The Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services, Nick Mangwana, has defended the government’s order for vendors to vacate undesignated trading sites by 9 September, describing the issue as a complex urban challenge that requires a balance between livelihoods and public order.
In a post on X on Sunday, Mangwana said street trade was a vital source of income globally but had to be regulated.
“The debate over vendor relocation is a complex urban challenge. While street trade is a vital source of income and an integral part of the retail sector globally, cities must balance this with public health and safety,” he wrote.
“Designated vending zones, equipped with ablution facilities and waste management, offer a practical compromise.
“However, vending must be legal, properly regulated, and conducted only in approved spaces—not on the doorsteps of supermarkets or other formal businesses, as this creates unfair competition and obstruction.
“This approach, used successfully in many cities, protects both public order and the viability of small enterprises.
“The goal is not exclusion but creating sustainable infrastructure that supports commerce while maintaining clean, accessible public spaces for all.”
Mangwana’s remarks come as the government faces growing criticism over the directive issued by the Minister of Local Government and Public Works, Daniel Garwe.
On 2 September, Garwe issued a seven-day eviction notice expiring on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, ordering all vendors operating at sites not authorised by local authorities to vacate.
The government warned of a “comprehensive, zero-tolerance clean-up operation” targeting illegal vending sites across Harare and the broader Harare Metropolitan Province before extending the operation nationwide.
Garwe said all illegal structures would be dismantled and municipal police deployed to prevent traders from reoccupying cleared areas, with the operation intended to restore order, improve sanitation and ease congestion.
The order has sparked fierce pushback from opposition figures, rights groups and vendor associations.
Former Mt Pleasant MP Fadzayi Mahere accused the government of manufacturing poverty and then punishing citizens for it.
“They manufacture poverty through their looting, corruption and incompetence then punish the people for the chaotic mess that they’ve created. In a normal country, factories thrive, farms flourish, people work decent jobs for decent pay and the poor get social grants. Not in Zimbabwe,” Mahere said.
She said street vending was a survival tactic, not a choice.
“Here, the people are alone so they make a plan. They hustle hard. When they fend for themselves, the same Govt that impoverished them turns around and says they’re dirty and their vending stalls must be destroyed.”
“If everything were equal, nobody would be on the streets selling wares and food. Nobody wants to be setting up a random stall to put food on the table and send kids to school. Everyone wants dignity and value for their work.”
Mahere likened the planned clean-up to the 2005 Operation Murambatsvina, saying, “Operation Murambatsvina is about to be unleashed. They’ve decided to declare war on the poor yet again.”
Human rights lobby ZimRights also condemned the directive, saying the sickness was not in the street but in an economy that has closed its doors.
“The sickness is not in the street. It is in an economy that has closed its doors to its own children,” the association said in a statement. “Sweeping vendors off the pavement will not create a single job, will not lower the price of a single loaf of bread, and will not return a single family to dignity. It will only push the symptom out of sight while the disease deepens.”
ZimRights said the order imposed by a seven-day ultimatum and municipal police, in the absence of any credible alternative, was not an order but displacement.
“Before they are vendors, they are mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. They are graduates whose degrees are folded in drawers, retrenched workers, widows, young people who came of age in a country that had no vacancy for their ambition,” it said. “Nobody dreams of a life spent under the sun bargaining over tomatoes and airtime. Vending is not a choice; it is the last item on a long list of things that did not work out.”
The organisation cited Section 24 of the Constitution on decent livelihoods, Section 51 on human dignity and Section 68 on fair administrative conduct, arguing: “A deadline is not consultation. An eviction is not a livelihoods policy.” It has called on government to suspend the deadline and open structured dialogue.
The Vendors Initiative for Social and Economic Transformation (VISET) took a similar line, saying while it recognises government’s responsibility to keep urban areas clean and orderly, authorities should act in line with the National Informal Economy Formalisation Strategy adopted in April 2026.
Executive director Samuel Wadzai said removing vendors without providing viable alternatives would disrupt livelihoods and push already vulnerable workers further into poverty.
VISET argued that the deadline collides with the government’s own formalisation promise. “Formalisation cannot mean simply removing people from where they currently earn a living,” the organisation said. “It must create pathways for informal traders to transition into safer, more secure and sustainable forms of economic activity.”
Leave a Reply Cancel reply