Do animals matter more than people?— MPs question Zimbabwe’s wildlife laws 

Members of Parliament have raised concern over Zimbabwe’s wildlife protection laws, questioning whether they prioritise animals over human safety and livelihoods as cases of human-wildlife conflict continue to claim lives.

The issue came under discussion in Parliament on Wednesday last week when MP Elizabeth Masuku asked the Minister of Environment about the government’s policy on the co-existence of people and wild animals, citing incidents in Hwange and Tsholotsho.

“Since a lot of people are being killed by these animals,” she said, “what is the government doing to protect communities living near wildlife areas?”

The Parks and Wildlife Management Bill, Clause 9 Part IIC (161)(1), provides for a Human-Wildlife Conflict Relief Fund (HWCRF), intended to offer monetary relief to victims of wildlife encounters that result in death, permanent disability, or physical injury.

However, Section 161(2) stipulates that no person shall be entitled to such relief if they are injured, maimed, or killed while illegally harvesting or negligently interfering with wild animals.

Responding to the concerns, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Ziyambi Ziyambi, said policies are in place to manage coexistence between humans and wildlife within their respective territories.

“We have a policy. However, once in a while, you cannot control animals crossing into areas where people live,” he said. “In those circumstances, our Parks and Wildlife personnel are called in to ensure that they either put down the animals or take them back.”

He added: “We have a policy where animals stay in their game parks. If an animal strays and becomes dangerous to the inhabitants of that area, Parks officials will come and put that animal down. However, we must also co-exist with our wild animals, in their space and in ours.”

Contributing to the debate, MP Shakespear Hamauswa criticised the legal framework for what he described as a lack of fairness, arguing that the laws appear to protect animals more than people.

“Why has the government not put in place a law that says when a person kills or injures a wild animal, that person is severely sentenced, yet, on the other hand, when a wild animal attacks a human being, there is no compensation for the humans?” he asked.

 

“I have indicated in my earlier response that when an animal strays and becomes dangerous to human beings, many times Parks and Wildlife personnel put it down rather than take it back to its original habitat,” he said. “It is not correct to say that the law favours animals over human beings. The animals are being put down, and human beings must also act responsibly around wildlife.”