Maputo:  The Maputo Sunday paper "Domingo" has joined the hyena chorus of those who want to end the new regime of compulsory inspections for road vehicles. The editorial in the latest issue of "Domingo" calls on the government to halt the inspections - to "stop and think, in dialogue with citizens".

And what citizens does "Domingo" have in mind? Those who are killed and maimed every day on the country's roads every day? Or that relatively rich two per cent of households who own cars?

Or perhaps "Domingo" is only thinking of that very small percentage of the population who own "chapas" - the colloquial term for the minibuses, many of them grossly overcrowded and poorly maintained, that provide much of the urban passenger transport in Mozambique.

"Domingo's" arguments against the inspections are suspiciously similar to those raised by chapa owners in meetings with officials of the government's National Traffic Institute (INAV). The editorial talks of roads that are "completely potholed, with authentic craters here and there", so that completely new minibuses are allegedly ruined in a matter of days. As a result, it laments, the majority of vehicles on Mozambican roads are bound to fail the inspection.

Are the editors of "Domingo" really trying to tell us that cars drive without headlights because the roads are bad? Or that potholed roads somehow damage brakes more than motorways do?

"Domingo", which used to be an outspoken supporter of the ruling Frelimo Party and its governments, seems to have forgotten that in recent years hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on improving the roads. A higher percentage of Mozambican roads are in decent condition than ever before. Are we supposed to wait until every road in the country is tarred, and every pothole has been filled before inspecting vehicles for their roadworthiness?

"Domingo" complains that the inspections are carried out with "sophisticated electronic equipment", but most car owners have their vehicles repaired at improvised workshops "underneath a cashew tree". Either this is a remarkable coincidence of viewpoints, or it is a direct plagiarism from one of the more foolish interventions made by chapa owners at their meeting with INAV n Maputo last Wedesdays. For exactly the same miserable comparison between sophisticated inspection machines and repairs under cashew trees was made by a transport operator called Adriano Mondlane.

Worse still, "Domingo" claims that the inspections are no good because they've been imported from the west. It claims that those who ordered the inspections (presumably the paper is thinking of Transport Minister Paulo Zucula) have "their head in the First World, without an attentive reading of our reality".

"It does not appear to us a healthy development policy to use the criteria of the First World", the paper declares solemnly. So it's fine for Europeans, but not for Africans, to outlaw vehicles with defective brakes, dud steering, or exhausts that poison the atmosphere with dense clouds of smoke.

This is the racism of low expectations. This is exactly the same mindset of those who shrug their shoulders and accept corruption because "this is Africa".

"This is Africa" - and so we should put up with the second, third or tenth rate. We should not get above our station and demand that vehicles on Mozambican roads should be just as safe as those in Europe.

The "Domingo" approach is strikingly different from that of the Frelimo leadership. The calls by President Armando Guebuza for "self-esteem" are not compatible with allowing mobile death traps to continue circulating on Mozambican roads.

Perhaps "Domingo" thinks the country's founding president, Samora Machel, had his head in the First World. On a visit to Maputo Port in Paul Fauvet1980, Machel asked the then Transport Minister , Jose Luis Cabaco, how good the port services were. Cabaco replied that Maputo was "better than the port of Dar es Salaam".

Machel's acerbic response was "Is it as good as the port of Rotterdam?"

For Samora Machel, the port was either efficient or it was not. It either met professional standards or it did not. There were no "African standards" separate and different from "European standards".

Similarly with road safety - there is no such thing as "African" or "Third World" safety that is different from "First World" safety. A vehicle is either roadworthy or it is not. And when an unsafe vehicle knocks over an African pedestrian, he bleeds and dies just as easily as a European one.

"Domingo" suggests that the condition of vehicles is not that important anyway, since more people die on the roads because of drunkenness or excessive speed. This could well be true (although "Domingo" does not cite any statistics), but it is not a serious reason for allowing unsafe vehicles to circulate.

In the modern world, governments legislate against all three threats. They do not say "We haven't got enough breathalyzers or speed cameras, so we won't bother to inspect vehicles for their safety".

"Domingo" claims that checks on drunken driving and the violation of speed limits "are practically non-existent". Even if this were true, it would not be an argument against inspections.

And it is not true. This AIM reporter personally knows people in Maputo who have been breathalysed and who have been fined for speeding. No doubt there are not enough breathalysers in Mozambique. In fact, there are not enough traffic police - or, indeed, enough police of any kind. So should we postpone the fight against crime until there are twice, three times, five times as many police as there are today?

For "Domingo", a shortage of resources is a reason for giving up. Had that mentality prevailed a few decades ago, the country would still be under Portuguese colonial rule.

*  Colum by Paul Fauvet