Page 1 of 15

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 07

August 2015

Available online: http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/ P a g e | 534

Unveiling the Controversies; anAnalysis of the Causes of Conflicts

between Communities and Local Authorities in Zimbabwe: A Case of

Binga Rural District Council.

Quegas Mutale1 Abednico Siambombe2

1Corresponding author; Student, Midlands State University, P Bag 9055 Gweru, Zimbabwe,

Department of Local Governance Studies

2Student, Midlands State University, P Bag 9055 Gweru, Zimbabwe, Department of Politics and

Public Management

Email: quegasmutale@gmail.com Email: abednicoss@gmail.com

Abstract

The research is tied on the recurring conflicts

that continuously spill between communities

and Binga Rural District Council (BRDC) in

Zimbabwe. Researchers engaged the

qualitative approach in data collection and

presentation from both primary and secondary

sources. Despite the divergence of the

understanding of conflict, it is never spared in

Zimbabwean communities. In Binga, some

conflicts are traced back to the pre- independence era when BaTonga people, who

marks the population of Binga, were

evacuated from the Kasambabezi River. With

time conflicts arose on land for farming and

settlement, poor service delivery, high taxes

and lack of follow up on good governance

principles. The paper highlights the brief

historical background of Binga starting from

the time of resettlement in 1957 by the

Rhodesian Regime. The conflicts between

Binga communities and RDC have negatively

affected the relations; further crippled service

delivery which subsequently dropped back

development of the area. However, the

conflicts are functional as they enable

responsible authorities to realise their

mistakes so as to devise strategies and

measures to improve. Lawyers, through high

courts have been engaged from time to time to

resolve conflicts. On the reverse side, only a

handful of consultations were done by BDRC

to make communities participate and get

involved in council affairs, except for the

minister responsible for Local Government.

Conflict management mechanisms,

diversifying income generation projects,

following the principles of good governance,

community participation, engagement and

involvement and community awareness and

empowerment may not stop conflicts but at

least minimise them for the benefit of the

district. The research is summarised by

recommending for the need to study more on

the land issue as the major conflict in Binga.

Introduction

The word conflict can merely be understood as

disagreements between or among individual or

a group of people or institutions. Pickering

(1999) coins that Daniel Webster defines

conflict as competitive or opposing action of

incompatibles, antagonistic state or action (as

of divergent ideas, interests or persons),

struggle resulting from incompatible needs,

drives, wishes or demands and hostile

encounter. In essence, conflict exists when two

or more competing responses or courses of

action to a single event are considered.

Conflict does not necessarily imply hostility,

although hostility can certainly become part of

the situation (Pickering, 1999). Conflict has

neither been solely bad nor absolutely good,

but there is strong call for conflict

management and resolution in Zimbabwean

local authorities. It is one of the inherent

Page 2 of 15

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 07

August 2015

Available online: http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/ P a g e | 535

aspects characterising the existence of the

traditional and modern institutions, both public

and private. In this particular aspect, this paper

unveils the conflicting situations and

circumstances between Binga Rural District

Council (BRDC) as a local authority and the

communities which are predominantly

occupied by BaTonga people. Local

authorities are the major agent for service

delivery with communities as the major

stakeholder in the paradigm of human

existence and development in the district. The

major conflicts in local authorities in

Zimbabwe include political polarisation,

politics of administration, land use, power

politics, and institutional governance among

them. In Binga district, as elsewhere the

causes of conflict range from differences in

interest basing on resource usage; historical

background of BaTonga people that left

bleeding wounds; legal environment which is

not understood by communities; political

environment and differences between

traditional and elected appointments.

Highlighting conflict can be problematic

politically, yet an awareness of the nature,

causes and potential results of conflicts must

be a part of effective development planning

(Blench, 1996). The paper is hinged on the

concern of the conflicts that continue to

increase between communities and local

authorities. Hence, this paper’s mandated

effort is giving an outline of conflicts and its

causes in Zimbabwean local authorities, taking

a case of Binga; analysing the harmful and

remedial effects of the conflicts on service

delivery, development and public relations of

communities and local authorities, hence

leading to the road of designing the correct

recipe for improved service delivery mandate

of local authorities. Therefore, in the specific

terms, the paper addresses the three major

objectives and these are: to identify the

conflicts between the communities and local

authorities in Binga; to trace the root causes of

the conflict between communities and local

authorities in Zimbabwe; and to give a critical

analysis of the causes of conflicts in order to

provide recommendations to prevent, manage

or deal with conflicts in future.

Key words: conflict, communities, local

authorities, service delivery, development

Brief background of Binga

People of Binga also known as the River

Tonga (Tremmel, 1994) stayed along the

Kasambabezi (well known as Zambezi River)

from the pre-colonial era. Oral tradition among

the BaTonga reveals that they are the pioneer

settlers of Zimbabwe, despite many historical

contestations that may be aroused by both

communities in Zimbabwe and scholars in the

academic field. The BaTonga were not visible

as they were isolated and it is up until the

colonial times in the mid-20th century (1957)

that they were evacuated from the banks of

Kasambabezi River by the colonial

government, then Rhodesia. BaTonga people

had a ‘splendid’ isolation since time

immemorial. They enjoyed the relations with

the Zambian counterparts. They were under

the rulership of basimabbuku (village/ kraal

heads) and basimwami (chiefs) under the

traditional authority. Resources were

communally owned. Their trade links were

with the Zambian people, although stories

were told where others went to as far as

Bulawayo on foot to search for employment.

BaTonga lived in a strongly traditional way

which they really enjoyed. They had no access

to social services like school education, health

care delivery, and modern agriculture. The

BaTonga utilised the resources sustainably as

they supported and were supported by the

environment.

In the 1950s the BaTonga were forcibly

evacuated from the Zambezi to make way for

the Kariba dam which has grown into a lack

today. Some of the BaTonga people stay in

what is Binga today which is adjacent to the

Zambezi River. From the 1950s to date the tale

of conflict became an unceasing major concern

Page 3 of 15

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/index.php/JSMaP

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 01 Issue 07

August 2015

Available online: http://internationaljournalofresearch.org/ P a g e | 536

to the BaTonga people not only in Binga but

also elsewhere where BaTonga communities

can be found in Hwange, Gokwe and Kariba

districts in Zimbabwe. People in Binga were

denied access to major social services until

late 20th and early 21st century that the Non- Governmental Organisation (NGO)

community started and continued to eye for

the place for development programmes. In the

past they (BaTonga people) were largely cut

off from the benefits that accrued to other

Zimbabweans, especially those in urban areas

(Kuthan: 2010). Moreover, until the early

1980s, which saw the building of schools,

clinics and roads, these benefits all but

completely by-passed the Tonga (Kuthan:

2010). However, to date poverty is still a status

quo in Binga, attributable to what other

scholars and researchers regard as

‘marginalisation’. The communities in Binga

are still conflicting with the district’s highest

authorities.

Established in terms of the Rural District

Councils Act Chapter 20:13, Binga is one of

the 61 rural districts in Zimbabwe currently.

Its geographical location is at the edge of the

southern part of the Zambezi River in north

western Zimbabwe. BRDC was established on

the 19

th of September 1980. It is one of the

biggest district in Matabeleland north province

with a population estimate of 139 092

involving 75 356 females and 63 736 males

(Zimstat Census Report, 2012). The district is

divided into Binga north and Binga south

constituencies. The north constitutes 15 and

the south 10 of the 25 administrative wards in

the whole district. Binga district is occupied by

the BaTonga speaking people who are known

with rich conservative culture and peaceful co- existence. Of the Binga population as depicted

in the 2012 population census, 37,5 % are

communal farmers; 92,5 of households do not

dwell in units with electricity; and 96,2% are

rural dwellers. In terms of employment status

there is 62, 5 of employed people and 37, 5 in

communal farming. Most people in Binga (66,

8%) are in the agricultural sector and 4,3% are

occupied in the education system. Of late,

because of the population dynamics

highlighted above it is of no question why

among the major conflicts between

communities and BRDC, the land issue is at its

peak as will be presented forth.

BRDC is a local authority responsible for

transacting development aspects of the district.

It has its three sub-offices one located in

Siabuwa, a cotton growing area almost 100 km

east of Binga centre; the other at Mlibizi which

is a tourist resort and fishing area and Lusulu

which is well known for cereal crop growing.

The sub-offices were put to enhance

effectiveness in administering the much

demands of the fast growing district in terms

of population and demand for good quality

services. In a bid to endeavour the

transformation of communities, BRDC and the

community are found at logger heads. Hence,

the marrow of this paper unrolls the origin of

the misunderstandings and tracing the resultant

effects both in delivering services,

development and in terms of public relations.

Theoretical framework

The understanding of conflict yield long

debates among theorists across disciplines in

the academic discussion. This research adopts

the Dahrendorf’s conflict theory. On the basis

of his assumptions, Dahrendorf argues that

society can be split up into the "command

class" and the "obey class" and class conflict

should refer to situations of struggle between

those with authority and those without

(Tittenbrun, 2013). Dahrendorf claims for the

universal historic existence of the conflict

classes. Hence, the theory is based on the

relations of authority, which differ between the

two classes, the surbodinate and the superior.

The two classes are regarded by Dahrendorf as

part of the social structure which further

permeate the sprouting of the group conflict.

Hence in this context, conflict has universal