with the touch of the ruling Zanu-PF party that is inevitable. The surprise is that it retained a large degree of self-autonomy for so long. It has political appointees - for example, Bvute, imposed on the board by the government and, according to many sources, the eyes and ears of Jonathan Moyo, the information minister.

Chingoka tries to discredit the accusations by stating that the media's comments are not based on first-hand evidence. That might be because first-hand evidence is almost impossible to come by, as many foreign journalists - including anyone from the BBC - are banned from Zimbabwe. Last month, two experienced cricket writers - the Daily Telegraph's Mihir Bose and Telford Vice of Reuters - were expelled because, when the two of them arrived to cover the one-dayers against Sri Lanka, the ZCU decided that their accreditation was incomplete. Bose insisted that it wasn't; the Zimbabwe government countered with a claim that it had evidence that he was up to no good, but has been unable to supply a shred of proof to support their stance. This is a far from isolated example.

The instigator of the repeated attacks on press freedom is Moyo - who this week was forced to abandon a speech in neighbouring Mozambique after being heckled by local journalists protesting against his draconian policies. He has closed all opposition newspapers within Zimbabwe, against his own Supreme Court's rulings, and seeks to stifle any attempts to report the truth. Last week he declared war on the media, describing them as "terrorists of the pen". The ZCU, by means of its accreditation process, acts as the implementer of Moyo's policy.

Despite this, many within Zimbabwe continue to speak their minds. Often, understandably, they ask not to be named, as reprisals against individuals, families, and property are also hallmarks of the Mugabe regime. But because their comments are not attributed, it doesn't make them less truthful or effective.

The second issue is that of racism within the ZCU. To make it clear, I do not believe that the ZCU is a racist organisation. But I do believe that it is determined, at the behest of its political masters, to stamp out any opposition to Mugabe. It so happens that the majority of whites remaining in Zimbabwe are opposed to the regime, but so are a majority of blacks and Asians as well. The white players are an easy - and identifiable - target. Were the board to discriminate against players because they opposed the government, then it would be rapidly ostracised by the international community. But by claiming it is singling out those with "mischievous" racist agendas (Chingoka's description), it hides behind the colour card and hopes to escape criticism. As the Australian journalist Gideon Haigh said earlier this week: "The ZCU has brought politics into cricket. Imagine if the German soccer team decided it was only going to pick Aryans."

For evidence that the policy is concerned with eradicating opposition, one needs look no further than Zimbabwe's two leading club sides - Universal (Ebrahim's club) and Takashinga (allied to Steve Mangongo, the chairman of selectors). To quote Bose, writing in the Daily Telegraph: "In the last two years both Ebrahim and Mangongo have used their power to make it clear that if you play for their clubs you stand a better chance of playing for Zimbabwe. And although the government-controlled media have tried to present the Streak rebellion as whites seeking to maintain their power, blacks who do not belong to Universal and Takashinga have also suffered."

Chingoka also repeats a claim he has made several times before in his article: "The current board includes four white, four black and four Asian directors ... with such a diverse mixture of ethnic and cultural backgrounds it is difficult to see how the board can be accused of being made up of so-called `political appointees'."

Nobody disputes that the ethnic balance is right - indeed, there are far too few black members, given that whites and Asians account for less than 1% of the population. But the power within the ZCU is not evenly proportioned and lies entirely with two or three key individuals ... which brings me back to Messrs Bvute and Ebrahim. One witness to the key meeting where the decision was taken to fire Heath Streak said: "Ebrahim and Bvute were basically out of their trees ... they shouted down Chingoka when he tried to say they should discuss Streak's concerns." The timing of Monday's decision to sack the rebel players, who had just agreed to the board's demand for mediation, indicated that the hard-liners had won the battle for control of the ZCU. The last thing that they wanted was the white players back in the side, and so they rushed through the sackings. That was the main issue during Bvute's well-publicised confrontation with Mangongo.

Chingoka adds that Vince Hogg, a white former player, is chief executive of the ZCU. Not since Paul Hindenburg was German Chancellor under Adolf Hitler has a position been so marginalised. Last month, Hogg agreed to concessions with the rebels to try and give time for a solution to be brokered, only for Bvute to overrule him. Bvute is, nominally, junior to Hogg. There are numerous instances from sufficiently varied sources to make them entirely credible - reporting racial and political comments by certain board members. Those who have left Zimbabwe are even more outspoken. Henry Olonga, he of the black-armband protest, said: "Bvute has somehow accumulated more power than his office allows him, because he is well connected with influential people in Mugabe's ruling party."

It is also worth noting that Mangongo has no first-class playing experience but is a qualified coach. Ebrahim and Bvute's claims are even more tenuous, with neither having any identifiable skill in relation to the game. Their abilities and value lie elsewhere.

Chingoka's article ends with a mention of the good work being done by the ZCU to try to foster the game among the young, with the appointment of 80 full-time coaches to take the game into schools across the country. The efforts of the ZCU at grass-roots level are to be commended. If only it had retained its principles - and a love of the game - in its other dealings.