A number of challenges remained in the implementation of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) – the accord that laid the foundation for Zimbabwe’s coalition government in 2008 – mainly related to the dynamics between the two power-sharing parties.

During a discussion at the Electoral Institute for the Sustainability of Democracy in Africa’s (Eisa’s) fifth annual symposium investigating party systems, coalitions and stability in the Kenyan and Zimbabwean context, a panel consisting of representatives from the relevant parties compared the Kenyan coalition government with that of Zimbabwe.

Taking the podium first, Adan Dwale, a Kenyan Member of Parliament (MP) representing the Orange Democratic Movement, argued that the relative success of the Kenyan coalition government was owing to the respective leaders’ vision to put the interests of the country before that of party interests.

Dwale argued that some of the successes that characterised the Kenyan government were its commitment to goodwill, its equitable power-sharing basis and its commitment to reforms. He identified some of his government’s biggest challenges as a lack of cohesion, high-level corruption and a general lack of consultation.

Jeremiah Kioni, Party of National Unity MP, echoed Dwale in recognising that the equitable basis on which the coalition was based, was a key to its success. He added that the Kenyan government had made huge strides in implementing the new constitution, enforcing gender equality and establishing an effective Independent Electoral Commission.

However, once the panel moved onto Zimbabwe’s coalition government, there was less consensus.

Olivia Muchena, representing the ruling Zanu-PF party, argued that the coalition process had been undermined and destabilised by “outside influences” that have never accepted the inclusive government of Zimbabwe.

She said that the Zanu-PF and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party worked well together, but that “outsiders” created handicaps for policy implementation and retarded cooperation between the two factions.

Relations with the West and sanctions were issues that had not been properly dealt with and gave rise to tensions within the government of national unity (GoNU).

Voices from the MDC side, however, criticised the shaky coalition government on the basis of its formation.

Speaker of the Zimbabwe National Assembly and chairperson of the MDC, Lovemore Moyo, argued that the GPA undermined the GoNU in that it was brought on by unfair circumstances in the way that Zanu-PF used State resources to “illegitimately” cling onto power after the 2008 Presidential election.

He added that the Zanu-PF determination to hang onto power had resulted in draconian legislation resulting in the monopolisation of State resources, including the public broadcaster and other media. Despite new parties emerging, multiparty infrastructure remained weak owing to State-sponsored violence and intimidation, Moyo stated.

He cited the main difference between the MDC and Zanu-PF as the long standing ideological differences that were hindering cooperation and perpetuating the interparty bickering that was causing the stagnation in the GoNU.

In conclusion, Moyo called for good governance practices in the coalition government, freedom of the press, protection of human rights, the right to economic prosperity and the prevalence of the rule of law.

If the GoNU was to succeed in making Zimbabwe prosperous, the implementation of these issues was critical, he said.

The GPA is now in its twenty-fifth month.