By Staff Reporter

The September 9 ultimatum issued by Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Local Government and Public Works ordering all informal street traders to clear out of undesignated sites in Harare has triggered a massive, cross-sector backlash.

​As the deadline approaches, Harare remains on edge as the rest of the country watches. While the government maintains that the clean-up is necessary for trafficability, sanitation, and urban renewal, vendor groups have declared their intent to defy the order, setting up a high-stakes confrontation between municipal authorities and the informal workforce that keeps Zimbabwe's urban economy afloat. Framing the move as a health and public-order measure under the National Development Strategy, the government warned of a "zero-tolerance" crackdown beginning September 9. 

However, across the country, the response from labour unions, vendor associations, human rights groups, and political commentators has been swift, united, and furious, they are against the order.  Their collective voice seeks a just and humanitarian centred approach instead of a cruel blanket displacement.

​​The country’s largest labour federation; the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) condemned the deadline as a direct attack on a working class already pushed to the margins.

​"You cannot declare war on a workforce that you created. Over 80% of Zimbabweans earn their living through the informal economy because formal industry was decimated years ago. Forcing people off the pavements without offering viable, economically sensible alternatives is not urban renewal—it is economic violence. The government is punishing citizens for surviving a crisis the authorities themselves engineered," said Tirivanhu Marimo, ZCTU Secretary General in a statement.

He added that it was preposterous for the government to issue an ultimatum and directive without giving an alternative or permanent solution to the widespread issue of vending.

“The council must provide alternative places of trading where there is decency instead of reactionary policies that are inconsiderate of the highly informal set up Zimbabwe finds itself in. The people in this sector also pay rent and rates and if their source of income is stopped, they would not be able to do so. There is a high possibility of increased criminality as some will turn to illegal activities to survive. The solution is to sit down with them and chart the way forward,” he said.

Marimo warned that this operation could culminate into another Operation Murambatsvina” of 2005 that saw over 700 000 people losing their homes and livelihoods adding that ZCTU would continue to demand accountability from government as it continues to fight for social justice for all workers, including those in the informal economy.

The Vendors Initiative for Social and Economic Transformation (VISET) pointed out the fundamental logistics gap between the city’s capacity and the actual number of traders.

​ VISET executive director Samuel Wadzai said removing vendors without providing viable alternatives would disrupt livelihoods and push already vulnerable workers into deep poverty.

"Formalisation cannot mean simply removing people from where they currently earn a living. It must create pathways for informal traders to transition into safer, more secure and sustainable forms of economic activity," Wadzai said.

"Where are hundreds of thousands of people supposed to go in less than a week? The municipal designated sites do not exist in the numbers required, lack basic running water and sanitation, and are situated away from the foot traffic vendors rely on to feed their families. We agree that cities need order, but criminalizing livelihoods on an arbitrary deadline will only push millions deeper into extreme poverty. We are not leaving until proper, fully equipped market stalls are provided,” said VISET in a statement.

​Human rights advocates including representatives from Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) highlighted the constitutional violations and socio-economic impact of forced evictions.

​"The September 9 ultimatum echoes past draconian operations that violated basic human rights to dignity, work, and shelter. Unilateral deadlines enforced by police sweeps inevitably lead to arbitrary arrests, confiscation of goods without due process, and police brutality. The State has a constitutional obligation under Section 24 to adopt policies that provide its citizens with employment opportunities. Sweeping human beings off the streets like litter is a gross human rights concern."

​Political commentators, opposition figures, and social media influencers framed the move as political hypocrisy and a policy failure.

​"A government that fails to create jobs should not have the audacity to destroy self-made survival strategies. Calling millions of hard-working citizens 'illegal' while failing to manage the macro-economy is total governance bankruptcy. Instead of chasing a mother selling tomatoes to pay school fees, the government should focus on structural economic reform. You cannot clean a city by starving its populace,” said a prominent social and political commentator.