In a world marked by deep divisions, social injustice, and historical wounds—Zimbabwe included—few concepts offer as much untapped potential for individual and collective healing as forgiveness. While it is often associated with religious or moral practice, forgiveness is increasingly understood as a cornerstone of public health, human flourishing, and dignity.
It sits squarely within the framework of humanistic management, a theme I have consistently explored in this column through articles on dignity, well - being, and transformative education. The Global Forgiveness Movement, driven by the Human Flourishing Programme at Harvard University, now offers a rigorous, research based framework for integrating forgiveness into our cultural, educational, and policy discourse.
Forgiveness is more than a spiritual exercise; it is a psychological and societal imperative. In previous articles, I argued that dignity—the intrinsic worth of every human being—should underpin how we educate future leaders and structure our institutions.
Well-being, as I explored through the lens of Michael Pirson’s work, requires not only material sufficiency but inner peace and relational harmony. Forgiveness ties these strands together. It affirms dignity by refusing to define people solely by their worst acts. It promotes flourishing by releasing individuals and communities from the corrosive grip of bitterness, vengeance, and trauma.
Zim’s historical, social landscape
From Gukurahundi to Operation Murambatsvina, Zimbabwe’s recent history is marred by political violence, economic dislocation, and social rupture. These wounds remain largely unaddressed in the national discourse. Yet forgiveness, as part of a broader reconciliation framework, holds transformative potential.
It is not a call to forget or excuse wrongdoing but an invitation to transcend it—for the sake of societal renewal. Models such as South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission have offered some inspiration, but Zimbabwe has yet to develop a comprehensive, inclusive process for healing its past.
Research by Everett Worthington, Robert Enright, and others has shown that forgiveness interventions can significantly improve mental health, reduce stress, and promote prosocial behaviour.
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Bulls to charge into Zimbabwe gold stocks
- Ndiraya concerned as goals dry up
- Letters: How solar power is transforming African farms
Keep Reading
The Human Flourishing Programme’s Global Forgiveness Movement seeks to operationalise this science for practical application. Zimbabwean educators, policymakers, and community leaders would do well to study and adapt these findings to our unique cultural and historical context.
Schools could integrate forgiveness education into citizenship and history curricula. Faith-based organisations and civil society could facilitate community dialogue circles. Even in the workplace, principles of restorative justice and conflict transformation can anchor forgiveness in organisational culture.
Forgiveness is not weakness. It is a demanding ethical and civic virtue. Zimbabwe’s political leadership must model this virtue by acknowledging past harms and creating safe spaces for truth telling and redress.
Civil society must advocate not only for justice in legal terms but for healing in human terms. And citizens, though weary, must begin to imagine a future not shackled by resentment but animated by shared purpose. The journey of forgiveness is deeply personal but also profoundly public.
REACH forgiveness model in Zim
The REACH Forgiveness Model, developed by Worthington and tested across high conflict regions including South Africa and Colombia, provides a practical, step by step guide to cultivating forgiveness. How can this model be applied in Zimbabwe?
The REACH model comprises five stages: Recall, Empathise, Altruistic gift, Commit, and Hold on. Together, these steps provide a structured pathway for people to move from emotional pain to peace. Each step is both personally transformative and socially relevant—particularly in a context such as Zimbabwe where past wounds remain tender and unacknowledged.
Recall asks the individual or community to acknowledge the wrong done and the feelings associated with it. In Zimbabwe, many grievances lie buried beneath layers of fear, censorship, and silence. Victims of Gukurahundi still wait for national acknowledgment. Families displaced during Operation Murambatsvina continue to live with unprocessed grief. Farmers affected by land redistribution carry scars that have been politicised, not healed.
In a culture that often shames emotional expression or equates forgetting with forgiveness, the REACH model calls for honest reckoning. This is not about dwelling on pain, but about facing it squarely so that it can lose its power to define the future. Schools and civil society organisations could facilitate “memory circles” or story sharing sessions to allow Zimbabweans to recall wounds without fear of retaliation or dismissal.
Empathy is the most difficult step. It does not condone harm, but it challenges us to consider the context, pressures, or brokenness that may have driven someone to offend.
In Zimbabwean communities, where political violence often pitted neighbour against neighbour, empathy could mean listening to a former militia member explain how poverty or fear manipulated them into violence. It could involve recognising that many state actors were executing policies under duress.
Empathy is also needed in family settings, where generational conflict, abuse, and neglect persist. A young professional in Harare might recall being beaten for academic underperformance by a parent who grew up under colonial inferiority complexes.
Understanding the psychological and socio-historical burdens that shaped the offender creates room for humanisation—and thus, for healing.
The REACH workbook invites people to write a narrative from the offender’s perspective. In Zimbabwean church groups or youth mentorship forums, this could be done collectively as an exercise in mutual understanding—especially across political, ethnic, or generational divides.
The altruistic gift stage reframes forgiveness not as something earned, but as a gift—given not because the offender deserves it, but because the forgiver values peace more than resentment. This concept resonates deeply with Ubuntu, the Zimbabwean worldview that says “I am because we are.” The altruistic act of forgiveness restores not only the self but the collective.
An example of this can be seen in rural Matabeleland, where some communities, lacking formal truth commissions, have chosen traditional rituals of cleansing and reconciliation. These acts, though unofficial, reflect the altruistic gift of forgiveness—a decision to let go, for the sake of the next generation.
At an institutional level, churches and schools could champion this step by teaching that forgiveness is an act of power, not weakness.
For students who experience bullying, or employees passed over for promotion due to office politics, forgiveness can free them from mental shackles and toxic rumination.
Forgiveness becomes more durable when it’s externalised — written down, spoken aloud, or ritualised. Zimbabwean culture already has deep traditions of ritual: marriage ceremonies, ancestral acknowledgements, and national holidays. The REACH model encourages creating similarly visible moments for forgiveness.
A school in Bulawayo, for instance, could establish an annual “Peace Assembly” where students write anonymous letters of forgiveness to peers, teachers, or family members and place them in a communal box. Community-based organisations working in post conflict areas could host mural projects where people depict stories of hurt and healing.
Making forgiveness a social commitment transforms it from a fragile private decision into a resilient public value.
Forgiveness is not a one-time act. Offenders may reoffend. Pain may resurface. Memories may be re-triggered. The final REACH step—Hold on—acknowledges this and urges individuals and communities to maintain forgiveness through reflection, ritual, and support networks.
This is where Zimbabwe has the greatest opportunity — and responsibility. A nation that forgives must also embed forgiveness into its structures: the justice system, educational curricula, political rhetoric, and media culture.
Without this systemic reinforcement, forgiveness risks being interpreted as naïveté or surrender.
Zimbabwean institutions could hold annual interfaith dialogues, restorative justice training for police, or forgiveness-themed arts festivals. Universities could offer modules on restorative leadership and post traumatic growth.
The National Peace and Reconciliation Commission could partner with local councils to build “Peace Hubs” in communities, where people access not only counselling but also practical forgiveness tools.
Jongwe is a humanistic leader with extensive expertise across various industries in Southern Africa, including higher education- WhatsApp at+263 788016938 or by email at [email protected]
