IN recent weeks, Zimbabwe’s roads, particularly in urban centres such as Harare, have become sites of confrontation, chaos, and, in some cases, tragedy.
The intensifying crackdown by the Zimbabwe Republic Police on unregistered vehicles and informal transport operators, commonly known as mushikashika, has raised serious questions about the nature of law enforcement in the country.
What is being framed as a necessary response to lawlessness is increasingly taking the form of dangerous, high-risk encounters between police officers and drivers. Officers have been seen chasing moving vehicles, clinging onto cars in motion, smashing windows, and forcing drivers into abrupt and often reckless manoeuvres. These actions are not taking place in controlled environments but are unfolding on busy roads, in densely populated areas, and in full view of the public.
The consequences have been predictable and devastating. Accidents have occurred. Passengers have been injured. Lives have been lost.
This moment demands more than reactive commentary. It requires a deeper interrogation of a fundamental question: what does it mean to enforce the law, and at what point does enforcement itself become unlawful or even deadly?
Legitimacy of law vs enforcement
Keep Reading
- Harare businesswoman turns heat on police CCU over 'bias'
- Letter to my people: Criminals are hiding in plain sight
- 5 Zim cops off to South Sudan
- Crime tech: Technology can eradicate corruption
There is no dispute that illegal transport operators pose real challenges. Unregistered vehicles, unlicensed drivers, and unregulated operations create risks not only for passengers, but for the broader public.
The state has a legitimate interest and indeed a duty to regulate the transport sector in the interest of safety, order, and accountability.
However, the legitimacy of the law does not automatically translate into the legitimacy of how that law is enforced.
Law enforcement is not simply about compliance; it is about method, proportionality, and accountability. When enforcement methods endanger the very lives they are meant to protect, the state risks undermining its own authority. The law begins to appear not as a system of order, but as a source of fear and instability.
What is currently unfolding on Zimbabwe’s roads suggests a troubling shift from enforcement as a protective function to enforcement as a performative and, at times, violent display of control.
Public safety risk
One of the most concerning aspects of the current crackdown is the way it is being carried out.
High-speed pursuits in congested urban spaces, physical confrontations with moving vehicles, and the use of force in unpredictable environments all point to a disregard for basic principles of public safety.
Policing, at its core, is meant to reduce harm. Yet in these instances, it is arguably producing harm.
A police officer jumping onto a moving vehicle or striking a driver mid-motion does not simply target the alleged offender. It places passengers, pedestrians, and other road users at immediate risk. A driver attempting to evade arrest under such conditions may panic, lose control, or make split-second decisions that have irreversible consequences.
The result is a chain reaction of danger, where enforcement becomes indistinguishable from the threat it seeks to eliminate.
The shadow of corruption
Any honest analysis of this issue must also confront a long-standing and deeply-embedded reality: the relationship between traffic enforcement and corruption.
For years, interactions between informal transport operators and law enforcement officials have often been shaped by informal payments.
Roadblocks have, in many instances, become sites of negotiation rather than regulation. Compliance has been less about adherence to the law and more about the ability to pay.
In this context, the current aggressive enforcement measures raise uncomfortable questions. Are these actions a genuine attempt to restore order, or are they part of a shifting landscape in which control over informal revenue streams is being renegotiated?
For many citizens, the line between enforcement and extortion remains blurred.
This perception matters. The effectiveness of law enforcement depends not only on power, but on legitimacy. When the public views enforcement as selective, inconsistent, or self-serving, trust erodes. And without trust, compliance becomes fragile, temporary, and often coerced.
The political economy of informality
It is also important to ask why informal transport systems exist in the first place.
In Zimbabwe, the rise of mushikashika is not simply a story of lawlessness. It is a story of necessity.
The collapse or inadequacy of formal public transport systems has left a gap that informal operators have stepped in to fill. For many citizens, these services are not optional; they are essential.
People use informal transport to get to work, to access healthcare, to take children to school.
For drivers, it is often one of the few available livelihood options in an economy characterised by high unemployment and limited formal opportunities.
Criminalising this system without addressing the structural conditions that sustain it is not a solution, it is a displacement of the problem.
When enforcement focuses solely on the symptoms, it leaves the underlying causes intact. The result is a cycle of crackdowns, evasion, and re-emergence, with increasing levels of risk and instability.
The human cost
Lost in the language of “unlicensed drivers” and “enforcement operations” are the human beings at the centre of this crisis.
Passengers who board these vehicles are not criminals. They are commuters navigating a broken system.
Drivers are not abstract violators of the law. They are individuals trying to earn a living, often in the absence of viable alternatives. When enforcement turns violent, it is these individuals who bear the cost.
Injuries sustained during chases, accidents caused by panic, and deaths resulting from reckless confrontations are not collateral damage but direct consequences of policy choices and enforcement practices.
A system that claims to uphold the law cannot afford to treat human life as expendable.
Is this the way to enforce the law?
This brings us back to the central question: is this the right way to enforce the law?
The answer, increasingly, appears to be no. Effective law enforcement must be guided by principles of proportionality, necessity, and reasonableness. It must minimise harm, not amplify it. It must build public confidence, not erode it.
There are alternative approaches that prioritise safety and sustainability over confrontation.
For example, enforcement could focus on stationary checks rather than high-speed pursuits. Technology could be used to identify and track non-compliant vehicles without immediate physical confrontation. Clear protocols could be established to ensure that officers do not engage in actions that put lives at risk.
Full article on www.theindependent.co.zw
Mutowekuziva–Mafa is a legal practitioner and social justice advocate specialising in climate justice and extractives. With an LLB and Masters of Law of Land and Natural Resources from the University of Zimbabwe, she empowers African communities and promotes sustainable development through expertise in natural resource governance, transparency and accountability.These New Horizon – a weekly column published in the Zimbabwe Independent, coordinated by Lovemore Kadenge, an independent consultant, managing consultant of Zawale Consultants (Private) Limited, past president of the Zimbabwe Economics Society (ZES) and past president of the Chartered Governance & Accountancy Institute in Zimbabwe (CGAIZ). Email -kadenge.zes@gmail.com or Mobile No. +263 772 382 852
At the same time, enforcement must be accompanied by broader reforms.
Towards a more balanced approach
A meaningful response to the challenges of informal transport operators requires a shift from a purely punitive model to a more balanced and integrated approach.
First, there must be accountability within law enforcement institutions. Allegations of corruption, abuse of power, and unsafe practices must be taken seriously and addressed transparently. Without this, any enforcement effort will continue to lack credibility.
Second, the state must invest in reliable and accessible public transport systems. As long as there is a gap, informal operators will continue to fill it. The question is whether this happens in a regulated and safer way, or in a criminalised and chaotic environment.
Third, there is a need to create pathways for regularisation. Not all informal operators are unwilling to comply with the law; many are simply unable to meet existing requirements that are often prohibitive. Simplified licensing processes, affordable compliance mechanisms, and inclusive policy frameworks could bring more actors into the formal system.
Finally, there must be a shift in how the state views informality itself. Rather than treating it solely as a problem to be eliminated, it should be understood as a reality to be managed and integrated into the broader economic framework.
Law, order, and responsibility
The current situation on Zimbabwe’s roads is not just about unlicensed drivers or police overreach. It is about the broader relationship between the state and its citizens, and the ways in which power is exercised in everyday life.
Law enforcement is necessary. Regulation is necessary. But neither can come at the cost of human life. If the enforcement of the law creates conditions that are as dangerous as the violations it seeks to address, then something has gone fundamentally wrong. Zimbabwe does not need a war on its roads. It needs a system that works — one that is fair, accountable, and grounded in the realities of its people.
Until then, the question will remain: who is really being protected, and at what cost?
Mutowekuziva–Mafa is a legal practitioner and social justice advocate specialising in climate justice and extractives. With an LLB and Masters of Law of Land and Natural Resources from the University of Zimbabwe, she empowers African communities and promotes sustainable development through expertise in natural resource governance, transparency and accountability.These New Horizon – a weekly column published in the Zimbabwe Independent, coordinated by Lovemore Kadenge, an independent consultant, managing consultant of Zawale Consultants (Private) Limited, past president of the Zimbabwe Economics Society (ZES) and past president of the Chartered Governance & Accountancy Institute in Zimbabwe (CGAIZ). Email -kadenge.zes@gmail.com or Mobile No. +263 772 382 852