1

Question: Official Crime statistics do not show the

pattern, extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe.
Critically evaluate this statement.

Official statistics are statistics produced by government agencies to shed

light on economic and social conditions, develop, monitor and implement
policies, inform decision making and debate both within government and
the wider community. Statistical data is obtained from a systematic
investigation to establish facts or search for knowledge otherwise referred
to as research. Statistics is a quantitative research method which can be
tested scientifically. However these official statistics because of the
different methods used to obtain them cannot be taken at face value.
This text critically evaluates the assertion that official crime statistics do
not show the pattern, extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe.

Firstly, to clarify the meaning of the above assertion, we need to

understand the definition of crime and statistics both in the literal sense
and in the context of the question. Watts (2008) reminisces it ,as
sobering to find respected criminologists like Fattah (1997) arguing that
there is no universal or agreed upon definition (of crime). He further
asserts it means different things to different people and that all attempts
to define it are doomed. This suggests that what is perceived as crime by
one may not necessarily be crime to the other. Looking at crime as a
universal evil Wilson & Herrnstein (1985), two well known neo-
conservative criminologists advance the idea that some activities are
intrinsically bad or evil. They say that human behaviour like homicide,
incest, rape, theft and robbery are intrinsically and universally evil. Their
argument is that these are issues condemned in all societies and in all
historical periods by ancient tradition, moral sentiments and formal law,
Watts (2008). This approach is met with insurmountable contradiction in
research where Boswell (1994) questions what we make for example, of
the legal marriages contracted between brothers and sisters in ancient
Egypt, an activity usually defined as incest. Crime on the other hand can
be determined by the laws of the land as Michael & Adler (1933) suggest
the most precise and least ambiguous definition of crime is that which is
prohibited by the criminal code. Criminologists also focus on crime as
antisocial human behaviour. Michael & Adler (1933) point out to the
attempts to define crime in moral terms and in social terms and to the
definition of crime as behaviour as immoral lacking precision and clarity.
These conflicting definitions make the official crime statistics not to
present an accurate picture on the pattern, extent and coverage of crime.

The definition of crime as antisocial behaviour is hardly more precise or

less ambiguous, although it does not shift the emphasis from what is
thought of as the intrinsic quality of conduct to its social consequences.
 2

Watts (2008) further asserts that thoughtful criminologists since Tarde

(1886) and Sutherland (1924, 1947) long understand that what counts as
crime or is defined as much is relative to time and place. O’Donell &
O'Sullivan (2002) defines a crime as an act which is judged a sufficient
challenge to the functioning of the society as to warrant punishment. The
contradictions in the definition of crime make it subjective i.e. relevant to
a specific place at a certain time, different morals and sentiments and so
on. The variance in the way crime is defined cause the statistics not to
give an accurate picture of the pattern, extent and coverage of crime in
the country.

According to Giddens (2001), statistics about crime and delinquency are

probably the least reliable of all official published figures on social issues.
He further asserts that many criminologists have emphasised the need
not to take official statistics at face value. In addition he points out to the
long process in deciding between a crime and its registration by police.
Haralambos & Holborn (2004), concur that official statistics provide
information on the total number of crimes known to the police. This
suggests that the police figures only contain those figures of cases that
have been reported to them or those which they qualify as crimes as
given in the statutes of a given country. Levels of recorded crime may
differ dramatically from levels of criminal activity. An on line UK Home
office journal indicates that police records are one data source used to
record crime, which statistics alone do not paint an accurate picture as a
result of many crimes not being reported to police.

In Zimbabwe, government information sources and independent sources

give contradicting and conflicting information pertaining official crime
statistics. Both sources disagree on the nature of crimes on the basis of
political and social grounds; statistical data is either inflated or deflated to
suit the requirements of the source. Towards the run-up to the 2008
general elections the different sources gave conflicting arguments on the
number of incidents of political violence around the country with the
government sources mainly The Herald newspapers and Z.B.C. giving
conservative figures on the incidents while the independent sources
exaggerated on the incidents of political violence around the country.
This is because as Haralambos & Holborn (2004) put it to be quiet obvious
that not all crime that takes place is recorded by police. The criminal
justice system in Zimbabwe is divided into two mainly the common law
based on the Roman-Dutch law and the customary law which recognises
traditional leaders. Official statistical data does not include numbers of
those found guilty as having committed an offence under the customary
law. Haralambos & Holborn (2004) argue that there is much evidence of a
substantial dark figure of unrecorded crimes. This results in the official
 3

statistics not showing the pattern, extent and coverage of crime in

Zimbabwe.

The reliability of crime statistics is dependent on several factors which

influence either the rise or fall of a particular offence. O’Donnell &
O’Sullivan (2001) suggest that in some areas crime is less likely to be
reported because of social reasons as he gives the example of the 1997
British Crime Survey (BCS) which finds that, of the reasons for not
reporting crime, ‘We dealt with the matter’, constitutes 11 percent and
‘fear of reprisals’, constitute 3 percent. Giddens (2001) attributes the
variations, mainly the rise, to increased public awareness of crime which
leads to more reporting. Society may not be aware of what constitutes a
crime. As crime awareness campaigns are conducted by either the police
or humanitarian organisations crime figures have been seen to be steadily
increasing as people become aware of their rights. The process of
recording a crime may affect the number of crimes reported as
Haralambos & Holborn (2001) indicate that it must come to someone’s
attention that a crime has taken place before it is reported to the relevant
agency after which that agency must be willing to accept that the law has
been broken. This exhaustive process makes victims off petty crimes let
go the criminals or offenders for fear of having their time wasted by
police. This therefore causes crime statistics not to give a true picture
about pattern extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe.

Crime figures may include systematic bias as a result of social inequalities

as O’Donnell & O’Sullivan (2001) assert that zero tolerance has been more
successful with marginalised sections of the community, such as beggars
and prostitutes, but there has been little sign of increased vigour against
more powerful and corporate offenders. Both white collar and corporate
crime can be considered as examples of middle class opportunity. Hazel
Croall (1998) in Haralambos & Holborn (2004) argues that crimes such as
burglary, robbery or theft which are largely associated with the lower
class offenders are more likely to be prosecuted than crimes such as tax
evasion, or breaches of health, safety or consumer legislation which are
associated with middle class offenders. Labelling theory demonstrates
young working-class, particularly young black men, as likely to be
overrepresented in crime figures. The chivalry thesis suggests that female
offenders are treated more leniently than men. Feminist theorists have
suggested that women are treated on the basis of ideas about the ‘proper’
behaviour of women and are punished for deviance from the norms
femininity. So this unequal treatment between social classes gives a false
picture on the pattern extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe.
 4

Haralambos & Holborn (2004) suggest that it is possible to estimate the

amount of crime of which victims are aware but which is not reported to
the police or not recorded as crime by them. This is conducted in what is
referred to as Victimisation studies, which in essence are crime surveys
conducted independently. Results for victimisation studies have been
more reliable for certain crimes than police statistics. According to Croall
(1998) victimisation studies provide an indication of trends in crime and
estimates of how many crimes remain unreported; however the data from
them is not entirely reliable. Croall (1998) critically looks at the problems
with British crime surveys (BCS) and deduces that like other victim
surveys, the BCS can only record crimes which victims are aware of,
therefore excluding many crimes. Further, the results reflect
respondents’ definitions of events which may not be the same as legal
classifications which are also limited by respondents’ memory. Because
the limitations of the survey to the household, it does not record crimes to
businesses or crime committed in or against institutions. The early crime
surveys only interviewed people over the age of sixteen therefore
omitting crimes committed against the younger age group. The BCS
shows that the most likely crime to be recorded is motor vehicle theft
which constitutes 95 percent of offences recorded in 1997 probably
because of the need to report to make an insurance claim (Haralambos &
Holborn, 2004). The limitations of the victimisation studies outlined in this
text make the assertion that official crime statistics do not show the
pattern, extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe true.

The police as the major source of official statistical data, is overcome by

bribery and corruption which according to Haralambos & Holborn (ibid)
states that because both parties are involved and are both liable to
prosecution, they therefore are neither going to report. Therefore both
offences elude the official count as they go unreported. It is important to
analyse crime sociologically because as Left Realism argues, to ignore
crime is to ignore a very real problem of working-class communities. The
Functionalists accept crime as a working class problem and see its cause
as lack of opportunity for young men in poor communities. More recent
theorists have also seen criminality as part of a crisis of masculinity.
Crimes against women and homosexuals also relate to broad inequalities
in society. According to Haralambos & Holborn (2004) in certain instances
such as domestic violence, the methodology of the study may result in
significant underreporting. Members of ethnic minority groups are likely
to be victims of crime, although they are often presented as perpetrators.
This shows why in Zimbabwe and the world over official crime statistics do
not show the pattern extent and coverage of crime in general.
 5

Doherty (2004) suggests that race as a factor in the criminal justice

system requires particular attention. A home office (2002) report
indicates that black people were four times likely to be arrested than
white or other ethnic groups. Doherty (2004) further asserts that the
police were statistically less likely to identify suspects for homicides
involving black victims than for white or other ethnic groups. The home
office report in addition says information collected on magistrates’ court
decisions from six pilot areas indicated that, excluding those defendants
committed to the Crown court for trial, white defendants were more likely
to be convicted (64 per cent) than black or Asian defendants (53 per cent
and 4 percent respectively). This suggests that there is racial bias in the
way that crime data is collected in different countries depending on the
dominance. While the criminal justice system is one of the most
important tools available to society for the control of anti-social behaviour,
the system needs to prove a balance between punishing the guilty and
protecting the innocent being found guilty. There have been many
miscarriages to justice where innocent people have been sent to prison.
This suggests why official crime statistics do not give an accurate picture
on the pattern extent and coverage of crime in Zimbabwe.

White collar crime is difficult to detect and hence does not account for a
significant percentage in official crime statistics. Cressy & Ward (1969) as
cited by Doherty (2004) argue that there is strong evidence that white-
collar offenders do not think of themselves as offenders. Thus, even in
victim studies this nature of crime cannot be uncovered and hence
statistics may not reflect figures of this nature of crime. A typical
example would be for instance tax evasion, under invoicing of goods say
at the port of entry; it would take a long time to detect these crimes or
they may never be detected which then means official statistics does not
cover these crimes adequately. The impact of the internet over the years
has been immense. The rise of this networked society has expanded the
range of information available to individuals and changed the way we
relate to one another in the virtual world as well as the physical world.
However it also has a dark side; the internet has proven to be an influence
on criminal activity as crimes such as hacking, pornography have been
reported to be on the rise as a result of its use. However other countries
do not consider these as crimes. As such because of the complex nature
of the cyber crimes it is difficult to quantify them and hence official figures
in Zimbabwe may not reflect the pattern, extent and coverage of such
crimes.

In conclusion though official statistics cannot be taken at face value, they

give a reference point of comparison. Victimisation study figures are
 6

reliable indicators of long term crime trends because it asks people about
their actual experiences of crime. However in Zimbabwe official and
independent statistics have not been reliable as a result of the high
political polarisations of the institutions that compile the statistical data.
As such they tend to be inflated or deflated to favour the source.

REFERENCES

1. Doherty 2002; Crime statistics

2. Giddens A, 2001; Sociology. 4th edition, Blackwell publishers Ltd,

Oxford

3. Haralambos M & Holborn M, 2004; Sociology; Themes and

perspectives. Revised edition. Harper Collins Publishers, London.

4. O’Donell I & O’Sullivan E, 2002; Crime Control in Ireland; The politics

of intolerance (Undercurrents). Cork University Press, Cork.
 7

5. Watts R, 2007; International Criminology: A Critical Introduction.

Routledge, London.

6. Wilson J. Q & Hernstein R. J, 1985; Crime and Human Nature.

Simon & Schuster Ltd, London.

7. www.garlik.com/press/Garlik_uk_cybercrime_Report.pdf