| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Makosi asylum decision has no legal legs
Zimbabwean Big Brother beauty Makosi Musambasi has been granted refugee status by the UK government -- because she fears she may be killed in Zimbabwe for her lewd behaviour on the TV programme. We asked Northern Ireland-based Zimbabwean lawyer, Khanyisela Moyo to give us her view:
By Khanyisela Moyo
ON THIS occasion I deem it proper to start by congratulating Ms Makosi Musambasi for succeeding in her immigration appeal.
The decision by the UK Asylum and Immigration Tribunal on Makosi raises serious questions relating to their adjudicating process.
Lest I be misquoted, I would like to make it clear that I had no wish to see Makosi deported; sending any Zimbabwean back to Zimbabwe, for what ever reason, at this time would be a violation of that individual’s dignity.
I am merely amazed that the tribunal swallowed the ridiculous averments made on behalf of Makosi Musambasi.
The message conveyed is that exposed breasts are a more convincing case for persecution than bodily scars.
The Fourth Edition of the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines a refugee as; “One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.”
The key words here are “war political and religious persecution”. Makosi’s case clearly cannot be said to be running away from neither a war nor political oppression as she was heard boasting of how Mugabe’s nephew Philip Chiyangwa was besotted with her. She is in the good books of the Zimbabwean equivalent of a royal family. This could be qualified by her assertions on Channel 4 News last night that she is not into politics...interpreted as a refusal to condemn the incumbent Zimbabwean administration.
In the appeal against her deportation, she stated that her fear was that if she went back to Zimbabwe she would be recognized on the streets by both children and adults who will see her as a lesbian who has violated cultural rites by wearing a bikini or even trousers. The tribunal apparently swallowed this nonsense, hook, line and sinker.
Zimbabweans who had the luxury of watching Big Brother would not be that intoleran. As for the Zimbabwean tabloid press, does anyone regard newspaper stories of her antics as anything other than entertainment?
The majority of Zimbabweans in Zimbabwe only have access to local content (A fact confirmed by Ms Musambasi on Channel 4 last night) therefore Makosi is merely a celebrity in Britain and not in her homeland. The sight of a young lady wearing trousers in Zimbabwe is not unusual. In any event, whereas sodomy is a criminal offence in Zimbabwe our legal system is silent on the legality of lesbianism.
The Tribunal seems to have imputed Robert Mugabe’s homophobic sentiments to the rest of the population, whereas to the best of my knowledge, there is no religious or cultural fundamentalism in Zimbabwe. I do not know of any Zimbabwean who has been stoned for violating a cultural norm in Zimbabwe.
Makosi could have been allowed to stay in this county for any other reason other than being accorded refugee status, and in my opinion this decision makes a mockery of the whole asylum system.
Perhaps Makosi now
has her reward for the good job she made on national TV of reinforcing
the white stereotype of young black women as both indecent and promiscuous,
and for entertaining and titillating the great British public.
JOIN THE
DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
shapiro@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website