The SEC Joins The Cutting-Edge eDiscovery World

Government lawyers are generally assumed to be several generations behind the curve when it comes to technology. The federal court system is even out here claiming they have to keep PACER in the dark ages despite that claim being routinely debunked, docketing is a jurisdiction by jurisdiction mess, and somehow WordPerfect is still in business. But the SEC is stepping up its tech game with a new eDiscovery system.

In a press release issued this morning, Casepoint announced that the SEC has selected a specially designed version of the product called Casepoint Government for its eDiscovery needs.

“We are honored that the SEC has selected Casepoint Government as its technology of choice for this important program to bring its eDiscovery process to the cloud,” said Amy Hilbert, VP of Public Sector at Casepoint. “We understand the magnitude of the demands on the SEC. Our technology has been carefully built over many years to meet or exceed the agency’s needs through our scalable platform, artificial intelligence, and advanced analytics.”

Getting a large-scale eDiscovery system was imperative for the SEC who receives approximately 3,500 new productions, totaling nearly 10 terabytes after processing, each month. Casepoint’s system won out over multiple competitors in a multi-stage selection process based on its “software features and functionality, cybersecurity, management and key personnel, past performance, and a competitive proof of concept process.” With Casepoint on board, the SEC will have a powerful tool to sift through the mounds of data it’s receiving.


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

John Dowd Writes Letter In Comic Sans Because He’s Through Pretending He’s Not A Clown

When John Dowd represented Donald Trump in the Mueller investigation and loudly discussed the case in restaurants in front of journalists, folks were all too willing to write it off as an uncharacteristic flub from an otherwise competent attorney. When Dowd tried to explain that presidents can’t obstruct justice, people wrote it off as a zealous advocate saying whatever he needed to to help his client — except, of course, his counterpart on Trump’s defense team who thought it was nuts. But now we can finally, finally go ahead and admit that John Dowd may just be a clown.

Dowd, who now represents some of Rudy Giuliani’s toadies in the Ukraine story, informed the House Intelligence Committee that his clients would not be showing up to testify. It’s a pretty standard move for an attorney representing people this deeply embroiled in what could well turn out to be criminal activity. Indeed, it’s generally a bad idea to talk to Congress if you have any concerns that you might end up dealing with prosecutors. But how Dowd chose to communicate with the House was… curious. Observe!



Yes, that’s Comic Sans. And you never want to use Comic Sans. Seriously, no matter what.

Yet this isn’t even Dowd’s first brush with Comic Sans. During the Mueller investigation, Dowd sent a letter with a Comic Sans letterhead begging to spare Trump the obstruction charge that Mueller would eventually admit he’d have leveled had he been allowed to. Mueller got another message in Comic Sans from Ty Cobb, probably the result of the high-stakes restaurant strategy session the two had.

Is this intentional? Is Dowd trying to troll the entities investigating his clients by intentionally writing them in joke lettering? It’s an interesting conspiracy theory, but one that seems to give Dowd far more credit than he’s built up over the course of these investigations. Occam’s razor suggests he’s just embracing his inner child. It may not be the most professional — or even a marginally professional — look, but if it sparks joy for him, so be it.

After all, Jay Sekulow’s legal reasoning may as well be written in Wingdings, so let’s cut Dowd some slack.

Trump’s old lawyers really, really love Comic Sans [Fast Company]

Earlier: What Font Should You Use For Your Résumé? Apparently This Matters To People.
Comic Sans: The Perfect Font For A Subpoena… If You’re As Dumb As This Clerk


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Gordon Sondland Is A Case Study In Trump’s Obstruction Of Congress

Adam Schiff (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

We talk a lot about how “weak” the Congressional subpoena power is, but we have to remember why the power is so weak. The abuse of executive power required to make a Congressional subpoena “weak” is so massive, and we’ve gotten so used to President Donald Trump’s abuse of his office, that we really need to take a step back to see how violative Trump is behaving towards American norms and practices. Today’s non-testimony of Gordon Sondland is as good a case study as any.

Gordon Sondland was asked, not subpoenaed, to appear before Congress as part of its ongoing investigation into Trump’s apparent and admitted to extortion of the Ukraine in exchange for help with the 2020 election. Sondland, as the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, reports to the Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, who reports to the President of the United States, Donald Trump. But Sondland, Pompeo, and Trump all work for the people of the United States (technically) of which the House of Representatives are their most direct representatives.

Put another way, the people asked one of their employees to appear before their representatives to answer for how the people’s business is being conducted abroad, and that employee told the people to go f**k themselves. More than that, he claims that he was ordered to tell the people to go f**k themselves by the President of the United States.

That’s simply insane. You shouldn’t need a subpoena to compel an employee to explain themselves. That we even get into the realm of subpoenas represents a direct obstruction of a Congressional inquiry by the president. In a normally functioning democracy, that would be a fireable offense on the part of the president.

The House responded by issuing a subpoena for Sondland’s testimony. Most likely, Trump will order Sondland to ignore the subpoena as well.

Which brings another actor into our game: Attorney General William Barr. Barr, again, reports to President Trump, but is technically employed by the American people. His job, as the chief law enforcement officer in the country, is supposed to be to enforce the laws of the United States government. A Congressional subpoena is one such law, and the attorney general is supposed to take all steps to ensure compliance, including jailing people who refuse to testify under a duly executed subpoena, if need be.

Does anyone think Barr will do that? Of course not. Because Barr has shown himself to be a craven accessory to President Trump’s apparent crimes, not an independent actor with his own responsibility to the Constitution. It is likely that Barr will aide Sondland’s attempts to avoid congressional testimony, all at the behest of Donald Trump.

Barr, of course, should not even be in a position where he is making any decisions regarding any enforcement of this investigation, because he himself is implicated as one of the major accomplices or witnesses to Trump’s abuse of power. Asking him to help force Sondland to testify might be like asking a drug kingpin to force his connect to testify against him.

Again, in a normally functioning democracy, this would be unacceptable. Barr would be forced to recuse, a deputy would urge Sondland to comply, over the will of the president if necessary, and men would be dangling handcuffs in front of Sondland while he made his decision. The fact that none of that is going to happen should enrage people, regardless of party. But there is no more “regardless of party” in this country. Republican party apparatchiks have successfully convinced Republican voters that there is no more important identity than being white and Republican. Nothing can be allowed to threaten that, not even crimes committed by the president in plain sight.

It is in this context: where the employee of the American people fails to voluntarily comply with the law, where the secretary of state and the attorney general fail to uphold the Constitution, all in service of a criminal president who is supported by the spineless prevarications of his wholly owned political party, is where the Congressional subpoena power appears “weak.” If you put it on a solid booster rocket, the Space Shuttle can aid humanity’s exploration and understanding of the cosmos. On its own, it’s just a shell of fragile plastic. It can’t even fly.

Every president and executive branch officer going forward now gets to know that Congress can simply be ignored if the people they represent are too docile and distracted to take action. This will not end well for the American system of government.


Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and a contributor at The Nation. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.

Major Changes Coming To The LSAT With Removal Of Logic Games Section

(Image via Getty)

How much better would your score on the LSAT have been if the logic games section (aka the analytical reasoning section) in its current format wasn’t on the exam? In just four years, prospective law students around the country will find out.

This dramatic step forward for the LSAT — which just took an equally dramatic step forward by going completely digital — is all thanks to Angelo Binno, a legally blind apspiring law student whose visual impairment prevented him from completing the drawing and diagramming that’s often necessary to complete that segment of the exam.

After eight years of litigation against the American Bar Association and the Law School Adminission Council, the parties have finally settled. While LSAC approved several accommodations for Binno, his request to have the logic games section of the LSAT waived was denied. “They handed me a pencil and paper and I said it’s useless to me because I can’t see to draw,” Binno said in an interview with ClickOn Detroit.

Binno and his co-plaintiff, Shelesha Taylor, who is also legally blind, will now work alongside LSAC with the assistance of the Wayne State University Law School’s Disability Law Clinic to make the LSAT experience fairer for all test-takers.

Here’s an excerpt from a press release announcing the settlement (emphasis added):

LSAC has begun research and development into alternative ways to assess analytical reasoning skills, as part of a broader review of all question types to determine how the fundamental skills for success in law school can be reliably assessed in ways that offer improved accessibility for all test takers. Consistent with the parties’ agreement, LSAC will complete this work within the next four years, which will enable all prospective law school students to take an exam administered by LSAC that does not have the current AR section but continues to assess analytical reasoning abilities.

What will the new analytical reasoning section look like? LSAC has 48 months to hash that out. Hopefully it doesn’t look anything like its current format, according to Binno’s lawyer, Jason Turkish, who also has a severe sight impairment:

A, B, C, D, and E go into a bar and E is next to A and A is next to B and C must be two spaces over from E. Where is D? I’ve never had to answer a question like that in any state or federal court, but that’s how we’re deciding who’s going to go to law school.

When asked if he would be taking the LSAT again, Binno said, “Yes. And I will pass.” Congratulations to Angelo Binno on this hard-fought victory, which will not only benefit him, but all future law students. Well done!

Statement on the amicable resolution of Binno v. LSAC lawsuit [PR Newswire]
LSAT to drastically change after LSAC settles lawsuit with blind Metro Detroit man [ClickOn Detroit]


Staci ZaretskyStaci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

3 Questions For A Biglaw Refugee Turned Biglaw Vice Chair

Bill Isaacson (Photo via Boies Schiller)

Back in 2016, I wrote about rediscovering one of my favorite voices, ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser, and how his move from radio to podcasting offered lessons for lawyers hoping to strike out on their own. In particular, I focused on what prospective Biglaw refugees could learn from the 71-year-old Kornheiser’s focus on delivering a quality product to his listeners via a new medium.

Years later, I am still listening to the podcast, enjoying the rotating cast of characters discussing sports, culture, and the news of the day. All delivered alongside Tony’s detailed descriptions of his various physical ailments, as well as his general frustration navigating 2019 as a technophobic, cash-paying, intolerant of stupidity, one-percenter who is not afraid to mix it up with a home-invading flying squirrel or aggressive deer when the hour calls. Throw in humorous critiques of the ad copy submitted by the advertisers who keep the lights on and some user-submitted original music and jingles — it all adds up to an hour well-spent each day. (Even if my high schoolers protested vociferously when the podcast’s name was reflected on our car’s radio display screen while driving carpool at 7 a.m. This was a major embarrassment, even though I was listening to the show on my earphones. Which in and of themselves are embarrassing, since they are not Airpods. Can’t win.)

Carpool faux pas aside, one of the recurring surprise guests on Tony’s podcast is his friend and legal luminary, Bill Isaacson, who is only one of the leading antitrust lawyers in the entire country, as well as the Vice Chair of Boies Schiller, where he was one of the original lawyers to join the then-startup firm, leaving a Biglaw partnership to do so. As I have had a long-held interest in the intersection of IP and antitrust, fueled recently by a spate of interesting cases raising antitrust issues in the context of standard-essential patents, I reached out to Bill in the hopes that he would agree to a written interview for this audience. As gracious as he is celebrated, he agreed, and I am pleased to share Bill’s insights on a range of topics, including preparing for a career as a trial lawyer and the value of taking ownership over your legal career.

As usual, I have added some brief commentary to the answers below and in next week’s second installment, but have otherwise presented Bill’s answers as he provided them.

1) You went to college on a debate scholarship and are now a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Looking back, do you think you were destined for trial work or was it your experiences in law school and beyond that led to a career in the courtroom?

I spent my high school years (at Marquette High School in Milwaukee) focused on debate, which did end up paying my way through college (at the University of Redlands in California).  Many debaters I knew then marched into law school. Law firms are riddled with ex-debaters, and I do not know many debaters that became doctors. I believe the reason for that is not so much the oral advocacy we learned, it is more the time we spent on research and structuring of complicated materials into arguments and presentations.  Because of debate, for example, I was researching in the law library in high school. Debate taught me more about how to prepare for trial than it did about how to communicate at trial. I eventually decided that “arguing” like in a debate was not always the best method of communication in court, and that my goal in court should be to have a (persuasive) conversation with a judge or jury. 

GK: Bill makes a strong argument for exposing more students, particularly at a younger age to debate. As someone who teaches a high-school elective class on IP, I understand the importance of working with students on their writing skills. At the same time, giving them a taste of “getting on their feet” — while also developing their research skills so they are prepared to speak coherently and persuasively — is an important ingredient. And Bill’s points on the importance of developing research skills and learning to speak to your audience should resonate with any IP lawyer who gets (or hopes) to speak in a courtroom.

2) What is the biggest lesson you learned from taking the leap as a newly minted Biglaw partner to join Boies Schiller as one of the founding lawyers and how would you turn that experience into advice for other lawyers contemplating a similar move?

We just passed 22 years since the founding of the firm.  One part of the experience of practicing law in a law firm is that you are part of business.  It is a unique opportunity to help build a business with your colleagues (whether it is a new firm, a department, a practice area, etc.) in the environment and with the clients that you want. I recommend grabbing that opportunity if you get it.  Joining this firm at the beginning was the best professional decision I ever made. And I would have no regrets if it had turned out less successfully than it did.

GK: Speaking from personal experience, all I can say is that I agree with Bill wholeheartedly on the immense personal satisfaction that comes with helping to build a business. Especially with people you want to build it with, doing the work that you want to do, for the clients you want to work on behalf of. As weighty as the challenges are, the rewards are just so much sweeter for them.

3) For the past few years, you have often been mentioned as a spectator, and sometimes speaker, on Tony Kornheiser’s popular podcast. How important is it for lawyers to maintain friendships with people outside of the profession, whether or not they are famous?

We all need friends in our lives who make us laugh.  Although Tony’s television show PTI is more famous, I met Tony through his radio show.  I ended up through my brother (who is a Broadway producer) arranging good seats for Tony at Broadway plays and going to the theatre with him and the podcast regulars. The tickets for Tony became a running joke on his show and we became friends.  Tony’s audience often arranges for him all sorts of benefits (and well as sending him junk) and he provides laughter to his listeners in his podcast (“La Cheeserie!” to any other of the podcast listeners.). All in all, it is a healthy relationship. 

GK: For my thoughts on Tony, go back and re-read the intro paragraphs to this column. La Cheeserie to all. 

Next week, we will conclude our interview with Bill, focusing on some of his famous successes in the IP and antitrust arenas.

Please feel free to send comments or questions to me at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome.


Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique, and Markman Advisors LLC, a leading consultancy on patent issues for the investment community. Gaston’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and related counseling, with a strong focus on patent matters. You can reach him at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or follow him on Twitter: @gkroub.

Hong Kong Protestors Carry Last Wills And Testaments As They Protest Economic Conditions

Studio Incendo [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)]

As a trusts and estates practitioner, I advise all individuals who have reached the age of majority to execute a last will and testament. No matter the size of one’s wealth or the nature of one’s family composition, a last will and testament is needed to keep affairs in order in the event of death. Not surprisingly, individuals are often compelled to write last wills when they have experienced something significant in their lives. The birth of children, the death of a relative, a divorce, or personal illness are all common impetuses for executing a last will and testament.

I am always pleased when an individual engages my services to write a last will and testament without any inciting reason, in other words, they do it because it is the responsible thing for an adult to do. I admire this kind of diligence and sense of responsibility as if the testatrix understands that even the smallest bank account requires some direction in its post-mortem disbursement and estates of all sizes require instructions.

As such, I have been fascinated by recent news reports from the ongoing protests in Hong Kong. For more than three months, citizens of Hong Kong have demonstrated against the government as they argue for the preservation of individual rights and freedoms. The protests have often resulted in violence. The risk of injury and death are palpable.

News reports reveal that some protesters have executed last wills and testaments as they expect to die as a result of the protests. Many of the protesters are students, in their twenties. The majority of the protestors represent the youth of Hong Kong. They do not have enough money to live in the expensive city, and while educated, they fear for their future. The protests are demonstrations in support of their future and their freedom. Despite their lack of wealth, many have chosen to write last wills and testaments as their final revelations, directing the administration of their estates and leaving messages for their families.

A driving issue among the protesters is the high cost of living in Hong Kong and the decrease in available jobs and wages, despite higher education. Property prices are also surging, making the purchase of a residence unattainable for many. Additionally, Hong Kong was established as a city for businesses. As such, its legislative council which determines how public money is used is dominated by business groups. Businesses, and not individuals, often get the advantages.

The plight of the Hong Kong citizens is an impetus for the contemplation of one’s own mortality. News outlets have reported that as a result of the protests, violence, and bleak opportunities, many are accepting of the fact that they may die. This realization, coupled with the education and preparedness of the protesters, is the basis for the preparation of their last wills and testaments. It is also demonstrative of the fact that one does not need to be wealthy, or even monetarily comfortable, to write a last will.

The protesters in Hong Kong demonstrate that when in the path of death, one needs to plan. Regardless of whether one has children, a spouse, an education, or money, upon death, there will always be an affair to reconcile. These actions also serve as a reminder that the last wills are often used as a final note to family and friends, revealing not only one’s wishes for the distribution of assets and property, but recognition of family and friends. Herein lies the immense power of a last will and testament, that is to implore upon one’s survivors the testator’s final thoughts and convictions. Certainly in the case of the Hong Kong protestors, much like wartime soldiers and terminal illness patients, the formality and structure of a last will and testament allow for their memory and direction to be forever preserved.


Cori A. Robinson is a solo practitioner having founded Cori A. Robinson PLLC, a New York and New Jersey law firm, in 2017. For more than a decade Cori has focused her law practice on trusts and estates and elder law including estate and Medicaid planning, probate and administration, estate litigation, and guardianships. She can be reached at cori@robinsonestatelaw.com

Kamala Harris Gets Dragged Into DLA Piper Sexual Assault Controversy

Senator Kamala Harris (Photo by NOAH BERGER/AFP/Getty Images)

Kamala Harris is in a bit of a sticky situation.

The presidential hopeful has publicly come out in opposition to mandatory arbitration agreements. Indeed, she joined Senator Richard Blumenthal urging JPMorgan Chase to eliminate forced arbitration, saying at the time:

“One of the fundamental principles of our democracy is that everyone should get their day in court. Forced arbitration deprives Americans of that basic right.”

And that’s a great, liberal stance to take! Unfortunately for the senator, DLA Piper feels very, very differently. See DLA is where Harris’s husband, Douglas Emhoff, is a partner. And the firm’s stance on mandatory arbitration has been in the news lately — a partner at DLA, Vanina Guerrero, alleges the co-managing partner of the firm’s Silicon Valley office, Louis Lehot, repeatedly sexually assaulted her, beginning shortly after she began working for the firm in 2018. Last week Guerrero penned an open letter asking the firm to release her from their forced arbitration agreement so she’d be free to pursue her claims in open court. The firm has yet to respond to Guerrero’s request to be let out of the mandatory arbitration agreement, saying only that they are aware of the allegations against Lehot and are investigating.

Indeed, DLA Piper has defended their use of mandatory arbitration before. When law school student activists organized a #DumpDLA campaign over their arbitration stance, the firm put out a fluffy statement defending arbitration conflating the benefits some people get from arbitration as an option and ignoring the harms of forcing all their employees to use that as their exclusive mechanism for dispute resolution. Their stance didn’t waiver amidst protests against mandatory arbitration outside of their office.

All of which sets the stage for the latest move. Guerrero’s attorney, Jeanne Christensen partner at Wigdor, wrote an open letter to Harris asking her to condemn the use of mandatory arbitration agreements at DLA Piper:

I am sure you would agree that silencing women through forced arbitration must end. No female employee, including a new partner, would knowingly agree to waive her right to our court system for claims involving sexual assault, battery or rape. Given your profile as a candidate for the Democratic nominee for President of the United States, you are in a unique position to condemn the actions of DLA Piper and make clear that mandatory arbitration must stop. We, therefore, urge you to publicly support the notion that all women who work at DLA Piper deserve to hear allegations about unlawful sexual conduct by male employees.

And, you have to give it to Christensen, this is a smart play. Legally, they don’t have a way into court unless DLA waives the arbitration agreement. So turning up the pressure on the firm is really their best bet, and using a high profile partner and his higher profile spouse to do so keeps the conversation about sexual assault and mandatory arbitration going and gives it the widest possible audience.

Now some have argued it isn’t fair to hold Harris responsible for the actions of her husband and his firm. But Harris willingly waded into the mandatory arbitration waters when JP Morgan Chase was doing it. Why wouldn’t it be okay to now ask Harris if her stance on mandatory arbitration is universal or if it stops when her family gets some tangential benefit from the agreement. And here’s the thing, she can (and, hopefully, will) condemn DLA — no one has to agree with their spouse 100 percent of the time and with their spouse’s law firm even less of the time. But asking Harris this question to better get a sense of the contours of her position on mandatory arbitration agreements is more than a fair question for someone who wants to be president.


headshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

The Status Quo Could Be Hindering Your Efficiency – There Is A Solution

Attorneys know there is usually more work than time in most days. That’s just how it is when you are staffed to provide legal services, but not marketing, office administration, accounting, or any of the other responsibilities that larger law firms can delegate to dedicated personnel. This is more than just an inconvenient fact of life. It’s a potential fatal flaw, because administrative duties pull attorneys away from profitable work, thus dragging down a firm’s efficiency and putting its overall viability at risk.

“Efficiency” can be defined as the time it takes to complete a given task. In a law firm context, it pertains to the time and effort needed to carry a matter from intake to paid invoice. Obviously, the more efficient this process, the better a firm’s bottom line. And yet, an overwhelming majority of firms have ignored streamlining this area of their operations.

In the 2019 State of U.S. Small Law Firms Report from the Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, 72 percent of the 300 respondents said spending too much time on administrative tasks was at least a “moderate” challenge. That’s up two percent from the previous year. While it’s a small uptick, it shows that firms failed to make headway on this challenge. Not only that, it is becoming more of a problem.

That point is underscored by how small law firms define “success.” Seventy-six percent say it’s based on overall profits. By clogging a lawyer’s day with non-billable work, inefficiency corrodes profits, and dilutes the most important measure of success for many firms.

If any further proof is needed, consider these three areas where a lack of efficiency creates serious structural problems:

Client dissatisfaction: In the era of on-demand entertainment and restaurant-to-door delivery service, is it any wonder clients want results immediately? That may not be possible, of course, but it’s still true that a lawyer who is not able to operate efficiently cannot attend to client matters quickly. The less time a lawyer has to spend on non-client work, the more quickly any given billable task can be handled.

Lower-quality work product: Quality legal work demands focus, and that’s hard to do when you’re dealing with issues other than practicing law. The attorney who focuses primarily on his clients’ matters produces a much higher quality finished product that leads to happier, more loyal customers.

Attorney burnout: Burnout is a tremendous issue for the legal profession. For lawyers at small firms, a major cause is trying to do everything alone. When “everything” includes too much non-billable work, lawyers become exhausted performing tasks that don’t bring in any money. That is inefficiency at its worst.

In the end, no small law firm attorney needs another thing on his or her plate. Efficiency is worthy of special consideration, however. Because, in its absence, the prospect of ultimate failure increases.

Download the white paper to learn more.

Lacking common cents: how Zimbabwe went from economic star to financial basket case – The Zimbabwean

While Gideon Gono, the former governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, claimed hyperinflation in Zimbabwe peaked at 2.2 million percent, Bloomberg estimates it was closer to 500 billion percent

Imagine clean tap water running just once a week, or half the population struggling to rustle up a single meal every day. This, according to Eddie Cross, an MP for Bulawayo South and founding member of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party, is the reality of a “period of harsh austerity” in Zimbabwe that “has [drastically] reduced living standards”.

These tough conditions show little sign of letting up, with the country sinking deeper into an economic crisis that has drawn comparisons to 2008, when GDP growth in Zimbabwe fell to -17.7 percent (see Fig 1) and the currency was devalued to such an extent that a wheelbarrow full of notes wouldn’t even buy a loaf of bread.

In the aftermath of the 2008 hyperinflationary crisis, the country’s leaders were able to agree on a power-sharing arrangement that allowed Zimbabwe to emerge with some semblance of hope. This time round, with the nation’s ruling party refusing to relinquish control or acknowledge the depths of the crisis, no solutions – international or domestic – are forthcoming. Rather, the country seems doomed to sink deeper into a financial depression that will have devastating consequences for its citizens and could take decades to recover from.

Rocky Rhodes
In its short history as a unified country, Zimbabwe has seen its fair share of economic hardship. The area of land that makes up modern-day Zimbabwe had been home to various tribal communities for centuries before it was demarcated in its current form in the 1890s by imperialist Cecil Rhodes and the British South Africa Company. The new state, which was named Southern Rhodesia in honour of its coloniser, remained under the control of the UK until 1965, when it declared itself independent. The following 15 years would be defined by a brutal civil war, which pitted the white colonialist minority government against black guerrilla forces led by, among others, future Zimbabwean Prime Minister Robert Mugabe.

Zimbabwe seems doomed to sink deeper into a financial depression that will have devastating consequences for its citizens

Peace was achieved in the early 1980s, facilitating Zimbabwe’s emergence as an economic star. The country’s GDP grew by an average 5.2 percent during that decade, thanks to an extensive programme of public spending – notably on education and healthcare facilities. In 1992, a study by the World Bank found that more than 500 health centres had been built across the country in the preceding 12 years, while enrolment in secondary schools had increased by 902 percent between 1980 and 1990. For all intents and purposes, the country was well on its way to becoming mythologised as a great African success story.

Mugabe’s administration, however, made a series of poor decisions that impeded the country’s economic ascendance. The first was the manner in which the early 1980s investment drive was carried out. As a fledgling independent nation, Zimbabwe did not have the necessary productivity to support such high spending, so while the new societal infrastructure improved the quality of life for Zimbabwe’s citizens, it also meant the country racked up a significant budget deficit, leaving it extremely short on emergency funds.

The government’s second misstep came in 1998, when it chose to weigh in on the conflict in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Not only did the cost of this intervention drain what little remained of Zimbabwe’s bank reserves, it also alienated the country from the international community – in 1999, both the World Bank and the IMF suspended their aid provision due to an unwillingness to fund Zimbabwe’s military spending in the DRC. Three years later, the country was suspended from the Commonwealth and subjected to sanctions by both the US and EU amid allegations of political corruption. This isolation decimated Zimbabwe’s agricultural sector, which accounted for around 12.6 percent of GDP at the time.

“Zimbabwe was an agrarian industrial country, with emphasis on the word ‘industrial’,” Stephen Chan, a professor of international relations at SOAS University of London, told World Finance. “It was regarded as extremely hi-tech, growing food for modern international markets.” The application of sanctions, however, severely dampened exports. The industry was further crippled by a drought in 2003, which destroyed the meagre subsistence agriculture that remained and left 70 percent of Zimbabwe’s citizens living below the bread line.

Sick notes
Over the following five years, the country descended deeper into economic crisis. Inflation reached 1,000 percent in 2006 – leading the World Bank to declare Zimbabwe the fastest-shrinking economy outside of a war zone – and the government’s attempts to stop prices from skyrocketing were ineffectual, to say the least. While Gideon Gono, the former governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, claimed hyperinflation peaked at 2.2 million percent in July 2008, Bloomberg estimates it was closer to 500 billion percent – a figure that Chan described as “metaphysical”. He added: “You couldn’t offer beggars anything in the street, because they’d just throw it away. It was meaningless. You’d have entire alleyways just full of worthless notes.”

Chan’s vivid image symbolises a wider truth: currency has always been at the heart of Zimbabwe’s economic troubles. In the 1980s and 1990s, as the country remained in relative infancy, one of the most vital tasks for Mugabe’s administration was to ensure the Zimbabwean dollar retained its value in order to support macroeconomic stability. It failed dismally for two reasons: first, it showed an inability to create and maintain national industries that would offer underlying productive value, and second, it proved itself too willing to devalue the currency, which, in turn, caused a greater international PR problem.

The destructive impact of the government’s failure was borne out most clearly in the hyperinflation crisis, but the repercussions continue to this day. In 2009, then finance minister Tendai Biti, who was part of an emergency government of national unity, implemented a recovery plan centred on the adoption of the US dollar as legal tender. While this succeeded in curbing hyperinflation at the time, it has subsequently caused significant issues when it comes to obtaining foreign currency – particularly given the rest of the world’s reluctance to lend to Zimbabwe, which stems from the country’s failure to prove that it has learned its fiscal lesson. “What has come home to roost very recently is that [Zimbabwe] really has no way of sourcing any more dollars,” Chan told World Finance. “No one will lend to [it] anymore, because there never really was a viable repayment plan.”

The government has not been entirely oblivious to these shortages and has, over the past few years, attempted to introduce various currency policies, each with little success. In 2016, bond notes and coins that would purportedly mirror the value of the US dollar were introduced, but they rapidly lost value when citizens realised they had no inherent worth and were not widely accepted as payment. In June 2019, the government – now led by President Emmerson Mnangagwa following the ousting of Mugabe in a military coup in 2017 – went a step further and attempted to introduce an entirely new currency. The RTGS dollar – the first iteration of Zimbabwe’s sovereign currency since 2008 – prevents citizens from using foreign currencies such as the US dollar and pound sterling as legal tender.

In August 2019, Zimbabwean Foreign Minister Sibusiso Moyo claimed that introducing the new currency had stabilised the economy, but with the government refusing to publish inflation data until February 2020, it’s difficult to know whether there’s much truth in his statement. Chan is unconvinced: “There was no real choice because of the lack of US dollars, but there’s no productive value [in the new currency] to pay for imports, so wholesalers are just going to charge more and more money for things.” In other words, the government’s reluctance to reveal inflation information smacks of a cover-up – it does not want to reveal to the world exactly how much of a failure its initiative was with regards to curbing inflation.

Trouble ahead
Anecdotal evidence emerging from Zimbabwe does little to suggest the government has averted an economic crisis. As of June, fuel prices had been hiked to such an extent that the average daily commute costs as much as $20, while 18-hour blackouts have become commonplace in Zimbabwe’s capital, Harare. According to the World Food Programme, an estimated two million people are facing drought-induced starvation, while the same number have no access to clean water.

The current scarcities pose an immediate threat to life for some of Zimbabwe’s citizens, but there are also deeper and more wide-reaching disasters on the horizon, particularly with regards to shortages in HIV and AIDS medication. According to the UN, the country has one of the highest prevalences of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, with an estimated 12.7 percent of the population living with the disease in 2018. This figure has fallen dramatically from its peak in the early 2000s – thanks, in part, to increased awareness of transition methods and behavioural changes such as the use of condoms. Access to antiretroviral treatment (ART) has also improved as a result of a government programme that started to be rolled out in 2003.

According to the UN, 84 percent of those living with HIV in Zimbabwe were able to access ART in 2018. Within this group, 70 percent were provided with medication by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, a multinational organisation that provides grants to nations where HIV is prevalent. In order to unlock these grants, however, governments must contribute a certain percentage of the cost; in Zimbabwe’s case, its leaders must pay $24.2m between 2018 and 2021 to gain access to the full $483m grant.

As a result of the financial troubles currently afflicting the country, the Zimbabwean Government was unable to contribute the $6m sum required in July to unlock the Global Fund’s latest instalment. Consequently, access to ART for HIV patients has been severely restricted, with some being issued a two weeks’ supply at a time rather than the requisite three months, and others being given expired drugs.

“You’ve got the makings of a second stage of the pandemic [of the 1980s],” Chan said. If HIV sufferers cannot gain access to the life-saving medication needed to control their symptoms, cases of AIDS are likely to surge. Infection rates may also rise, as sufferers will not be visiting clinics to collect medication and, as a result, will not be offered condoms at the same time.

In 2016, bond notes and coins that would purportedly mirror the value of the US dollar were introduced, but they rapidly lost value when citizens realised they had no inherent worth and were not widely accepted as payment

Mine for the taking
Of course, not all of Zimbabwe’s citizens are suffering. “There’s an oligarchic class made up of elite governmental and military figures – or those related to such people – who have insulated themselves by some recourse to corrupt means,” Chan explained. Members of this class, which established itself during Mugabe’s reign and has gone unchallenged by Mnangagwa, reportedly enriched themselves through a combination of bribery, overvalued government contracts and the illegal seizure and sale of illegitimate property.

“Transparency International estimates that $100bn has disappeared from the Zimbabwean economy [as a result of corruption],” Cross told World Finance. “The military has been a major beneficiary and has fought to protect its privileged position [under Mnangagwa].” What’s more, this corruption is not the sort that offers a silver lining in the form of job creation or productive value. “Corrupt monies circulated within can be beneficial, even if not always traceable,” Chan said. “But when it’s taken out of the system – or spent on non-productive luxuries, as is largely the case in Zimbabwe – no good is done.”

The diamond market has proven a particularly popular breeding ground for corruption, with a 2008 cable (leaked in 2010) from the US Embassy in Zimbabwe calling the sector “one of the dirtiest” in a “country filled with corrupt schemes”. In 2006, Zimbabwe became a diamond hotbed overnight following the excavation of the Marange diamond fields, which were regarded at the time as the richest natural source of the gems to be discovered for more than a century.

It was hoped initially that the government would utilise the funds derived from mining to reduce the country’s budget deficit; in practice, though, profits have been concentrated in the hands of a select few political and military officials. According to the 2008 cable, these include Gono and former vice president Joice Mujuru, both of whom were accused of skimming hundreds of thousands of dollars a month in illegitimate profits from gem sales. Both Gono and Mujuru denied these allegations.

The Marange diamond fields were also reported to be the site of a torture camp run by the Zimbabwe National Army, the existence of which was revealed in 2011 by the BBC’s Panorama series. Victims told the broadcaster they had been subjected to beatings, sexual assault and dog maulings at the hands of the soldiers there, none of whom are known to have faced repercussions for their actions.

With the government paralysed by a crisis of its own creation, Zimbabwe’s citizens have been left to weather the storm alone

Military impunity remains a significant issue in Zimbabwe today. Not only does this reinforce the existence of corruption, it also creates a culture of fear and violence, robbing citizens of their right to peaceful protest. In January 2019, when trade unions led a work stoppage following a 150 percent hike in fuel prices, security forces shot dead 17 people and raped at least 17 women, according to Human Rights Watch.

No way out
Given the endemic nature of corruption, the dire economic situation and looming public health crisis, the outlook for Zimbabwe is bleak. The most pressing challenge remains the restoration of some kind of economic stability, but with other countries unwilling to offer budgetary support loans and national industry at a standstill, the government will be hard-pressed to drum up any sort of funding soon. Even if it did stumble upon some miraculous money tree, the notes growing on its branches would either be entirely worthless or not accepted as legal tender in accordance with current monetary policy. What’s more, given the level of corruption at the uppermost levels of government, it’s highly unlikely that any new funds would be directed to the sectors suffering critical shortages. Instead, they would find themselves lining the pockets of the well connected.

With the government paralysed by a crisis of its own creation, Zimbabwe’s citizens have been left to weather the storm alone – a nigh impossible task given the absolute lack of basic societal infrastructure. Even the informal economy, which has historically proven extremely resilient in Zimbabwe, is floundering. Last year, in a bid to maintain some sort of viable currency regime, a number of small operators began establishing a grassroots virtual economy, using mobile cash to pay for goods and services. However, this was quickly quashed by the country’s conservative-leaning finance minister, Mthuli Ncube, who introduced a two percent tax on transactions that priced out low-earning citizens.

In a functioning democratic society, the clear response to such an abject failure in economic policy would be to vote out the politicians responsible. In Zimbabwe, though, this is not an option given the monopoly held by Mnangagwa’s party, the Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF). Even if there were to be an election, the likelihood of the results being manipulated is extremely high. What’s more, ZANU-PF’s main opposition, the MDC, is by no means squeaky clean, having experienced its own corruption scandals in recent years. “If you’re looking at democratic solutions for the future, then Zimbabwe is currently between a rock and a hard place,” Chan told World Finance.

The one glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel is Zimbabwe’s negotiations with the IMF regarding a bailout programme, which remain at an early stage. However, the IMF is highly unlikely to green-light any loans until Zimbabwe pays off its debts to other lenders, such as the World Bank. Even if loan agreements can be reached, the country will pay a high price for financial assistance. “Terrible austerities have to come and the poorest people will be hit the hardest,” Chan said. This would likely lead to further civil unrest, again culminating in military violence.

As it currently stands, Zimbabwe is a ticking time bomb. With domestic options exhausted, international intervention is crucial to supporting and sustaining the lives of its citizens. If the country is allowed to collapse entirely, the implications will stretch well beyond Zimbabwean borders, leaving the rest of the world to pick up the humanitarian and economic pieces for decades to come.

Zimbabwe economy seen contracting up to 6% in 2019 – treasury document – The Zimbabwean

Hopes that Zimbabwe’s economy would quickly rebound under President Emmerson Mnangagwa, who took over after the late Robert Mugabe was deposed in a coup in November 2017, have faded fast as citizens grapple with soaring inflation which has eroded earnings and savings.

The national treasury said in a pre-budget planning document that Zimbabwe’s economic problems were being compounded by shortages of foreign currency, fuel and electricity.

“The economy is, therefore, projected to underperform by as much as -3% to -6% in 2019,” the document said, adding that the economy was expected to grow 4.6% next year.

Zimbabwe’s economy is grappling with its worst crisis in a decade, with triple-digit inflation, rolling power cuts and shortages of U.S. dollars, medicines and fuel which have revived memories of the 2008 hyperinflation under Mugabe.

The treasury said the month-on-month inflation rate was projected to fall to around 10% by December this year before easing to 2.3% at the end of 2020.

The government had kept spending in check, the treasury said, and is expecting a budget deficit of up to 4% of GDP this year.

Lacking common cents: how Zimbabwe went from economic star to financial basket case
Who is behind the spate of activist abductions in Zimbabwe?

Post published in: Business