Across the world, what people choose to wear has long been a point of both celebration and contention.
Fashion and clothing are intertwined with culture, personal expression, and societal values.
Yet, in Zimbabwe, the issue of a dress code has become an increasingly complex and controversial subject, with new developments at institutions like the Vehicle Inspection Department (VID), which has recently banned certain clothes from its depots.
This ban echoes similar practices in Zimbabwean courts and raises significant questions about the country’s approach to public attire.
Are there laws that dictate how Zimbabweans—particularly women—should dress in public?
If so, which laws? And if not, is the enforcement of such “dress codes” a violation of personal freedoms and a form of gender discrimination?
The conversation on dress codes in Zimbabwe raises critical questions about legality, tradition, and the evolving nature of culture.
This article delves into these issues, focusing on how Zimbabwe’s vague stance on public attire leaves room for discriminatory treatment, how the VID ban fits into the larger debate, and whether there is a path forward that embraces both law and cultural heritage.
The VID Ban: A New Chapter in Zimbabwe’s Dress Code Debate
The recent decision by the Vehicle Inspection Department (VID) to ban certain types of clothes from its depots has reignited the discussion on public dress codes in Zimbabwe.
The department cited reasons similar to those invoked by the country’s courts, which have long imposed dress restrictions on women, particularly when it comes to attire considered inappropriate for formal environments.
The VID’s enforcement of certain clothes ban seems to be part of a larger societal trend where clothing choices—especially for women—are scrutinised and regulated without a clear legal foundation.
This regulation mirrors the informal dress codes enforced at courts, where women mostly have been barred from entering for wearing sleeveless tops, short skirts, or tight trousers.
The question that arises is whether these rules are based on legal mandates or simply cultural expectations being enforced through institutions.
Is There a Dress Code in Zimbabwe?
On paper, Zimbabwe has no formal dress code that explicitly prescribes or proscribes specific articles of clothing.
However, what seems to exist in practice is an unspoken and loosely enforced set of societal norms, often directed at women, that govern what is deemed “appropriate” attire in public spaces.
The VID’s recent ban fits into this pattern, as do previous incidents where women have been publicly harassed, shamed, or even arrested for wearing clothes deemed “indecent,” such as short skirts, revealing tops, or tight-fitting clothes.
While these incidents are often justified by public officials as necessary to uphold “decency” and “morality,” no clear legal framework supports such measures.
The question, then, is: on what basis are these dress codes enforced, if there is no concrete law dictating such norms?
Which Law Is Being Used to Ban Certain Clothes?
The enforcement of an informal dress code in Zimbabwe is often justified under the guise of public decency laws.
The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter 9:23) mentions issues related to public indecency but remains vague and open to interpretation.
It criminalises behavior considered “indecent or obscene,” but the exact boundaries of what constitutes “indecent” are left largely undefined.
The VID and courts likely lean on such vague laws to justify their dress regulations, but this approach is problematic.
The lack of specificity in these legal codes has resulted in selective enforcement—targeting mainly women and leaving the judgment of “indecency” to the whims of law enforcement officers, court officials, or institutional gatekeepers.
For instance, police have in the past arrested women under claims of indecent exposure, citing this vague criminal code, but the law itself does not explicitly ban specific types of clothing, such as short skirts or tight pants.
This vagueness has empowered conservative sections of society to exert undue influence on women’s attire, reinforcing harmful gender stereotypes and perpetuating a culture of policing women’s bodies.
Ultimately, this creates a discriminatory system that impacts women far more than men.
Is This Not Discriminatory Treatment Against Women?
The targeting of women under these loosely defined regulations is undeniably discriminatory.
It disproportionately affects women, particularly in public spaces such as markets, transportation hubs, or even at government offices like the VID.
Women are frequently subjected to harassment and abuse for wearing clothes deemed inappropriate, while men rarely face similar scrutiny.
This double standard raises essential questions about gender equality and human rights in Zimbabwe.
This gender bias is reminiscent of broader global trends where women’s bodies and clothing are often subject to stricter social control than men’s.
By using laws or norms of “public decency” to limit women’s freedom of expression through clothing, Zimbabwe is engaging in a form of patriarchal control that echoes centuries-old practices of subjugating women.
Zimbabwe’s Constitution, in fact, guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to dignity and personal security (Section 51 and 52), the right to equality and non-discrimination (Section 56), and freedom of expression (Section 61).
The current vague application of decency laws to police women’s clothing is arguably in conflict with these constitutional protections, creating a legal gray area that warrants urgent scrutiny.
What Should Be Done to Align Laws and Dress?
To address this pressing issue, Zimbabwe must undertake several key reforms to align laws with principles of equality and personal freedom:
- Clear Legal Definitions: The laws surrounding public indecency and morality must be clearly defined. The Criminal Law Act should be amended to remove ambiguity regarding what constitutes indecent exposure or behavior, particularly in relation to clothing. The absence of clarity allows for arbitrary enforcement that often targets women unfairly.
- End Gender Discrimination: Policies and practices must be gender-neutral. Women should not be disproportionately affected by laws and norms governing dress. Legal reforms must explicitly prohibit gender-based discrimination in all forms, including in the enforcement of dress codes.
- Public Awareness and Sensitization: There should be a nationwide campaign to promote awareness about women’s rights and freedoms, as enshrined in the Constitution. This campaign should include police training to prevent discriminatory treatment against women based on their attire.
- Cultural Sensitivity: While laws should be clear and non-discriminatory, they must also take into account Zimbabwe’s cultural diversity. The government could engage in a consultative process with cultural leaders, women’s rights groups, and the general public to develop a balanced approach that respects both modern freedoms and traditional values.
Dress Codes in Other Countries: What Can Zimbabwe Learn?
Zimbabwe is not the only country grappling with the complexities of dress codes and gender discrimination.
Across Africa and the world, dress codes have been a source of legal battles and societal debate:
Sudan: Under the former Islamic government of Sudan, women were required by law to wear headscarves and long dresses in public.
While the law has been abolished following the revolution in 2019, women still face societal pressure to conform to conservative dress codes.
Uganda: Uganda’s Anti-Pornography Act of 2014 initially sparked a nationwide debate on women’s clothing, particularly mini-skirts, which were claimed to promote immorality.
Although the government denied this intention, the law created a culture where women were frequently harassed for their attire.
France: In France, the government has gone to the opposite extreme, enacting laws that ban religious garments such as the hijab in public schools, citing secularism.
This approach has been criticised for limiting women’s right to dress in accordance with their beliefs.
These examples show that whether the law mandates certain clothing or restricts it, women often bear the brunt of dress code enforcement.
In many cases, these laws reinforce existing gender inequalities and limit personal freedom under the guise of maintaining public order or morality.
The Case for Embracing Traditional Dress
In Zimbabwe, there is a rich cultural heritage to draw from when discussing clothing and identity.
Traditional garments like the nhembe (a traditional loincloth worn by men) or the shashiko (a decorative garment worn by women) embody a deep connection to Zimbabwean roots.
These traditional clothes were functional and symbolic, designed for comfort in the region’s climate and reflective of the wearer’s status and role within the community.
There is an argument to be made that instead of enforcing vague and discriminatory dress codes, Zimbabwe could embrace and promote its traditional attire as part of its cultural heritage.
In a globalised world where Western fashion often dominates, Zimbabwe has an opportunity to celebrate its unique traditions through clothing while allowing room for modern expression.
What is Culture? Is Culture Not Dynamic?
The notion of “culture” is often invoked to justify dress codes and the policing of women’s attire.
However, culture is not static—it evolves over time.
What was considered appropriate clothing a hundred years ago may not hold the same relevance today.
Similarly, the concept of modesty and decency has shifted across generations and will continue to do so.
By clinging to outdated ideas of dress, Zimbabwe risks stifling its cultural dynamism.
Instead of viewing culture as something fixed, Zimbabwe should embrace its fluidity and allow for the coexistence of traditional and modern expressions of identity through clothing.
Moving Forward: A Dress Code for All or None?
Ultimately, Zimbabwe must decide whether it wants to enforce a dress code at all—and if so, what that code should reflect.
The current vague and arbitrary system, which disproportionately targets women, is unsustainable and violates basic constitutional rights.
If Zimbabwe chooses to implement a dress code, it must be clearly defined, non-discriminatory, and respectful of personal freedoms and gender equality.
The time has come for Zimbabwe to have an honest conversation about the role of