By Aldridge Dzvene | Positive Eye News
ROME, ITALY – At a time when global fractures over religion and belief are sharpening, the Second Parliamentary Conference on Interfaith Dialogue convened in Rome from 19–21 June 2025, casting a global spotlight on a subject too often left simmering beneath geopolitics: hatred based on religion or belief. But it was the Zimbabwean delegation, through a compelling address by Hon. Advocate Jacob Francis Nzwidamilimo Mudenda, Speaker of the Parliament of Zimbabwe—that offered a model rooted in both constitutional rigour and cultural empathy.
Held in the sacred precincts of the Plenary Hall of the Chamber of Deputies, the Dialogue gathered an exceptional cadre of religious leaders, legislators, and human rights advocates. The central theme, “Countering Hatred Based on Religion or Belief: De-escalating Polarization, Preventing Dehumanization and Religious Weaponization”, reverberated with urgency as ongoing global conflicts, from the Middle East to Eastern Europe, expose the tragic costs of religious intolerance.
Speaker Mudenda’s address distinguished itself with philosophical depth and constitutional insight. Referencing John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty, he called for inclusive engagement across all faiths and beliefs, reminding delegates that a full understanding of truth comes only when “hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion.” This intellectual grounding seamlessly segued into a constitutional perspective. Quoting Voltaire’s timeless defence of dissent, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, Mudenda laid bare the philosophical imperative behind legal protections for religious liberty.
Zimbabwe, he explained, does not merely tolerate religion, it constitutionally empowers it. The 2013 Constitution, under Article 60, entrenches freedom of religion, conscience, thought, and belief. But more than that, Mudenda emphasised, the framework goes beyond negative liberty (freedom from interference) and champions positive liberty: an active right to express, propagate, and practise one’s faith in both private and public spheres.
Further strengthening this position is Section 56, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion. This dual-pronged (“belt and braces”) approach is more than legal ornamentation, it is a functional safeguard against polarisation. The Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission, Mudenda noted, reinforces these rights and remains pivotal in upholding religious freedom within a broader human rights agenda.
Notably, Zimbabwe’s commitment extends beyond national law. As a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a ratifier of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the country reaffirms its position on the international stage. Moreover, by adhering to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which embeds African philosophies like Ubuntu, Zimbabwe roots its human rights ethos in a tradition of communal interdependence: “I am because you are, and you are because we are.”
Amid this legal scaffolding, Speaker Mudenda painted a vivid picture of Zimbabwe as a functioning interfaith society. The Zimbabwe Council of Churches, representing diverse faiths, is a testament to peaceful religious co-existence. “There is no hatred based on religion in Zimbabwe,” Mudenda stated with conviction, an assertion that stood in stark contrast to global trends but one that found evidence in the country’s relatively harmonious interfaith relations.
In aligning Zimbabwe’s domestic architecture with global peace efforts, Mudenda’s contribution resonated beyond his speech. His previous address at the inaugural Marrakesh Interfaith Dialogue was quoted in the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s new report: “Engagement with Religion and Belief by Parliamentarians.” This publication, launched during the Rome conference, reflects an emerging consensus, MPs must take the lead in building bridges across belief systems.
The broader conference featured high-level engagements. Italy’s Chamber President Hon. Lorenzo Fontana and Senate President Hon. Ignazio La Russa both decried escalating religious and ethnic divisions. Rt. Hon. Tulia Ackson, IPU President, reaffirmed parliaments’ duty to uphold inclusive societies through legislative and diplomatic functions. From UN envoys to religious dignitaries like Cardinal George Koovakad and Rabbi David Rosen, the call was unified: dialogue, not division; respect, not radicalisation.
In this context, Zimbabwe’s model, anchored in law, culture, and dialogue, emerged not just as a national narrative but as a possible template for global emulation.
In his closing remark, Speaker Mudenda offered a rallying cry, one both spiritually evocative and politically grounded: “In faithful hope, we shall conquer.” It was more than rhetoric; it was a proposition for our time, where hope, codified in law and nurtured through dialogue, becomes the most potent antidote to hatred.
