LAST week was one of the City of Harare's most difficult in recent memory. Within days, the local authority lurched from one public relations crisis to another, exposing deeper questions about the conduct of its enforcement officers and the city's commitment to accountability.

The first incident involved parking marshals from the city's parking management unit, City Parking, who clamped a vehicle as a woman was rushing her sick baby to a clinic. The public outrage that followed forced the city to apologise for "the trauma caused to the mother, her family and all residents of Harare", while promising investigations and "appropriate measures".

Barely a day later, another controversy erupted after a video circulated on social media showing a municipal police officer slapping a woman inside a banking hall.

Rather than immediately condemning the assault, the city sought to explain the circumstances surrounding the altercation, saying the woman had bitten the officer's finger before the incident captured on video. It argued that the circulating footage had been edited and did not show the earlier confrontation. Only on Saturday did the city announce that the officer had been suspended pending a disciplinary hearing.

The two incidents have cast an uncomfortable spotlight on the other face of municipal enforcement.

Whether or not the city's account of events is accurate is almost beside the point. Even if the officer was provoked, the central issue remains unchanged: a municipal police officer struck a civilian.

Keep Reading

Municipal police exist to maintain public order, not become agents of disorder. When an officer resorts to violence, the institution he represents shares responsibility. By placing significant emphasis on the woman's alleged conduct, the city's response risked appearing more concerned with managing public outrage than confronting misconduct within its ranks.

Residents were not looking for a detailed reconstruction of who provoked whom. They wanted assurance that the City of Harare would uphold professional standards and hold its officers accountable.

The timing makes the matter even more significant. The city is currently engaging the government in a bid to secure arrest powers for its municipal police. Such powers demand a high degree of professionalism, restraint and public confidence. Yet complaints about aggressive behaviour by municipal police officers and parking marshals are hardly new. Vendors have long accused municipal officers of excessive force during enforcement operations, while motorists frequently complain of intimidation when questioning officials' actions.

These latest incidents reinforce the urgent need for comprehensive retraining, particularly in conflict management, de-escalation and public engagement. Enforcement officers must understand that authority is exercised through professionalism, not intimidation.

More importantly, accountability cannot depend on a viral video. The fact that public action followed only after footage circulated widely suggests a system that reacts to public pressure rather than one capable of policing itself.

The City of Harare now owes residents more than carefully worded statements. It should publicly outline the reforms it intends to implement, including mandatory de-escalation training, stronger supervision of enforcement officers, transparent complaint-handling procedures and the publication of disciplinary outcomes in cases involving misconduct.

Public trust is earned not through apologies, but through demonstrable change.

The city must own this moment without qualification or excuses. Residents deserve enforcement officers who protect, not intimidate; who exercise authority with restraint, not force. Unless Harare demonstrates meaningful reform, these incidents will not be remembered as isolated lapses but as symptoms of a culture that has gone unchecked for far too long.