Zimbabweans were greeted this week with a sense of déjà vu as the Minister of Local Government, Daniel Garwe, announced an immediate ban on night vending and the sale of second-hand clothes. The directive, primarily targeting the bustling night economies of Harare and Bulawayo, was framed as a necessary measure to curb illegal activities and restore order to the nation’s urban centres. However, a closer look reveals a policy announcement that is not only redundant but also wilfully ignorant of the economic realities faced by millions.

In a meeting with Harare City Councillors, Minister Garwe declared that night vending was a “national threat,” allegedly fuelling illicit drug and substance dealing, crippling formal businesses, and posing a danger to health and national security. While these are serious accusations, the assertion that night markets are the primary hub for the drug trade is questionable at best. It is an open secret that drug dealers, often referred to as “Jazzman,” operate with alarming impunity in broad daylight across residential neighbourhoods, frequently shielded by powerful, unseen figures.

This “new” ban overlooks a crucial fact: both activities are already illegal. Vending on city streets without the requisite licenses has long been prohibited. Similarly, the importation and sale of second-hand clothes, colloquially known as mabhero, were banned nearly a decade ago under Statutory Instrument 19 of 2016. This instrument explicitly classifies “second-hand clothing and shoes” under headings that restrict their import.

The 2016 ban did not eradicate the trade; it merely drove it underground and introduced a risk premium. Bales of clothing that once sold for an average of US$100 now command prices between US$140 and US$200. This extra cost covers the network of smugglers, or malaichas, who navigate porous borders and grease the palms of officials to ensure the goods reach their destination. The minister’s recent verbal directive is unlikely to change this dynamic. At worst, it will add another layer of “risk,” further inflating prices for the end consumer and lining the pockets of the corrupt.

The Informal Sector: A Scapegoat for Failed Economic Policies

To understand the government’s persistent war on vending, one must look at Zimbabwe’s economic trajectory. The once-thriving formal economy of the 1990s has been decimated by decades of economic mismanagement. This has given rise to a dominant informal sector, which now accounts for a staggering portion of the country’s economic activity.

The government’s stance on this sector is deeply contradictory. Officials often blame the informal economy for the struggles of the formal sector, citing tax evasion and unfair competition. Yet, they simultaneously leverage the high self-employment figures within this very sector to present deceptively low national unemployment statistics. If the millions of vendors were to be counted as unemployed, the official rate would skyrocket from the current single digits to reflect the grim reality of joblessness that some estimate to be over 80%.

The government consistently fails to acknowledge its own role in this economic shift. Punitive taxes, an unstable currency, and suffocating bureaucracy have made formal business operations an uphill battle, effectively pushing entrepreneurs into the informal space.

A Nation Clothed in Second-Hand Garments

The move to eradicate the second-hand clothing market is particularly detached from the daily struggles of ordinary Zimbabweans. For the past two decades, mabhero have been the primary means by which citizens have managed to dress themselves and their families affordably.

A visit to a formal retail outlet like Edgars reveals shirts priced at US$20 or more—a significant expense for individuals earning the average monthly salary of around US$150. After covering rent and groceries, there is little left for new clothing. The second-hand market, with items like jeans selling for as little as US$2, provides a vital and affordable alternative. Until the local textile industry can produce clothing at prices competitive with these imports, a successful ban would, quite literally, risk creating a nation of the naked.

Attempts to stifle this trade have been made before, with previous bans ultimately relaxed due to public pressure and replaced by import duties that proved difficult to enforce.

The Futility of Enforcement

The practicalities of enforcing this renewed ban are also highly questionable. Night vending emerged as a strategic adaptation by traders seeking to avoid the constant harassment and extortion by police during daylight hours. With formal businesses closed and parking fees lifted after 5:00 PM, entire streets transform into convenient shopping hubs for consumers.

To enforce the minister’s directive would require a significant increase in policing budgets for already cash-strapped city councils that are visibly failing to provide basic services like refuse collection and maintaining traffic lights. Diverting these scant resources to chase people trying to earn an honest living in the middle of the night appears to be a gross misallocation of priorities.

Critics have labelled the ban a punitive measure against the poor, arguing that vending is a symptom of economic desperation, not defiance. The government’s focus, they contend, should be on addressing the root causes of economic decline—corruption and mismanagement—rather than punishing its victims.

---

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1: What has the Zimbabwean government banned?

The Minister of Local Government has announced an immediate ban on night vending and the importation and sale of second-hand clothes in urban centres.

Q2: Weren’t these activities already illegal?

Yes. Street vending without a licence is against municipal by-laws. The importation of second-hand clothing for resale was banned under Statutory Instrument 19 of 2016. The recent announcement is a reaffirmation of these existing prohibitions.

Q3: Why is the government focused on this ban now?

The government claims the ban is to fight crime, particularly drug dealing, and to support formal businesses that pay taxes. Critics argue it is a distraction from the government’s own economic failings and an attempt to scapegoat the informal sector.

Q4: How does this ban affect ordinary Zimbabweans?

The majority of Zimbabweans rely on the informal sector for their livelihoods. The ban on second-hand clothes directly impacts the ability of low-income families to afford clothing. Night markets also provide a more affordable source for various goods for consumers.

Q5: Will the ban be effective?

Previous bans have been largely ineffective, leading to a black market and increased corruption. Given the scale of the informal economy and the limited resources of local councils, widespread and sustained enforcement is unlikely to succeed. It is more likely to increase the cost of goods and the level of bribery.

---