Zimbabwe going back in time

[Sidhe]

I'm missing all the good discussion, but I find it hilarious that using magic to hurt someone is still illegal there. That's priceless.

The magic may not work El machinae but the psychology of letting your opponent know he is cursed by powerfull magic will still work wonders in superstitious cultures. If you've seen the sort of games master psychologists can play on individuals in the west and I refer to the practitioner of the dark arts know as Derren Brown, it's very obvious that even the cleverest westerners can be made to do the most unusual things and reveal the most amazing secrets by there reactions alone, these could be considered "magic" tricks, I wouldn't mock it, headology can be powerfuly manipulative, even making people die from fear is not beyond it's remit at least in cultures where the belief is strong. I remember hearing a story of a voodoo witch doctor saying that a man would die if he ate chicken, his friend fed him chicken as a joke and told him so, the man died of a heart attack. Mindgames can be very powerful, even on the cynical westerner.

 

[Gr3yL3gion]

Lets start the inquisition!!!

 

[aneeshm]

Well, there are people in some "civilized" countries believing that some guy divided the Red sea into two parts using a stick, others that a virgin gave birth to the son of a guy they worship and call God, and some others that their "hero" have a kind of horse traveling at the light's speed who brought him to the God mentioned above. And countless believe that Jupiter and Saturn have a significant impact on their love affairs

I sometimes wonder where this perverted mentality of trying to somehow , in some mentally deficient way , trying to "balance" some ******** act committed by some group which it is politically incorrect to criticise by mentioning some perceived wrong or criticisable element in the group which it is politically correct to bash comes from . What motivates these people ( like the author of the above post ) ? It is obviously nothing positive - because this is essentially a waste of time and an attempt to get a rise out of more mature people , and adds nothing constructive to the converstaion . It also shows a tremendous immaturity and lack of understanding of the group which it is "correct" to criticise , as most of the criticisms are puerile and ill-informed . I sometimes wonder . . . . . . .

 

[HannibalBarka]

I sometimes wonder where this perverted mentality of trying to somehow , in some mentally deficient way , trying to "balance" some ******** act committed by some group which it is politically incorrect to criticise by mentioning some perceived wrong or criticisable element in the group which it is politically correct to bash comes from . What motivates these people ( like the author of the above post ) ? It is obviously nothing positive - because this is essentially a waste of time and an attempt to get a rise out of more mature people , and adds nothing constructive to the converstaion . It also shows a tremendous immaturity and lack of understanding of the group which it is "correct" to criticise , as most of the criticisms are puerile and ill-informed . I sometimes wonder . . . . . . .

while this brillant and very clear post obviously isn't a waste of time
keep wondering honey

 

[bathsheba666]

Nice try, but way off the track.

In fact, the expulsion of white farmers was almost welcomed by many people as something like "retribution" for they many sins. Like they deserved it or what.

The point is that the white farmers were farming land that had been simply expropriated from the native tribes after the country was colonised.
So, now it has been re-expropriated.

I know, two wrongs, yada-yada.

 

[Winner]

I sometimes wonder where this perverted mentality of trying to somehow , in some mentally deficient way , trying to "balance" some ******** act committed by some group which it is politically incorrect to criticise by mentioning some perceived wrong or criticisable element in the group which it is politically correct to bash comes from . What motivates these people ( like the author of the above post ) ? It is obviously nothing positive - because this is essentially a waste of time and an attempt to get a rise out of more mature people , and adds nothing constructive to the converstaion . It also shows a tremendous immaturity and lack of understanding of the group which it is "correct" to criticise , as most of the criticisms are puerile and ill-informed . I sometimes wonder . . . . . . .

 

[Winner]

The point is that the white farmers were farming land that had been simply expropriated from the native tribes after the country was colonised.
So, now it has been re-expropriated.

I know, two wrongs, yada-yada.

Funny, when Israelis use this kind of argument ("this land is ours, because we lived here first"), everybody is yelling that they can't reason their territorial claims this way. But when some black dictator expatriates descendants of white evil imperialists, it is good enough for the pseudoliberal public

Hypocrisy, tralala

 

[Bozo Erectus]

This is too insulting to even bother replying to. I'm done with this thread. Thanks for the insights into your personality and how you deal w/ people who posts things that A. you don't understand or B. don't like.

Looks like we've both revealed something then, Ive revealed that I deal with people I disagree with by asking them questions. Your way of dealing with them is making comments of a personal nature that have nothing to do with the topic, and then running away.

You could've simply asked me to elaborate, but instead, you gotta post all this crap. I'm done with this thread.

Good riddance. Dont let the door smack you in the ass on the way out.

 

[bathsheba666]

Funny, when Israelis use this kind of argument ("this land is ours, because we lived here first"), everybody is yelling that they can't reason their territorial claims this way. But when some black dictator expatriates descendants of white evil imperialists, it is good enough for the pseudoliberal public

Hypocrisy, tralala

I guess it all depends on when 'first' was. Are you referring to 2000 years ago here?

My point was aimed at Winner's comment about it being welcomed as retribution for many sins. I saw it as more specific.

The invocation of black dictators is unfortunate and unhelpful, but should there be a statute of limitation on ill-gotten gains? Should Kenny-boy's kids get his money, or should it go back to the people who were defrauded?

At what point in time does this no longer seem worthwhile?

The other perception in play in righting wrongs is the relative strengths of the protagonists. Rich white farmers in Southern African states don't naturally merit much sympathy. This can be extrapolated... ...according to political preference.

A stronger argument against the expropriations would be that the farms were not handed to worthy people, only cronies of the government.

 

[Winner]

I guess it all depends on when 'first' was. Are you referring to 2000 years ago here?

OK, how long do you have to live somewhere in order to get a legitimate claim for that land? You're saying 1400 (Arabs have been living in the present-day Israel since the 7th century I think) years is enough. On the other hand, 100 years is not.

So what about Albanians in Kosovo or Turks in Europe? Or Poles in ex-German territories? Protestants in Norther Ireland? Chinese in Taiwan? Americans in America?

I think that setting some minimum period of time you have to dwell somewhere could prove to be very tricky.

A stronger argument against the expropriations would be that the farms were not handed to worthy people, only cronies of the government.

Touché.

 

[The Last Conformist]

When the practical result of a reform is economical disaster, it seems to me that whether the reform was justified is at best of academic interest.

It's politically incorrect to criticize Mugabe? About the only national leader that gets as consistently bad press is Kim Jong-Il ...

 

[carlosMM]

This could be considered flaming.

Why would that be flaming? It is an accurate description of what these people believe, jsut not using the words they usually use.

Face it: religion often sounds ridiculous if you put the essential credos into other words. Stating that flames and insults noone in his right mind.

 

[Dionysius]

Protestants in Norther Ireland?

the only divide up there is religion and hatred.
you could argue many people up there are scottish in descent,
and many are, but scots came from ireland anyway, and picts before them.
essentially the protestant-catholic divide is being used to
keep both sides hating the other. the protestants refuse to live in a
catholic majority country, which is why they want to be a province of
britain. the catholics dont want to live in a protestant majority
country because of the prejudice against them.

READ THIS

 

[Uiler]

The responses from Westerners on this thread reminds me of how so many Westerners attack the Chinese government for repressing Christians in China but say nary a word about the much greater repression against Chinese traditional beliefs and Taoism. You know despite the fact that Christianity was at the very most a couple of % of the population at its very height and practically every single Chinese got affected by the crackdown on traditional beliefs. I see this as indictive of the prejudice in Western societies than anything else, dismissing anything which isn't something they are familiar with i.e. organised in a central authority or around a central authoritive text as "not worthy of being a religion". When they break up Christian meetings which affect at most a couple of % of the population, it is "religious oppression" and "evil". When they tear down temples and ban millenia old religious festivals that the entire population of China used to celebrate, it is "fighting against ignorance and superstition" and "the correct thing to do".

As far as I can see this is just about witchcraft not being illegal anymore (unless you hurt someone). It's known as freedom of religion guys. You know the right to practise whatever religion you like as long as you don't hurt other people. Even if said religion involves beliefs in a religion which is not based on a central authority or a central authoritive text.

Which is why more traditional religion is in Hong Kong and overseas chinese than mainland Chinese. And yes, a lot of this does involve superstition and what Westerners would call "witchcraft" though Chinese don't think that way.

 

[carlosMM]

Uiler, while I agree with you in general and on the Chinese example, I think you are too rash to just pull the 'freedom of religion' card on voodoo.

Consider please: in a society where superstition is taught by parents and preachers, 'harm' from 'witchcraft' is extremely hard to define properly. Since the government officially states that it exists, too, the general consensus is that it exists.
Now, in sucha country, wouldn't it cause psychological harm if someone told someone else he'd been witched? Can't the threat of witchcraft not be used to oppress others? Sure it can. And where do you draw the line? 'Witchcraft fence against adultery'?

Obviously, if people want to believe such nonsense, we should let them. I do not tell Christians to stop believing into nonexistent things and water turning into wine either. But state-sponsoring it, that's a step too far.

(so what if they had simply legalized voodoo practices, not voodoo? That would be, IMO, fine)

 

[Uiler]

Uiler, while I agree with you in general and on the Chinese example, I think you are too rash to just pull the 'freedom of religion' card on voodoo.

Consider please: in a society where superstition is taught by parents and preachers, 'harm' from 'witchcraft' is extremely hard to define properly. Since the government officially states that it exists, too, the general consensus is that it exists.
Now, in sucha country, wouldn't it cause psychological harm if someone told someone else he'd been witched? Can't the threat of witchcraft not be used to oppress others? Sure it can. And where do you draw the line? 'Witchcraft fence against adultery'?

Obviously, if people want to believe such nonsense, we should let them. I do not tell Christians to stop believing into nonexistent things and water turning into wine either. But state-sponsoring it, that's a step too far.

(so what if they had simply legalized voodoo practices, not voodoo? That would be, IMO, fine)

Christianity used to have the exact same problems. Have you never heard of exorcisms? Practically everything that was wrong with a person that would now be called a mental illness or disorder was blamed on demonic possession. And lots of exocisms were conducted, often very violent and sometimes resulting in the deaths of the "possessed". You can still read about groups doing this today.

And the threat, "if you do this you will in burn for all eternity" used to have quite a lot of weight in Christian societies. In fact amongst some Christian societies this phrase still does.

And many Christian societies used to believe strongly in witchcraft as well, usually as evil beings. If they didn't believe in the power of witchcraft why did they burn so many witches?

Here's an interesting fact. Many Hong Kongers and many older Chinese overseas are very superstitious. And some of these people are very very successful and very very rich and very very well integrated into modern life. They believe in things that Westerners would call witchcraft. Chinese traditional religion is "ghosts and gods". Go to a casino, and "accidentally" sweep the feet of a guy about to enter. Prepare to get beaten or screamed at "for sweeping away his luck" for the evening. Go find a middle-aged Chinese woman and say something like "I think Hong Kong will meet with a terrible disaster" and get her looking at you funnily and tell you not to say horrible things because they bring bad luck. If you say someone will die they are more likely to die and this is more dangerous on certain days of the year. Chinese mothers regularly hang good luck charms around their children's bed. My older brother was "offered" to the Goddess of Mercy and Compassion. If you go to a cemetary you should bring some iron to ward off ghosts. You shouldn't go to a cemetary on certain days. And let's not even get started on Feng Shui. Go to Macao - it's easy to tell if someone is living in an apartment. There will be lucky signs (red and gold naturally) hanging on the door and some incense and offerings. Every shop will have these and maybe some gods (Guang Yu is popular). Many street corners will have these. In Macao it is believed that SARS did not affect the city because it is protected by the goddess "A-Ma". If you know how to do it, is is extremely easy to do a lot of harm and scare Chinese by superstition alone. I've lost count the number of times I accidentally brought bad luck to the family while I was growing up by doing what I thought was completely innocuous things. Those things above are just a fraction of the mistakes I made. There is a reason why the most popular Chinese calenders by far are those which have astrological tables and fortune tables on them so people can calculate lucky days for certain things. And I haven't even gotten started on Feng Shui.

Yet, both Macao and Hong Kong are successful modern cities and Hong Kong in particular revels in high-tech.

Basically, using religion as a way to "threaten" other people by fear is not something unique to "witchcraft". Chrsitianity is perfectly capable of talking about demonic possessions and burning in hell for all eternity and it still is to scare people into line. Should we ban Christianity because it causes mental stress and fear for telling people they are going to be damned for all eternity if they don't do A and B? And there's nothing about superstitions and witchcraft which necessarily precludes you becoming an extremely successful and high-tech country/city.

The point is superstitions and witchcraft are a red herring. Zimbabwe isn't a mess *because* they believe in witchcraft but due to a lot more factors. Nor is religion even a sign of doom and gloom. Hong Kong is one of the most superstitious cities on earth and it was modern and successful while the resolutely secular mainland was starving. Hong Kong is also one of the most high-tech cities on earth. Overseas Chinese communities can be deeply superstitious, yet are very rich and successful. The US is the most strongly Christian nation in the Western world and it is the only superpower in the world. It is not quite as simple as people like to make out.

 

[carlosMM]

Christianity used to have the exact same problems.

Indeed. And now that we, as Christianity-based societies, have gotten past that, we should try to help others avoid these mistakes and their horrid consequences.

Here's an interesting fact. Many Hong Kongers and many older Chinese overseas are very superstitious. And some of these people are very very successful and very very rich and very very well integrated into modern life. They believe in things that Westerners would call witchcraft. Chinese traditional religion is "ghosts and gods". Go to a casino, and "accidentally" sweep the feet of a guy about to enter. Prepare to get beaten or screamed at "for sweeping away his luck" for the evening. Go find a middle-aged Chinese woman and say something like "I think Hong Kong will meet with a terrible disaster" and get her looking at you funnily and tell you not to say horrible things because they bring bad luck. If you say someone will die they are more likely to die and this is more dangerous on certain days of the year. Chinese mothers regularly hang good luck charms around their children's bed. My older brother was "offered" to the Goddess of Mercy and Compassion. If you go to a cemetary you should bring some iron to ward off ghosts. You shouldn't go to a cemetary on certain days. And let's not even get started on Feng Shui. Go to Macao - it's easy to tell if someone is living in an apartment. There will be lucky signs (red and gold naturally) hanging on the door and some incense and offerings. Every shop will have these and maybe some gods (Guang Yu is popular). Many street corners will have these. In Macao it is believed that SARS did not affect the city because it is protected by the goddess "A-Ma". If you know how to do it, is is extremely easy to do a lot of harm and scare Chinese by superstition alone. I've lost count the number of times I accidentally brought bad luck to the family while I was growing up by doing what I thought was completely innocuous things. Those things above are just a fraction of the mistakes I made. There is a reason why the most popular Chinese calenders by far are those which have astrological tables and fortune tables on them so people can calculate lucky days for certain things. And I haven't even gotten started on Feng Shui.

Yet, both Macao and Hong Kong are successful modern cities and Hong Kong in particular revels in high-tech.

Yup, interesting.
Still, if the guy whose luck you 'swept away' sues you, he will not get a favorbale verdict. He'll be kciked out of court instead.

Basically, using religion as a way to "threaten" other people by fear is not something unique to "witchcraft".

Indeed. And, as said above: we are past that stage. As we are past the state religion state.

The point is superstitions and witchcraft are a red herring. Zimbabwe isn't a mess *because* they believe in witchcraft but due to a lot more factors.

Who said that it was the reason? I for one didn't.

 

[Uiler]

Indeed. And now that we, as Christianity-based societies, have gotten past that, we should try to help others avoid these mistakes and their horrid consequences.

Yup, interesting.
Still, if the guy whose luck you 'swept away' sues you, he will not get a favorbale verdict. He'll be kciked out of court instead.
Indeed. And, as said above: we are past that stage. As we are past the state religion state.Who said that it was the reason? I for one didn't.

Where in the article does it say that this will work in Zimbabwe as well? Besides that one line about the government "admitting" that witchcraft works there is no support anywhere in the article by facts like quotes or lines from the actual law itself. What seems to me more than anything else is actually a sensationalised version of this news which is by the way a few months old:

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=21276&sec=39&cont=all

Harare, Zimbabwe - ZIMBABWE has outlawed the practise of witchcraft following a raft of amendments to legislation drawn up by the former colonial regime.

From July this year, witchcraft will be a criminal offence punishable by a fine or a five-year jail term, the country's Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa said.

Until President Robert Mugabe assented to the amendments last week, Zimbabwe's Witchcraft Suppression Act, a holdover from the colonial era, made it illegal to call anyone a witch, meaning nearly all cases went unreported.

The police were also powerless to act, and just recently, the country's chief police spokesman said it was next to impossible to prove that one was a witch.

"Witchcraft is not an area that lends itself to police scrutiny," said Wayne Budzijena, the Zimbabwe Republic Police spokesman. "How do you verify an evil spell? This is a matter of spiritual faith, not a matter of empirical evidence."

Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa told state media at the weekend that Part VI of Chapter V of the Witchcraft Suppression Act had been amended and the amendments would come into effect on July 1, 2006.

He said: "President Mugabe has assented to the amendments and criminals will be charged for breaching certain sections of the Act as from July this year."

The new laws make it a criminal offence to hire a witch or assist in the commission of witchcraft, but also provides protection for people "groundlessly" accused of practising witchcraft.

The 50 000-member Zimbabwe National Traditional Healers Association has been instrumental in forcing the change in law.

Gordon Chavunduka, chairman of the association said: "Witchcraft and tokoloshis (demons and their gremlin-like henchmen, ankle-high creatures) are making a comeback. It's obvious the cause is economic. The worse the economy gets, the more political tension there is in society, the more frustrated and frightened people get. They turn to witchcraft to gain riches or to hurt their enemies."

In January this year, a top High Coutrt judge urged the Zimbabwe government to ease colonial era restrictions on the practice of witchcraft.

Justice Maphios Cheda, opening the new judicial year, said: "The strongly held conviction of belief in witchcraft and traditional healers ... cannot be wished away.

"We should amend the century-old Witchcraft Suppression Act in keeping with the popular thinking and beliefs of the majority in this country."

Although many highly educated Zimbabweans tend not to believe in such phenomena, they acknowledge the belief is part of their cultural background.

"I've never seen a tokoloshi, I've never had a tokoloshi attack me, but I've heard all the stories like everyone else," said Professor Welshman Ncube, a constitutional law scholar. "I don't believe or disbelieve. It's difficult for outsiders to understand, but African daily life relies heavily on the spirit world, for good or evil."

The amended Part VI of Chapter V of the Witchcraft Suppression Act now reads: "Whoever accuses a person of witchcraft means to indicate that the person (is possessed by a spirit or) used non-natural means (witch-finding) to cause death, injury, disease or inability in any person. This also means that destruction or loss of or damage to property of any description was involved.

"Any person who engages in any practice knowing that it is commonly associated with witchcraft, shall be guilty of engaging in a practice commonly associated with witchcraft if having the intention to cause harm to any person.

"Such practice inspires in the person against whom it was directed, a real fear or belief that harm will occur to that person or any member of his or her family, and be liable to a fine not exceeding level ten or imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both."

"Spoken words shall not in themselves constitute a practice commonly associated with witchcraft for the purpose of this section, unless accompanied by or used in connection with other conduct commonly associated with witchcraft.

"For the avoidance of doubt it is declared that any person who assists another person to commit the crime of engaging in a practice commonly associated with witchcraft, by giving advice or providing any substance or article to enable that person to commit the crime, shall be liable to be charged as an accomplice to the crime.

"A court shall not take judicial notice of any practice that is said to be commonly associated with witchcraft, but any person who, in the opinion of the court, is suitably qualified to do so on account of his/her knowledge, shall be competent to give expert evidence as to whether the practice that forms the subject of a charge under this section is a practice that is commonly associated with witchcraft, whether generally or in the particular area where the practice is alleged to have taken place.

"Any person who groundlessly or by the purported use of non-natural means accuses another person of witchcraft shall be guilty of indicating a witch or wizard and liable.

"It shall not be a defence to a contravention of a subsection involving the purported use of any non-natural means for the person charged to prove that the person he/she accused actually engaged in any practice commonly associated with witchcraft, but the court may suggest such circumstance as mitigatory when assessing the sentence to be imposed."

The amendment disqualifies as defence to murder, assault or any other crime that an accused was influenced by a genuine belief that the victim was a witch or wizard and a court would only use it as mitigation.

Basically, this move was favoured by both the law courts, the police and witchcraft users because the old laws basically banned witchcraft out right. The courts favoured it because the old laws were a restriction on freedom of religion, law enforcers favoured it because how do you prove someone is a witch? If you want to persecute someone for using witchcraft for hurting someone, under the old laws it was impossible to prove someone was a witch. These laws however don't ban being a witch but using witchcraft to attempt to hurt people by taking advantage of their fears. And the witchcraft practioners favoured it because (1) it unbanned witchcraft and (2) punished those who tried to use it to hurt other people by taking advantage of their beliefs, thus making them legal and giving them good PR.

I see nowhere in the quoted legislation or from any of the quoted speakers it says the government comes out in support that witchcraft works. Note that no-one or nothing from the government in the OP of this thread says that witchcraft works either.

Basically the original article is a bit of sensationalised rubbish. In fact if anything this is one of the few reasonable and logical pieces of legisation to come out of Zimbabwe for quite a long time.

Finally a lot of people here are showing their ignorance of voodoo and witchcraft. It's good to see just who does and doesn't know anything about voodoo and witchcraft. Just because they are different and because of traditional centuries long prejudices in Western culture mean they are inherently *bad*. They can be used for good as well, just like Christianity or any other religion can be used for good or bad. It's not voodoo's fault for example that it is so popular in Hollywood horror movies. Name one religion in the world that is only used for evil. Even people who call themselves Satanists have very different beliefs that say Lucifer was the good guy and by this we mean good as in the way we normally think of as good, not evil is good thing.

 

[carlosMM]

Uiler:

From July this year, witchcraft will be a criminal offence punishable by a fine or a five-year jail term, the country's Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa said.

The impossible needn't be made an 'offense' and cannot be 'punished'.

Or what would you say about a law in Europe saying that resurrections may not occur after 10:00 p.m. in order not to disturb the neighbours?

Oh, and please cut the crap about me insinuating they are *bad*, as you put it. Yeah, people do that. Not me. I distinguish between people, religions, and acts commited in the name of religions.

 

[Uiler]

Uiler:


The impossible needn't be made an 'offense' and cannot be 'punished'.

Or what would you say about a law in Europe saying that resurrections may not occur after 10:00 p.m. in order not to disturb the neighbours?

Honestly, read the actually legislation in the article which states explicitly that the act of knowingly using witchcraft to hurt other people is what is being punished and it doesn't say it's because it works but because it is so widely believed in Zimbabwe that it works. It is punished not because it works but because it evokes the same reaction as say a credible sounding death threat would in the US because of the religious beliefs of the people of Zimbabwe. Basically the whole basis of the legislation is what people in Zimbabwe credibly believe is a threat. And to be found guilty in this legislation they have to prove that (1) the person accused knows this and (2) deliberately used this knowledge to harm the other person. It would be the same as if you knew someone was deathly afraid of water. And to take revenge on them you purposely tie them up put them in the shallow end of a swimming pool and refuse to let them leave making them cataconic with fear.

In America today if you are on a plane and deliberately threaten people with a terrorist device you will be arrested and heavily punished even if you don't have one. Not as much as if you were to actually have a bomb but because the situation and past history made it a credible threat to the victims causing a great deal of stress and you were deliberately attempting to take advantage of this fear to gain something.

The amended Part VI of Chapter V of the Witchcraft Suppression Act now reads: "Whoever accuses a person of witchcraft means to indicate that the person (is possessed by a spirit or) used non-natural means (witch-finding) to cause death, injury, disease or inability in any person. This also means that destruction or loss of or damage to property of any description was involved.

"Any person who engages in any practice knowing that it is commonly associated with witchcraft, shall be guilty of engaging in a practice commonly associated with witchcraft if having the intention to cause harm to any person.

"Such practice inspires in the person against whom it was directed, a real fear or belief that harm will occur to that person or any member of his or her family, and be liable to a fine not exceeding level ten or imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both."

"Spoken words shall not in themselves constitute a practice commonly associated with witchcraft for the purpose of this section, unless accompanied by or used in connection with other conduct commonly associated with witchcraft.

"For the avoidance of doubt it is declared that any person who assists another person to commit the crime of engaging in a practice commonly associated with witchcraft, by giving advice or providing any substance or article to enable that person to commit the crime, shall be liable to be charged as an accomplice to the crime.

"A court shall not take judicial notice of any practice that is said to be commonly associated with witchcraft, but any person who, in the opinion of the court, is suitably qualified to do so on account of his/her knowledge, shall be competent to give expert evidence as to whether the practice that forms the subject of a charge under this section is a practice that is commonly associated with witchcraft, whether generally or in the particular area where the practice is alleged to have taken place.

"Any person who groundlessly or by the purported use of non-natural means accuses another person of witchcraft shall be guilty of indicating a witch or wizard and liable.

"It shall not be a defence to a contravention of a subsection involving the purported use of any non-natural means for the person charged to prove that the person he/she accused actually engaged in any practice commonly associated with witchcraft, but the court may suggest such circumstance as mitigatory when assessing the sentence to be imposed."

Where oh where does it say anywhere that witchcraft works? It's banning the *deliberate and knowing* use of witchcraft to harm people and the punishment is not because witchcraft works but because of the mental fear and stress it causes amongst people who believe it works (which is the majority of the population of Zimbabwe) and the intention of the perpetrator to cause this fear and distress knowing full well what the reactions of his victims will be. The first bit only states for what specific damage it is believed that witchcraft caused can you even make the accusation in the first place (so you don't clog up the courts with accusations that Bob caused your hair to fall out so they can concentrate on serious cases). However it specifically states that the punishment is because "Such practice inspires in the person against whom it was directed, a real fear or belief that harm will occur to that person or any member of his or her family." with no mention of whether the witchcraft actually worked. How would you even begin to prove that the witchcraft led to the specificied damage? You can't and the legislation doesn't even pretend to try to do so. As the Zimbabwe police spokesman says in *support* of the new law, "How do you verify an evil spell? This is a matter of spiritual faith, not a matter of empirical evidence."

BTW I believe in American law as well, it is not so important whether or not you can carry through a death threat either or whether you even intend to carry through with a death threat but whether a reasonable person under the same circumstances would believe that it is a credible threat. When you get punished in America it is because of the very real fear and distress it causes the victim and whether you intended to cause this fear and distress. It's the same with this law. It's just in Zimbabwe what a normal person believes is not the same as in America. What the old colonial law did was basically deny the religious beliefs of the majority of Zimbabwes. Witchcraft cannot be something which can be used as a psycholgical weapon to cause fear and distress because it doesn't exist. Woohoo. Case closed. I imagine if any of these witchcraft cases were tried in America the perpetrators would be found guilty and for the same reason. The victims had a real fear of witchcraft, the perpetrators knew of this fear and deliberately used it to gain revenge/money. Same as any other attacker taking deliberately taking advantage of a pyschological fear. All this is doing is putting witchcraft back on the same level ground as any other credible death threat instead of going "Nah, nah. Witchcraft doesn't exist. It doesn't exist. No one believes it. I can't see anything, hear anything. It doesn't exist. No-one in Zimbabwe believes in it. Oh oh oh. Lalalah." which is what the old colonial law did. The old law effectively ruled out witchcraft and only witchcraft for the credible death threat test. If you were taking advantage of any other psychological fear or religion, yes. Witchcraft, no. And this was solely due to the prejudices of the colonial rulers. It seems though that the Zimbabwe government does want to stop witchhunts, so they keep the bit about it being illegal to accuse someone of being a witch and taking into context the previous bits of the law, this means accusing them of using witchcraft being used to cause harm, without any evidence (of them deliberately using witchcraft with the intention of causing harm). The new law also states you cannot use the real belief that witchcraft was used against you for vigilantism.

Face facts people. Africa is not America or Europe. It has its own culture, it's own unique problems, besides the common ones. And one of these realities on the ground you may not like to admit is the fact that most people in Zimbabwe and many people in Africa feel that witchcraft is real. The threat of witchcraft has a similar psychological affect as someone coming to your house and putting a gun to your head. Even if the gun is not loaded, hence it impossible to actually kill you and showing the attacker had no intention of killing you he would still go to jail for quite a while. The current laws (crafted by the British) state that using witchcraft to psychologically torture someone is perfectly legal because what to actually try them in court you have to say what they did to cause you suffering and you are not allowed to mention that they use the threat of witchcraft. Ergo, no evidence, case closed. The legal system can do absolutely nothing to stop these people. What would *you* rather they do? Continue as they did before and pretend Zimbabwe is actually the same as Britain and no-one believes in witchcraft while people go around terrorising people using their so-called non-existent religious beliefs to extort money or take revenge or change the laws so that they can't (while still protecting people from vigilantism and witch hunts). Maybe the best thing is to go and force people to change their religious beliefs, not because they are using it to hurt other people but simply because you believe it is rubbish. After all, it's only a minority of Africans who use witchcraft for evil. Most people treat it the say as most Americans treat say Christianity. And you know what that's called? Trampling on freedom of religion. Imagine if a state tried to "educate" Christians that Christianity is rubbish. Every day you go to school and the government teaches force all Christians to recite, "God does not exist. God is just superstious rubbish. I do not believe in God. I will tell the government if my parents or anyone I know is a Christian so they can be reeducated.", all Christian churches are burnt down and Bibles made illegal. Because "religion is a scourge on our society and religion rots people's brains." How much of an outcry would there be? Actually this was one of the main "evils" of Communist totalarian dictatorships. The banning of religion.