After the 2008 election crisis in Zimbabwe, a Government of National Unity (GNU) was put in place under a power-sharing arrangement officially known as the Global Political Agreement (GPA).⁽²⁾ The GPA committed the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the official opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), to working together towards bringing Zimbabwe out of its economic and political crisis.⁽³⁾ By most accounts, the GPA has been largely unsuccessful, as ZANU-PF and its leader, Robert Mugabe, still engage in acts of political violence and intimidation to maintain their grip on power.

An important provision of the GPA was that Zimbabwe had to undertake a series of reforms, including adopting a new constitution as precondition for holding new elections.⁽⁴⁾ Three years into the transitional period, most of the mandated reforms are yet to be undertaken. Worse still, the process of drafting and adopting a new constitution is far from being complete. Irrespective of this, Zimbabwe’s President, Robert Mugabe, and his ZANU-PF party have expressed determination to push for elections to be held this year, with or without a new constitution. This paper examines Zimbabwe’s preparedness for elections, with a focus on the preconditions set out in the 2009 power-sharing agreement.

Power sharing agreement contains political violence

In September 2009, President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF party and Morgan Tsvangirai’s MDC, came to a power sharing agreement under the mediation of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).⁽⁵⁾ The GPA arrangement came about after the disputed elections in 2008, which resulted in ZANU-PF militants waging a violent political campaign against officials and supporters of the faction of the MDC that remained loyal to Tsvangirai.⁽⁶⁾ It should be recalled that the MDC was split into two in 2005, with the dominant faction (MDC-T) remaining under the leadership of Morgan Tsvangirai. In the ten years prior to the 2008 elections, the Joint Operations Command (JOC), which is Zimbabwe’s supreme Security Council, had employed violence to ensure Mugabe’s victory during elections.⁽⁷⁾ Since then, no concrete changes had been made to prevent the country from being plunged into political violence again.

According to the GPA, Zimbabwe is only meant to have elections once it has drafted a new constitution and made various security sector reforms.⁽⁸⁾ However, ZANU-PF is determined to have elections with or without the completion of these reforms in total disregard for the principles of the agreement. In fact, Mugabe has even asked for the replacement of South African President, Jacob Zuma, as the head of SADC’s mediation team in the Zimbabwean political crisis. This came after Zuma’s insistence that Zimbabwe’s constitutional reform process must be completed before elections could take place, as per the GPA.⁽⁹⁾

In general, a change in constitution for any country has numerous legal and political implications. In the specific case of Zimbabwe, it is detrimental to the democratic process if elections were to go ahead without the completion of the new constitution. If the Constitution is not complete prior to the elections, the party who wins the elections can influence the Constitution and ensure that it is in line with their own interests. This can cause irreparable damage to the democracy of a country since the leaders will be able to take undemocratic actions that may then in fact be legally backed by the Constitution.

A recent example of this in African politics is the case of Senegal, where the Constitution limits presidential candidates to two terms in office. However, the Constitutional Council, which is the highest court in Senegal, approved Abdoulaye Wade to compete in the elections for a third term. Wade had argued that the Constitution was changed during his first term, and since the law cannot be applied retroactively, he should be entitled to a third term, that would only count as his second.⁽¹⁰⁾ The problem with this is that it was Wade himself that changed the Senegalese Constitution in 2001. Although Wade’s candidacy was largely unpopular among Senegalese and even triggered deadly protests, the text of the law eventually prevailed over the spirit of the law.⁽¹¹⁾

The same type of scenario is possible in Zimbabwe, where the Constitution has often been manipulated to serve the interests of the ruling party, instead of protecting the democratic process. In fact, Zimbabwe’s Constitution has been amended 19 times over the past thirty years, and these amendments usually served to solidify ZANU-PF’s grip on power.⁽¹²⁾

Conditions for free and credible elections are not yet in place in Zimbabwe

It is evident that if Zimbabwe were to have elections in 2012, they are not likely to be free, fair and transparent. Even the most basic instruments for having successful elections are lacking in Zimbabwe. Firstly, the country does not have the money for elections. According to the Deputy Chairperson of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), Joyce Kazembe, an estimated US$ 220 million is needed to hold elections.⁽¹³⁾ Kazembe says that this budget has been submitted to the Treasury and that elections can go ahead as soon as the money is released. However, considering that lack of funds is one of the biggest reasons that the Constitution has not yet been drafted, besides disagreements between the parties, it seems unlikely that Zimbabwe will be able to produce this money for the elections.⁽¹⁴⁾ In fact, according to the Finance Minister, Tendai Biti, the Government does not have the funds to hold elections.⁽¹⁵⁾ Secondly, according to the power sharing agreement, besides reforming the security sector and drafting a new constitution, Zimbabwe also needs to formulate a roadmap on how free and fair elections will be conducted and media reforms also need to take place so that political parties can campaign freely.⁽¹⁶⁾ At this point in time none of the above is in place.

Thirdly, the electoral roll, which was drawn up in 1985, clearly needs revision. For instance, the roll includes children who have not yet attained the voting age, deceased people as well as people who have immigrated.⁽¹⁷⁾ Without an accurate voter’s roll, it becomes easy for parties to commit electoral fraud. A party that wishes to win can simply ensure that they get the votes of all those on the roll who do not qualify to vote. Fourthly, the competence and independence of Zimbabwe’s electoral commission has been questioned by certain electoral actors. For instance, the MDC-T has called for a change of staff in the ZEC, claiming that it is filled with security operatives loyal to Mugabe.⁽¹⁸⁾ Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, there are no concrete measures as of yet to ensure the safety of the voters. The actions of the JOC left 200 people dead in 2008, and it is reported that ZANU-PF has already ensured that the military is deployed to the rural areas of the country to ensure that the people in those areas vote for Mugabe.⁽¹⁹⁾ Thus it is doubtful whether proper political campaigning could take place these rural areas because when the military is deployed to ensure votes, they usually do so through violence and intimidation. Democratic elections are not feasible if the voters do not feel that they can vote for whom they please without fearing for their lives. Democratic elections are also not feasible if the integrity of the ballot is questionable.

Is Zimbabwe ready for a democratic transition?

When the above realities are faced, the question arises as to whether Zimbabwe is really ready to make the transition from a dictatorship and political stalemate to a democratic regime. It appears that as much as the Zimbabwean people are ready to participate in elections, it is actually a threat to their safety. Mugabe is of the opinion that the interim Government set up under the GPA is dysfunctional.⁽²⁰⁾ However, it cannot be said to be more dysfunctional than the pre-2008 Government. The fact that Zimbabwe has not ratified the African Charter of Democracy, Elections and Governance (ACDEG), also points to a reluctance to be held accountable for democratic performance. Surely ratifying a treaty that protects a democracy from dangers such as auto-legitimisation would be desirable, yet Zimbabwe is shying away from the ACDEG. In fact, Zimbabwe is not included in the 39 countries who have signed the ACDEG, suggesting that it is not even in the process of ratifying the ACDEG.⁽²¹⁾

It is likely that Zimbabwe will adopt a new constitution this year, which may be seen as a positive step since there is much more potential for strong democratic governance if there is a sound legal document on which it can be based. However, democratic governance depends on more than holding elections and drawing up a new constitution. It is vital that there is political will to adhere to the Constitution, as well as respect for it. Such a document should ideally not be drawn up under an atmosphere of distrust and fear. It was initially intended that the Constitution would be drafted through a constitutional outreach programme in which civil society could get involved in the process. However, there have been frequent violent outbursts between ZANU-PF and the MDC at these meetings, to the point where civil society could no longer become involved. Eventually the constitutional outreach programme deteriorated into a violent political campaign, where ZANU-PF intimidated civilians, and MDC loyalists were beaten up and arrested on no charge.⁽²²⁾

At this point the following is clear: Zimbabwe is definitely not ready for elections or sound democratic processes. Consequently, the country will most likely see yet another flawed, violent round of elections. The Constitution may be drafted, but it will be a polarised document facilitating ZANU-PF’s hold on power, instead of supporting democratic governance. The reason for this stems from the fact that the GPA was never successful in creating an actual sharing of power. ZANU-PF uses violence or force to achieve their political aims, and thus the fact the MDC is involved in the constitutional drafting process doesn’t have much meaning. Lastly, if Zimbabwe insists on having elections, the Government needs to put mechanisms in place to prevent electoral violence. The Zimbabwean Government must commit to not having any civilians lose their lives for their ballots. This is simply a matter of political will, which, if lacking on the part of Zimbabwe’s Government, should be encouraged by SADC and the AU. Democracy is meant to bring about good governance and conditions that are conducive to sustainable peace and development. Civilians should not suffer due to a flawed democratic process that exists merely so that the authoritarian Government can feign legitimacy.

Concluding remarks

As long as Zimbabwe’s leaders refuse to be accountable for their lack of democratic performance, the country will regress further and further from being a democracy. Zimbabwe’s electoral process will become even less credible if Mugabe manages to force elections this year, especially in light of the Constitution not yet being completed. Besides this, Zimbabwe faces numerous other obstacles to having free and fair elections that cannot be cleared out of the way over night. Security sector reform, for example, cannot be achieved quickly and easily. Also, the fact that little progress has been made towards protecting voters during elections is a major concern.

The fact that the requirements set out in the GPA were disregarded indicates a lack of political will to see democratic reforms materialise. Even if Zimbabwe does adopt a constitution, great care will have to be exercised to ensure that this document is not manipulated by ZANU-PF or anyone else. If the new Constitution is misused, then what is left of Zimbabwe’s democracy will become even more damaged and more of a danger to its citizens. Ultimately, it is up to Zimbabwe’s leadership to commit to respect for human life, and not to allow their citizens to be tortured by the effects of a disingenuous democratic process.

NOTES:

(1) Contact Naomi Kok through Consultancy Africa Intelligence’s Election Reflection Unit
( election.reflection@consultancyafrica.com).
(2) Zimbabwe Constitution Select Committee website, http://www.copac.org.zw.
(3) ‘Zimbabwe: One year on, reform a failure’, Human Rights Watch, 12 February 2010, http://www.hrw.org.
(4) Ibid.
(5) ‘Constitutional history of Zimbabwe’, Constitutionnet, http://www.constitutionnet.org.
(6) Noyes, A., ‘Zimbabwe’s unsavoury path to peace’, The New York Times, 14 January 2012, http://www.nytimes.com.
(7) Ibid.
(8) ACPP Daily Briefings, Institute for Security Studies, 31 January 2012, http://www.iss.co.za.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Ibid.
(11) Ibid.
(12) Dzinesa, G., ‘ZANU-PF: Elections, come what may’, The African.org, 17 February 2012.
(13) Zim elections will cost $220-million, says commission’, The Mail and Guardian, 19 October 2011, http://mg.co.za.
(14) Sibanda, T., ‘COPAC temporarily halts drafting of new constitution’, SW Radio Africa News, 14 June 2011, http://www.swradioafrica.com.
(15) ACPP Daily Briefings, Institute for Security Studies, 31 January 2012,
http://www.iss.co.za.
(16) ‘Zimbabwe: Harare’s elections clock ticks on’, Southern Africa Report, September 15 2011, http://www.southernafricarepo rt.com.
(17) Dzinesa, G., ‘ZANU-PF: Elections, come what may’, The African.org, 17 February 2012.
(18) ‘Zim elections will cost $220-million, says commission’, The Mail and Guardian, 19 October 2011, http://mg.co.za
(19) Noyes, A., ‘Zimbabwe’s unsavoury path to peace’, The New York Times, 14 January 2012, http://www.nytimes.com.
(20) Moyo, Q., ‘We must insist on reforms before polls’, Zimbabwe Independent, 1 March 2012, http://www.theindependent.co.zw.
(21) ‘AU: Ratification status of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance’, Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa, http://www.eisa.org.za.
(22) Dzinesa, G., ‘ZANU-PF: Elections, come what may’, The African.org, 17 February 2012.

Written by Naomi Kok ⁽¹⁾