Smaller Firm Lawyers: Your Daily Routine Is Not Just Boring, It’s Costing You Money

You’ve undoubtedly heard that a smooth, automated, data-driven technology toolset can optimize your workflow, but we’re here to tell you it can do more than that: it can optimize your life.  It will create an opportunity for a better work/life balance and, arguably most importantly, give you the ability to spend more of your time at work doing what you love: practicing the law.   

Innovative law firms are taking command of their accounting and administrative processes, while leveraging the cloud for data insights in order to continually optimize and refine their operations — and the resultant efficiencies will allow more time for billable hours and client service, driving profits and sustainability for the business. It’s tech-savvy firms that are poised to succeed in the digital era.

Sponsored by our friends at PwC, our new white paper, Smaller Firm Lawyers: Your Daily Routine Is Not Just Boring, It’s Costing You Money is designed to help small firms understand not only how to best utilize a technology tool kit, but why doing so is crucially important. 

The paper explores the following topics, among many others:

  • Embracing cloud technology
  • Building the right tech toolkit
  • Identifying the relevant KPIs
  • Extracting actionable insight from data

Download your free whitepaper here.

Martin Shkreli Is Suing An Investor For Fraud…From Prison, Because He Has Been Convicted Of Defrauding Said Investor

Life is a journey.

Budget Whack-A-Mole

I love budget whack-a-mole.  It makes life so much easier.  You can pretend to cut costs, without actually sacrificing anything.

“I know we’re obligated to cut our budget by $2 million this year.  It really stinks.  I suppose we’ll have to lay off Jarndyce.”

“But Jarndyce is a great executive assistant.”

“Wait!  I’ve got an idea.  Jarndyce supports both Summerson, a lawyer, and Clare, who’s in the business.  Why should our budget pay for Jarndyce?  Suppose we just transfer the cost of Jarndyce to the business unit budget.  We’ve saved 70 grand, and we’ve still got Jarndyce!”

Perfect!

Unless anyone were actually interested in saving the corporation money.

It’s budget whack-a-mole!

It happens wholesale when you think about cutting lawyers.

“Two million?  That’s a ton of money.  Where will it come from?”

“We’ll have to cut something like seven lawyers.”

“Jesus; that’s impossible.  If we’re short seven lawyers, how will we do the work?”

“Oh, that’s easy!  We’ll just hire outside counsel to do the work for us.”

“How much do you suppose that will cost?”

“Seven lawyers times 2,000 hours per year.  That’s 14,000 hours.  Suppose we get a firm to agree to do the work for $500 an hour.  We’ll pay $7 million.”

“We’re cutting $2 million in expenses, but we’ll incur $7 million in replacement costs?”

“Sure.  We’ve been told to cut costs, so we’re meeting our goal.  And the replacement cost of outside counsel will be paid by the business units that are requesting the lawyers’ services, rather than the law department, so the law department will have saved the money.”

“Are you sure that’s kosher?”

“As kosher as the day is long.  That’s budget whack-a-mole.”


Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and is now deputy general counsel at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Inside Straight: Advice About Lawyering, In-House And Out, That Only The Internet Could Provide (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at inhouse@abovethelaw.com.

Morning Docket: 09.09.19

(Photo by Getty)

* In the two years or so that Justice Neil Gorsuch has served on the Supreme Court, he’s become “everything conservatives hoped for and liberals feared,” having voted to overturn or suggested revisiting 11 of the court’s precedents thus far. [Washington Post]

* Speaking of Justice Gorsuch, here are the two rules he tells each of his law clerks to follow: “Rule number one: Don’t make it up — follow the law. Rule number two: when everybody else around you is yelling at you, asking you to make it up and condemning you for not making it up, refer to rule number one.” [Fox News]

* “I’m indebted to have his help and advice. He truly is a great American.” Frequent Trump critic George Conway, the Wachtell of counsel married to Kellyanne Conway, is informally advising former Rep. Joe Walsh’s 2020 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. [CNN]

* According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the legal sector added around 4,100 jobs in August, outpacing U.S. job growth. This seems like exciting news, but it capped off a summer where overall growth for law jobs was mostly flat. [American Lawyer]

* A Housewife Desperate to stay out of jail: Federal prosecutors say probation isn’t enough for Felicity Huffman’s participation in the Varsity Blues college admissions scandal and want her to serve at least one month in jail, but her lawyers don’t agree. [TODAY]


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.

The Zimbabwean writer who was Robert Mugabe’s nemesis – The Zimbabwean

FILE — In this Friday, Nov. 17, 2017 file photo, Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe officiates at a student graduation ceremony at Zimbabwe Open University on the outskirts of Harare, Zimbabwe. On Friday, Sept. 6, 2019, Zimbabwe President Emmerson Mnangagwa said his predecessor Robert Mugabe, age 95, has died. (AP Photo/Ben Curtis, File)

But Marechera could see through the deceptive characters that were at the brink of leading Zimbabwe. Most of them were his contemporaries and former classmates. Marechera’s no holds barred book, Mindblast, published in 1984 provides a searing review of the early years of Mugabe’s presidency. He writes:

…it seems to me for all the ideals our independence is supposed to represent, it’s still the same old ox-wagon of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. There’s even an attempt to make poverty a holy and acceptable condition. You say you’re hungry, and the shef peers over his three chins down at you and says Comrade, you’re the backbone of the revolution as if your life’s ambition is to be thin and lean as a mosquito’s backbone. And you try to say ‘Shef, I don’t want to be the backbone, I want to be the big belly of the struggle aginst neo-colonialism like the one you got there underneath that Castro beard.’ And before you even finish what you are saying he’s got the CIO and the police and you are being marched at gunpoint to the interrogation barracks. I’m not saying there’s such a thing as an absence of free speech. Rather there’s an excess of it to feed the numerous ears that have been unleashed ‘for security reasons.’

Mugabe who was known for being a vindictive character by political opponents probably never forgave Marechera for the embarrassment. After Marechera returned to independent Zimbabwe, he was harassed and persecuted by state security for his refusal to join the system, or his public rebukes directed towards the status quo. Marechera made it uncomfortable for politicians to be in the same room with him. He would call them out.

As a result, Marechera was effectively banished from public gatherings. The government’s solution was to periodically throw him in prison to keep him away from the media or his network of international friends who often visited him. These episodes contributed to the elevation of his reputation as a fearless critic of the establishment who spoke truth to power.

The cracks in Zimbabwe were always there, only the heat of time deepened them. After the landslide victory of Mugabe’s party in the 1980 elections, the sense of euphoria, which followed, was short-lived.

Bob Marley who was invited to play at the independence gala composed a song titled, Zimbabwe. Throughout the song Marley repeatedly warns the leadership:

Mugabe’s big man politics were entrenched in the early years. He annexed all political power to himself and mastered absolute authority by creating a one party state in 1987 to give shape to his dreams of total conquest and to hold under his sway the country, which he insensibly considered his private property. He spoke of Zimbabwe as “my country, my Zimbabwe.”

Bob Marley performed at Zimbabwe’s independence celebrations in 1980

In the new Zimbabwe, students and young radicals quickly heralded Marechera as the voice of their generation. Marechera was sublimely scathing of the slogans that surrounded the euphoria of independence. He was deeply suspicious of the black leadership led by Mugabe. Current political leaders such as Tendai Biti, Douglas Mwonzora and others who have become prominent figures in the opposition ranks embraced Marechera’s gospel. His uncompromising fight for justice and equality for the common man directly and indirectly influences a lot of the forces that merge to form the Movement of Democratic Change opposition party in 1999.

Tragic circumstances, however, brought Marechera and Mugabe together a few months before he died. This was a photo moment Mugabe would not let pass though Marechera was right to have been cynical. Marechera’s sister, Tsitsi, a 24-year old who had been a freedom fighter in the chimurenga war, was killed instantly by a booby-trapped television set which exploded in her Harare townhouse in May 1987. She was married to an ANC comrade, Vusumuzi Masondo (aka ‘Mhlophe Chiliza’).  Evidence later presented at the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission suggested this was a joint SADF Special Forces and Military Intelligence operation initiated by the apartheid government. Marechera’s brother-in-law was not at home at the time though his two nieces, aged one and five, were in the house but survived the blast.

Though Marechera, died young of an AIDS-related pulmonary disorder at 35 in 1987, he never stopped tormenting Mugabe to the end as young Zimbabweans who lived in the “House of Hunger” he presided never stopped reminding him of his failures to fulfill the promises of liberation.

Mugabe’s anti-colonial rage fueled long reign over Zimbabwe

Post published in: Featured

Mugabe’s anti-colonial rage fueled long reign over Zimbabwe – The Zimbabwean

JOHANNESBURG — Robert Mugabe had just made a furious speech against Zimbabwe’s LGBT community, calling them “worse than pigs and dogs.”

As he was about to get into his limousine, I asked, “Are you saying that gays in Zimbabwe have no legal rights?”

He glared at me and responded irately: “They have no rights whatsoever! They are an abomination and against human nature and God,” he shouted. He grabbed my arm and jostled me, causing my head to knock against a video camera behind.

That is how I remember Mugabe: an angry man who channeled his rage against colonial rule to become one of Africa’s most influential and longest-lasting leaders. He was one of the continent’s most iconic rulers, arguably more popular for a time than his rival Nelson Mandela. And he was one of Africa’s great liberators, who ruthlessly led the guerrilla force that ended white-minority rule in Rhodesia and brought about majority-rule Zimbabwe in 1980.

His 37-year reign and fist-shaking tirades against the former colonial powers of the West made him the ruler that many other African leaders emulate today.

Mugabe, who died Friday at age 95, grew up in poverty as the son of a single mother who was a subsistence farmer. Like all blacks in what was then Rhodesia, he suffered the indignities of colonial racism. He succeeded academically in a Catholic mission school and rose to become an African nationalist leader who had to fight to win basic democratic rights. When he won power in 1980, he advocated for reconciliation between whites and blacks but retained a bitterness that colored his rule.

I came to Zimbabwe as a journalist in 1980 and reported on Mugabe’s significant achievements in improving education and health for the country’s black majority, which made up more than 95% of the population. During 23 years in Zimbabwe, until my expulsion as the last foreign journalist in the country, I watched the shrewd tactics he used to retain power.

His attack on Zimbabwe’s LGBT community in August 1995 was a calculated move. He disliked that his star as Africa’s liberation hero had been eclipsed by Mandela, whose magnanimous and tolerant leadership included a constitution that specifically gave full legal rights to all citizens regardless of sexual orientation.

Mugabe defined a competing African nationalism that was exclusively for those who supported, and were accepted by, the ruling party. He was saying to the continent that Mandela’s leadership was too accepting of Western values and that his leadership of Zimbabwe was more authentically African.

His anti-gay tirades became a turning point in how Mugabe was viewed internationally. Until then, he was generally regarded as a benign leader who had dramatically improved conditions for Zimbabwe’s blacks. That positive image persisted despite the Matabeleland Massacres of the 1980s, in which his army killed 10,000 to 20,000 ethnic Ndebeles in the southern Matabeleland provinces. After his public excoriation of Zimbabwe’s small LBGT community, he was widely seen as an authoritarian leader.

Mugabe’s public posturing against gay people was not followed by punitive arrests. The country’s small, beleaguered LGBT population, primarily represented by the group Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe, or GALZ, succeeded in becoming an integral part of the human rights community.

I saw Mugabe’s irritation with Mandela up close a year later, in August 1996, when he married his second wife, Grace, in a lavish wedding at his birthplace in Kutama Mission. Several African heads of state attended the ceremony, which was followed by a luncheon reception attended by thousands of his party’s leaders and local residents. There was polite applause when Mugabe and Grace took their place at the top table. Then a huge cheer rippled through the crowd as Mandela strode through the crowd to his table. I looked over to see Mugabe, his face twisted into a bitter scowl directed at the South African leader.

A few years later, Mugabe launched his seizures of white-owned farms, the controversial move that became his signature policy.

In 2000, he had been in power for 20 years and was facing his most significant challenge from a new opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change, which sprang from labor unions and attracted support from Zimbabwe’s main Shona and Ndebele ethnic groups, the country’s urban and rural residents and blacks and whites.

There had been a national vote for a new constitution, which would have increased Mugabe’s executive powers. In a surprise result, the referendum was rejected, a stinging rebuke to his leadership that came just months before general elections for president and parliament.

Within two weeks, militias supporting Mugabe and his ruling party, ZANU-PF, begin violently seizing white-owned farms. Mugabe said Zimbabweans were taking back land that had been illegally confiscated by British colonialists. About a dozen white farmers were killed in the takeovers.

At the same time, his militia attacked leaders of the opposition party across the country, killing an estimated 300 and torturing many more, according to human rights groups. Police stood by, saying they would not intervene in political disputes. The opposition was denied coverage in the state media, which had a monopoly on all television and radio broadcasts. There were widespread charges of rigging, through documented discrepancies in voter registration and vote counting. Mugabe and ZANU-PF won the election.

The farm confiscations continued over several years, reducing the 4,200 white-owned farms to just a few score. Many observers agreed that land redistribution from whites to blacks was long overdue, but the way it was done damaged the country’s agricultural production and sent the economy into a downward spiral from which it has never recovered.

Many Africans regard the land grabs as Mugabe’s crowning achievement. To them, it doesn’t matter that lots of the farms went to his wife, generals, Cabinet ministers and party officials. It doesn’t matter that Zimbabwe, which was once known as the continent’s breadbasket, was reduced to a perennial recipient of international food aid.

What matters is that Mugabe eradicated white ownership of farms, the remaining vestige of white colonialism, and told the West to go to hell. That tapped into a deep-seated resentment across Africa and earned Mugabe widespread, and lasting, support.

An evil legacy – Zimbabwe Vigil Diary – The Zimbabwean

https://www.flickr.com/photos/zimbabwevigil/48695315556/sizes/m/

It is surely right to disregard the tyrant’s petulant objections and bury him alongside other Zanu PF leaders. Perhaps one day tourists will visit Heroes’ Acre like they do the desolate field outside Budapest where statues from the Soviet era have been dumped.

You can say of most people that they had good and bad points. Not the same with Mugabe. What was not bad was evil.

Many people, including opposition leaders and British ambassadors, say he had charm. So did Hitler. What charm Mugabe had was of the reptilian kind – poisonous. And it was for his poisonous ruin of the state that he will be remembered.

Mugabe was hailed as a liberation hero but there are doubts that he ever spared a thought for anyone apart from his own family. Embittered by a decade of detention, he then waded through blood to capture the leadership of Zanu.

When he came to power in 1980 he was responsible for the Gukurahundi genocide of some 20,000 Ndebele, along with his successor President Mnangagwa. Together they launched rash foreign excursions to line their own pockets. He was a bad example to Africa, which still reveres him despite his legacy of starvation, corruption, hopelessness and fear.

First reaction from Harare to the news of his death was from dimwit minister Energy Mutodi who bizarrely described the death of a 95-year-old man as ‘untimely’. But Mutodi was correct in saying ‘This nation is what it is because of what he did’.

Mnangagwa has declared seven days of mourning but you can be sure that he will not be observing it himself.

Other points

  • We marked the death of Mugabe with posters reading: ‘The goblin has gone’, ‘Now for real freedom’, ‘Mnangagwa must go too’, ‘Now out with Zanu PF’ and ‘Good riddance to Mugabe’. The press interviewed many of our activists.
  • Thanks to those who helped set up the front table and put up the banners today: Patience Chimba, Marvellous Chinguwa, Josephine Jombe, Lucia Mudzimu, Esther Munyira, Hazvinei Saili, Sikhumbuzule Sibanda and Ephraim Tapa. Thanks to Hazvinei, Marvellous and Josephine for looking after the front table, to Lucia, Esther, Sikhumbuzule, Chido Makawa, Heather Makawa and Bigboy Sibanda for handing out flyers, to Hazvinei and Mary Muteyerwa for drumming and to Hazvinei, Ephraim and Tryness Ncube for photos.
  • For latest Vigil pictures check: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zimb88abwevigil/. Please note: Vigil photos can only be downloaded from our Flickr website.

FOR THE RECORD: 32 signed the register.

EVENTS AND NOTICES:

  • ROHR general members’ meeting. Saturday 14th September from 11.30 am. Venue: Royal Festival Hall, South Bank Centre, Belvedere Road SE1 8XX. Contact: Ephraim Tapa 07940793090, Patricia Masamba 07708116625, Esther Munyira 07492058109.
  • ROHR Reading branch outreach and general meeting. Saturday 21st September. Community outreach from 11.30 am – 1.30 pm. Awareness campaign on deteriorating human rights in Zimbabwe. Venue: Broad Street, Reading. General meeting from 2 – 5 pm: Venue: The RISC 35-39 London Street, Reading, Berkshire RG1 4PS. Contact Nicodimus 07877386792, Josephine 07455166668, Shylette 07828929806, Josh 07877246251.
  • The Restoration of Human Rights in Zimbabwe (ROHR) is the Vigil’s partner organization based in Zimbabwe. ROHR grew out of the need for the Vigil to have an organization on the ground in Zimbabwe which reflected the Vigil’s mission statement in a practical way. ROHR in the UK actively fundraises through membership subscriptions, events, sales etc to support the activities of ROHR in Zimbabwe. Please note that the official website of ROHR Zimbabwe is http://www.rohrzimbabwe.org/. Any other website claiming to be the official website of ROHR in no way represents us.
  • The Vigil’s book ‘Zimbabwe Emergency’ is based on our weekly diaries. It records how events in Zimbabwe have unfolded as seen by the diaspora in the UK. It chronicles the economic disintegration, violence, growing oppression and political manoeuvring – and the tragic human cost involved. It is available at the Vigil. All proceeds go to the Vigil and our sister organisation the Restoration of Human Rights in Zimbabwe’s work in Zimbabwe. The book is also available from Amazon.
  • Facebook pages:

    Vigil: https://www.facebook.com/zimbabwevigil
    ROHR: https://www.facebook.com/Restoration-of-Human-Rights-ROHR-Zimbabwe-International-370825706588551/
    ZAF: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Zimbabwe-Action-Forum-ZAF/490257051027515

Zimbabweans choose work over mourning Mugabe

Post published in: Featured

Zimbabweans choose work over mourning Mugabe – The Zimbabwean

Former Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe

The streets and shops were packed, weddings and parties went ahead as planned. Most people were going about their usual business, trying to eke out living.

For while Mugabe is hailed for having led Zimbabwe to independence, for many Zimbabweans he is also the man who wrecked their economy, leaving them to live with the consequences.

Commuter mini bus driver More Kondo, 30, was busy decanting petrol from a large jerrycan into a smaller container to share with a fellow driver.

Mnangagwa: death of Mugabe “leaves a big void in our nation”

Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa reacts to the death of his predecessor Robert Mugabe, who has passed away aged 95.

“If it were another leader, right now this country should have shut down to mourn,” he said. “But he was an autocrat.

“Had he left power early and the country in a better shape, we would be celebrating his life and would have seriously shut down the country in honour of him.”

Mugabe died on Friday aged 95 at a Singapore hospital.

Lauded by some as liberator and for his uncompromising stance against the West, Mugabe led a controversial land-grab programme nearly two decades ago — seizing commercial farmland from whites.

This policy is widely blamed for having contributed to the collapse of the once-thriving economy.

Zimbabweans struggle daily to access basic services, while inflation hovers in triple digits. Many people on Saturday said they had more pressing needs to attend to than mourning.

“We not going to the funeral,” said Kondo shaking out remaining drops of petrol in the container that previously had engine oil. “We will be busy trying to make money, we are hungry.”

Fuel in Zimbabwe is in short supply and its price has been increased more than six times since the start of the year — as have prices for several other goods.

Another man, a 35-year-old engineering graduate who would only give his first name, Tonde, was equally unimpressed.

“I have a degree, I’m unemployed and hungry and you expect me to waste my time to go to his funeral? What, after 37 wasted years?

“He stole money and today he is gone,” he said.

‘He destroyed this country’ 

Along Kaguvi street, police officers set up their usual Saturday morning public interaction desks conducting surveys on the public’s views on policing.

People drew comparisons between Mugabe’s death and that of South Africa’s first black president and anti-apartheid icon Nelson Mandela, who died in 2013.

“When Mandela died, people went onto the streets, but look at him (Mugabe) — nothing.

“It doesn’t even look like there’s a death (of a former leader),” said 25-year-old auto-spares store keeper Munya Nhamo.

Mugabe, he said, had stolen the 2008 election from opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. “If he had accepted defeat, the country would not be in such a bad shape”.

Ozias Mupeti, 55, stood over his small stall selling fresh ginger and a few packets of paprika and curry.

“He destroyed this country. Now he’s gone and we have nothing left … because of him,” he said angrily. “It’s painful.”

A few metres down the road, ice cream vendor and mother-of-three Tendai Marange, 42, expressed mixed feelings as she waited for customers.

“We are not respecting him (Mugabe) by continuing to work, but when the body arrives we will stop,” she said. “For now we have to work because life is tough these days.

“When Mugabe was there things were better…. if he wanted prices to drop, they would”.

State television carried extensive coverage of the death between the normal weekend programming, such as sports.

Patson Muparadzi was preparing to go to Mugabe’s village for the wake.

Sporting a white Zanu-PF t-shirt emblazoned with Mugabe’s portrait, he said: “We are maybe here at work, but we are grieving.

“We are working so we can raise money for fuel to go to Zvimba (Mugabe’s rural home),” said added.

Willy Salim, 39, a street forex dealer, also mourned Mugabe’s death.

“Darkness has engulfed our country. Zimbabwe will never be the same without Mugabe,” he said.

Mugabe’s body to return home soon: family

Post published in: Featured

Mugabe’s body to return home soon: family – The Zimbabwean

HARARE – Robert Mugabe‘s nephew said on Sunday that a delegation was expected to leave Zimbabwe on Monday to collect the hero-turned-despot’s body from Singapore where he died two days ago.

Mugabe, a guerilla leader who swept to power after Zimbabwe’s independence from Britain and ruled for 37 years, died on Friday, aged 95.

His health took a hit after he was ousted by the military in November 2017, ending his increasingly tyrannical rule. He had been travelling to Singapore for treatment since April.

“I can’t give an authoritative day, all I know is people are leaving tomorrow Monday to go and pick up the body,” Leo Mugabe told AFP.

“So assuming they get there on Tuesday and the body is ready, logically you would think they should land here on Wednesday,” he said, adding that a list of accompanying family members was being finalised.

Once praised as a liberator who rid Zimbabwe of white minority rule, Mugabe soon turned to repression and fear to govern.

He is widely remembered for crushing political dissent and ruining the economy, prompting mixed reactions to his passing.

President Emmerson Mnangagwa declared a period of “national mourning” on Friday, without providing further detail.

The government is expected to announce when Mugabe’s body will be returned to Zimbabwe and provide details of the funeral in coming days.

Robert Mugabe was once a hero of the left – The Zimbabwean

If democracies have learned anything, it is that one man or woman in control of a country for decades never works. Having come to power by fighting against the previous regime, with spells in prison or exile, charismatic leaders can only sustain their power as that charisma fades by progressively tightening control. Challengers, typically embodying some combination of fresh ideas, new social forces and a desire to end abuse, are held down by ever fouler means.

Even if the state purports to be a democracy, elections are rigged, the media muzzled and opposition politicians harried or even killed. Inevitably, the economy suffers: there is a lack of investment, growing shortages, government rationing and rampant inflation. As the despot gets older, there is a fight for the succession, but without rules, process or accountability, so that it becomes a raw and destructive battle between factions. The need for orderly succession is an overlooked and powerful argument for democracy, as those conniving in the strutting power of presidents Putin and Xi will one day discover.

Authoritarianism – from Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, who died last week, to the Philippines’ Ferdinand Marcos – always goes wrong. The list of failures is long, including China’s Mao Zedong, Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. George Orwell’s prescient warnings in Animal Farm are confirmed again and again. The intriguing question is why so many both inside and outside a country suspend their thinking capacity and collude in the despot’s narrative.

Challenging authoritarian power from inside demands extreme bravery: the authoritarian will have control of the police, courts and military and be only too willing to use them. But there is little excuse for those outside, too often blindsided by stories of colonial liberation, freedom, socialism or, as in China’s case, sheer economic effectiveness.

Mugabe, who had nearly 40 years running Zimbabwe, is an object lesson. Once a freedom fighter, imprisoned for his beliefs, and and at the time benefitting from wide support among the western left, he was elected prime minister in 1980 as Zimbabwe’s saviour. Clever and articulate, he preached pan-African black power but also reconciliation. However, the institutions in the fledgling democracy, borrowed from Westminster (which, we are discovering, is a weak democratic model), were easily abused.

The doctrine that simple majorities confer total sovereign power, even over law and the courts, was co-opted by Mugabe to justify his transmutation from prime minister to president controlling all the institutions of authority. Then, as he became fearful that any successor would exile or imprison him for his misdeeds, he manipulated successive elections, rigging votes and closing ballot stations. The economy collapsed and ultimately he was ejected from office when too frail and old to sustain his charismatic control.

Of course, he had a great story. It needed a strong man to take on the noxious legacy of colonisation. The white community, still owning vast tracts of land, would necessarily oppose black rule. Fire had to be fought with fire: Zimbabweans should not listen to complaints about democratic abuse and interference with the rule of law. This was a raw power struggle in which democratic norms came second to redressing gross injustice. His black critics were playing into the hands of the whites.

Yet he is now seen as a pernicious disaster. It’s not just the rule of law that has been wrecked, but the economy. His one saving grace is that he helped convince Nelson Mandela that a successful South Africa would be based on respect for its democratic institutions – a fixed-term presidency, regular, independently scrutinised elections, independent courts, regard for law and an independent press.

Learning from its neighbour, South Africa, imperfect though it is, has been better served. The Mugabe-like former president Jacob Zuma, condemned by South Africa’s constitutional court for not upholding the constitution, is now fighting corruption charges and firmly out of power.

Good democratic governance is the precondition for prosperity, order, justice and freedom. Yet creating fit-for-purpose institutions of democracy is always a work in progress and always imperfect; no country possesses the utopian democratic system. The temptations of political power need constantly to be held in check by multiple and entrenched institutions of alternative power – an independent judiciary and press, a second chamber, a constitutional court and, above all, a culture of laws in which it is understood that respect for human rights is the glue that binds the entire democratic apparatus.

As the third decade of this century approaches, it is clear that no country, not even the once esteemed US and UK, can rely on producing this cultural glue from within. The greater the number of international norms, the greater their strength, the more support those fighting for justice and accountability have when their democratic institutions are under pressure.

This is certainly true of countries such as Zimbabwe, but also of today’s Russia or China. The brave protesters in Hong Kong are strengthened – and the Chinese authorities who want to crush them weakened – by the existence of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is an international gold standard, even if it is rarely attained, and so it is that bit harder to snuff out democracy. It is why the former supreme court justice Jonathan Sumption was so naive and fundamentally wrong in this year’s Reith lectures when he offered Brexit broadsides against international human rights law.

Certainly, human rights law can sometimes overstep the mark – all human institutions are imperfect – but to imagine that every country’s democracy is so strong that the national polity can be the sole site for defending and legitimising human rights is mad. The UK, with only a puppet privy council and no constitutional court (unlike South Africa) to adjudicate over the abuse of prerogative power, is hardly an acme of democratic process. Mugabe’s career, and the damage he inflicted on Zimbabwe, is too frequently dismissed as the result of a particular leader acting on a particular ex-British colony. Rather, it is a lesson for us all.

 Will Hutton is an Observer columnist