Is Zimbabwe ready for another round of elections Maxwell Madzikanga May 28, 2012 It is indisputable and internationally agreed

that without regular, properly scheduled, legally constituted, free and fair elections, citizens of a country cannot express their will nor can they be afforded an opportunity to select those fit to govern on their behalf. By periodically choosing their leaders during an election process, the electorate has a sacrosanct opportunity to protect its rights and guard against violations of fundamental freedoms. Elections supported by an appropriate separation and balance of power, genuine independence of the judiciary, a pluralistic system of political parties and organisations, respect for the rule of law, an independent and pluralistic media, respect for political and human rights, freedom of expression and the right to vote are the sine qua non of democracy. Every country in the world, Zimbabwe included should hold elections in as transparent a manner as the context allows. Any electoral process should ensure that the citizens are informed in advance when an election will take place, what the key electoral processes will entail, and which political parties and candidates would be contesting for political space. At the same time, all political parties and candidates should be afforded a level campaigning space that enables them not only to market their manifestos but also to adequately present themselves to the public, present their business case, be questioned, engaged and challenged by the electorate. This kind of unbridled interaction is healthy to any democratic political process. The electoral system in Zimbabwe should be configured to ensure that all unreasonable requirements hindering participation in the electoral process are removed and that the criteria for potential candidates are not unreasonably restrictive. Qualifying independent candidates, small, regional and emerging political parties should be afforded the same access to electoral resources and protection currently enjoyed only by the major political parties. Recently, there have been reports in the local media in Zimbabwe and elsewhere detailing the state and the dysfunctional nature of the coalition government arrangement in country. Some of the issues centre on concentration of power and decision-making in the presidium and the coalition principals leaving the legislative body only as a talking shop where non-binding, trivial issues are discussed and debated. Indeed, a dysfunctional legislature is an affront not only to democracy but the people who voted these honourables into parliament. Just waiting for their legislative terms to expire is but a dereliction of duty and irresponsibility at its worst. If the coalition is not working as reported by some of the key actors in the coalition, then one wonders whether an election held even before a constitution is finalised is not the best option. However, an early and haphazardly planned national election may have grave and long-term implications for the constitution making process. The spill over effects on the economy and the countrys nascent and strategic relationship with regional and international community are gruesome to imagine. A contested electoral process and a disputed outcome is not what Zimbabwe requires at the moment. With the electoral rhetoric and posturing witnessed recently, there are fundamental and unavoidable soul searching questions to be asked: Is Zimbabwe ready and able to conduct a free, fair election or not? Is an election that complies with international best practice and standards possible in the current context? Is Zimbabwe ready for an election where all the political parties and contestants can participate freely and be afforded an opportunity to market their policies without fear of the unknown? To hold a free and fair election, all the democratic institutions in Zimbabwe must not only be strong, responsive, impartial and courageous but should also be aware of their permanent enshrined statutory roles and responsibilities. And as long as state apparatus do not understand their mandates and core responsibilities, the electoral process and outcomes will always be heavily contested in Zimbabwe. In the past, particularly during the March 2008 and June 27 2008 runoff, some state institutions were accused of having been partisan and instrumental in mandating state-sponsored violence, stifling fundamental freedoms, diverting state resources in support of one political party and cajoling traditional leaders to influence voting patterns. On the other hand, the opposition movement in Zimbabwe needs to be more articulate as to why an early and hastily planned election is not an option for the country. The main opposition Movement for Democratic Change needs to be more articulate in marketing and packaging its rationale for a delayed election. That rationale should go beyond the fact that the constitution needs to be in place

prior to the election being held. One would hope to read and hear more about the wider implications of an early election on retarding economic and political recovery, trade and commerce, how an early election would affect the gains made in health, social services, education, national healing and investor confidence. In the past, the main opposition Movement for Democratic Change has made the mistake of investing heavily in externally-focussed advocacy, political globetrotting, and seeking international and regional support for its policies and strategies. However, a positive outcome of this externally-looking focus has been the persistent pressure impressed upon ZANU PF by SADC and the African Union to reform and respect human rights. An aggressive, persistent and structured approach targeted at the electorate has been lacking and as a result the electorate particularly in rural and semi-urban areas have been left wondering and at times awestruck. The line between ZANU PF and MDC seems to be blurring by the day and if the smaller political parties and independent candidates make massive inroads into MDC-T strongholds, Harvest House should not cry wolf. Harvest House should ensure that before its policy statements are churned out, there is shared agreement at all levels to avoid the many policy flip-flops witnessed since 2008. At times it appears like MDC-T is a party without a foundation, a party without principles and clear direction. A party that has forgotten the horrors of 2008 so quickly. If the party is going to survive, then it has to ensure that its policies are clearly and cleverly articulated at all leadership levels, coherent and compatible with prevailing political reality. It would be sad to witness all the sacrifice going down the drain. In politics as in other spheres of public life, the private images of politicians matter. With all the brains available at MDC-Ts disposal, Zimbabweans expect more in terms of clearer policy articulation and robust understanding of critical social, economic and other imperatives prevailing in the country. Come rain and thunder, MDC-T and any other political formation should be ready for the electoral surgery so long as that examination has been designed by competent bodies! Currently, the Zimbabwean electorate and the international community are receiving mixed, conflicting, and at times incoherent messages regarding when the next presidential and parliamentary elections will be held. The argument should go beyond the reasoning that there will be no election until our SADC approved demands are met. MDC should by now know better the strength, Machiavellian-style and arrogance of ZANU PF and its leadership. The responsibility is upon the principals of the coalition government to face up and debate this unpalatable subject and agree on an uncontested election roadmap. The continued uncertainty over whether an election will be held in 2012 or 2013 is not only unacceptable but a mockery to the millions of people who are struggling daily to earn a living yet continue to provide unreasonable remuneration and per diems for the politicians upkeep-the electorate. If the principals are not discussing such an important issue, then what are they discussing during the several marathon meetings conducted almost on a weekly basis. The ugly memories of political violence and torture unleashed on defenceless citizens are still afresh and it is a complete dereliction of duty and core responsibilities if the issue of an electoral roadmap is not agreed and widely disseminated. Politics is a game of compromise, negotiation, shifting of mindset as well as give and take. The days when politics was a zero-sum game are over particularly for a country with a delicate and profoundly complex context like Zimbabwe. My opinion is that before presidential and parliamentary elections are held in Zimbabwe, some minimum conditions need to be identified, discussed and agreed by all the political actors including civil society organisations. Among the conditions to be met before elections are held is the presence of a genuinely independent electoral body, an updated voters roll, existence of a level political environment for all, a voter education and awareness raising campaign conducted nationally by nonpartisan civic actors, de-politicisation of traditional structures at village, ward, provincial and national level, zero-tolerance of political violence, existence of politically neutralised state organs, access to free and unfettered media by all political parties, robust procedures for resolving disputes and clear declaration procedures for election outcomes, clear pathways for arbitration and contestation of electoral results, existence of an independent and empowered judiciary. In an environment where some non-governmental organisations are clearly partisan and aligned either to ZANU PF or MDC, it becomes extremely complex for a free and fair election to be held. By now the legislature should have enacted and operationalized a clear cross-party framework that guides the operations of local and international non-governmental organisations particularly during elections. The proper functioning of civil society organisation is a critical ingredient of any democratic society and any framework so

developed should not stifle but promote their civic roles and responsibilities. If there are any enduring lessons to be learnt from the 2008 presidential and legislative electoral process, it is the need to ensure that the role of the courts as impartial dispensers of justice and impartial adjudication of conflicts needs to be revisited, clearly defined and strengthened before another election is held. The Zimbabwean judiciary has to be supported and capacitated in its mandate as a dispenser of binding rulings and neutral arbiter during electoral processes. The role of the judiciary in facilitating a smooth and legitimate transfer of power and holding people to account for their actions irrespective of their political affiliation and standing in the republic has to be commonly shared at all levels. At the moment, MDC-T is intoxicated with removing and dislodging ZANU PF from power while ZANU PF is prepared to fight to the last man and never to hand-over power to a party perceived to be aligned with the West. This type of unhealthy scenario is self-defeating for both parties and detrimental to the progress and development of the country. At the same time, it should be understood that we are dealing with two parties that have had a chance to taste the sweetness of power and its associated fringe benefits. The is no easy answer whether 2012 is the appropriate year to go for another round of elections in Zimbabwe nor is it a simple decision to be made by one party in the seemingly dysfunctional coalition. However, what is critical is the realisation that the process for conducting this fundamental democratic process and the outcomes of the process will always be heavily contested particularly if minimum electoral preconditions are not agreed. The coalition government would be violating its obligations if it does not inform the electorate as to when the next election should happen and the format of that election. Periodic, free and fair elections are a human right. The citizens of Zimbabwe have a right to know and to be provided with a coherent and time-bound electoral roadmap.