Efforts by the Revolutionary Youth Movement, Free Zimbabwe Youth and the Zimbabwe Diaspora Forum to publicize the issue of the diaspora vote is commendable. At the same time the MDC's forray in Adis Ababa is indeed a continuation of the opposition's quest to sensitize the African community on the issues bedeviling Zimbabwe. Noone but ourselves can speak for ourselves on the issues affecting us as a people. While Thabo Mbeki is expected to brief his peers in Ethiopia on the sidelines of the AU Summit on matters to do with the SADC-talks, the progressive movement still needs to own the process of ushering in a new political dispensation.
Zimbabweans in the diaspora can contribute towards the cause materially, strategically and morally while the progressive movement back home needs to be organized and create a channel of support and linkage with the diaspora activists. This writer is committed to contributing in more ways than one towards the campaign against dictatorship in Zimbabwe.
This is the time to stand up and be counted. Individual and collective participation will be vital in the struggle to emancipate ourselves from tyranny. The progressive movement will not prevail with a single strategy but will do so based on a sustained and well organized multi-pronged approach. Legal, political and civic approaches need to be harnessed in order to extert pressure on the government of Zimbabwe. All these strategies will be geared towards deligitimizing the 2008 Election in Zimbabwe and campaigning for a new constitution and a free and fair election. Zimbabweans should unequivocally condemn a pre-determined outcome and lambast Mugabe's business as usual or rather rigging as usual approach to governance in Zimbabwe.
This writer is calling upon the wisdom and commitment of like-minded individuals to embark on a multi-pronged and sustained strategy to pressurize Robert Mugabe to respect fundamental human rights.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
US President State of the Union Address includes Zimbabwe
President G.W Bush reiterated his country's support for the people of Zimbabwe in his annual State of the Union Address yesterday.He was refering to the efforts geared towards ending the dictatorship of the Robert Mugabe regime which has been in power since 1980.
The inclusion of the Zimbabwean crisis in his speech is quite refreshing since it proves to the progressive movement that they are not alone in this struggle. An except from his speech:
"America is opposing genocide in Sudan and supporting freedom in countries from Cuba and Zimbabwe to Belarus and Burma."
The United States has been consistent in supporting the progressive movement in Zimbabwe and this writer hopes this will continue even beyond Bush's tenure.
The inclusion of the Zimbabwean crisis in his speech is quite refreshing since it proves to the progressive movement that they are not alone in this struggle. An except from his speech:
"America is opposing genocide in Sudan and supporting freedom in countries from Cuba and Zimbabwe to Belarus and Burma."
The United States has been consistent in supporting the progressive movement in Zimbabwe and this writer hopes this will continue even beyond Bush's tenure.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Progressive Zimbabweans end despotism
Zimbabweans have capacity to dislodge despotic Mugabe
Robert Mugabe’s arrogance, dishonor, disrespect and flagrant disregard for human rights are well chronicled. However, what is missing from all the annals is the fact that he is only human and can be humbled. How can one man hold to ransom an entire nation? How many more years should he be allowed to continue with his nefarious ways? For everything there is a season if one can borrow from the Holy Scriptures. Robert Mugabe must reap what he sowed. This writer is convinced, the determination, commitment, courage, innovation, passion, unity and astuteness of the progressive movement can rid our nation of this tyrant who has outlived his usefulness. What is required right now is an infinite capacity to strategize and mobilize as well as ending the arm-chair approach to dealing with Mugabe. Zimbabweans should derive inspiration from the opposition activists and leaders who are being arrested as the writer composes this article and not imbecile admiration to the extent of abandoning the whole struggle to these flag-bearers. Demonstrations should continue unabated and undebated in the towns of Zimbabwe whether dejury or defacto.
Latest events on the Zimbabwean political landscape range from the tragic to the insane and absurd. The arrest of Morgan Tsvangirai and his lieutenants albeit briefly, fit the former category while Gabriel Chaibva and Nathaniel Manheru’s utterances fit the latter.
This writer is perplexed by Gabriel Chaibva’s endorsement of Robert Mugabe’s announcement of the election date, March 29, 2008. The behavior of his faction is dubious and deserves the contempt it deserves. In as much as this writer accommodates opposing views, the issue of the elections was part of the negotiations and both factions participated as a single entity, therefore, this writer is convinced Welshman Ncube’s faction has lost the plot.
In spite of these internal dynamics, progressive Zimbabweans need to forge ahead with the struggle for a new political dispensation. A nation devastated by a complex and well entrenched dictatorship deserves permanent and effective solutions, not short-term concessions meant to benefit apologists of the system. The National Constitutional Assembly’s unwavering stance for a people’s constitution deserves to be immortalized.
Charles .M. Mutama writes in his personal capacity.
Robert Mugabe’s arrogance, dishonor, disrespect and flagrant disregard for human rights are well chronicled. However, what is missing from all the annals is the fact that he is only human and can be humbled. How can one man hold to ransom an entire nation? How many more years should he be allowed to continue with his nefarious ways? For everything there is a season if one can borrow from the Holy Scriptures. Robert Mugabe must reap what he sowed. This writer is convinced, the determination, commitment, courage, innovation, passion, unity and astuteness of the progressive movement can rid our nation of this tyrant who has outlived his usefulness. What is required right now is an infinite capacity to strategize and mobilize as well as ending the arm-chair approach to dealing with Mugabe. Zimbabweans should derive inspiration from the opposition activists and leaders who are being arrested as the writer composes this article and not imbecile admiration to the extent of abandoning the whole struggle to these flag-bearers. Demonstrations should continue unabated and undebated in the towns of Zimbabwe whether dejury or defacto.
Latest events on the Zimbabwean political landscape range from the tragic to the insane and absurd. The arrest of Morgan Tsvangirai and his lieutenants albeit briefly, fit the former category while Gabriel Chaibva and Nathaniel Manheru’s utterances fit the latter.
This writer is perplexed by Gabriel Chaibva’s endorsement of Robert Mugabe’s announcement of the election date, March 29, 2008. The behavior of his faction is dubious and deserves the contempt it deserves. In as much as this writer accommodates opposing views, the issue of the elections was part of the negotiations and both factions participated as a single entity, therefore, this writer is convinced Welshman Ncube’s faction has lost the plot.
In spite of these internal dynamics, progressive Zimbabweans need to forge ahead with the struggle for a new political dispensation. A nation devastated by a complex and well entrenched dictatorship deserves permanent and effective solutions, not short-term concessions meant to benefit apologists of the system. The National Constitutional Assembly’s unwavering stance for a people’s constitution deserves to be immortalized.
Charles .M. Mutama writes in his personal capacity.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Zimbabwe Elections and the Kenya Syndrome
The Situation in Kenya and the Struggle for a Democratic Constitution in Zimbabwe
The Kenyan Cautionary Tale
Since its December 27th General Election, Kenya has been experiencing a wave of political conflicts that should serve as a lesson to Zimbabwe’s pro-democracy movement, as these problems are rooted in the same democratic deficit.
Much of the media coverage on Kenya seems to have been consumed by a focus on the ensuing violence with very marginal efforts to investigate issues at the centre of this conflict: absence of political democratic institutions and the shortfalls of ‘executive’ fundamentalism. With Zimbabwe facing a potential election in March, a look into the Kenyan scenario would be helpful in avoiding a worse repeat. In order to build agency, around a proper constitutional reform process, whose outcome will insulate Zimbabwe from the problems those in Kenya are going through and those experienced in past elections.
Since the Kenyan election, over a thousand people have since lost their lives and 250 000 more have been displaced. As in most post-colonial conflicts, much of these tensions have taken an ugly ethno-tribal character.
According to observers, the elections themselves were held in a manner that can be deemed ‘free and fair’. In the run-up to the vote, all political parties had relative space to organize and campaign. Kenya has a growing free media, and unlike Zimbabwe does not have such notorious legislations as the Public Order Act or the Access to Information Act. The Election Day itself was rather peaceful.
The opposition, Orange Democratic Movement, won majority of the parliamentary seats. The ruling party would be announced as having won the Presidential vote. Problems were then reported in the tallying of the vote, throwing the Mwai Kibaki’s victory into dispute. The Chairperson of the Kenya Electoral Commission has since acknowledged that there was manipulation of the vote.
Independent observers have suggested that the Election was too close. The US Ambassador to Kenya, Michael Rannesberger, is quoted saying whoever won the Election, did so by a margin between 23 000 to 100 000 votes. And that is where part of the problem and why building Constitutional frameworks that harness the spirit of nation building lie.
Kenya like Zimbabwe, has its Lancaster House Constitution, drawn in 1963 as a settlement document when the British colonists were withdrawing from the territory to allow for Kenya’s independence. Consequently, this Constitution, now with its fair share of amendments, has not abhorred well for a transformational state, therefore allowing for dictatorship tendencies to set in. The Daniel Moi regime, would master repression under the shoulder of Constitutional righteousness.
As it relates to Elections, state administration and governance, Kenya has a winner-takes-all/loser-leaves-all electoral system. This system is what we have in Zimbabwe. What this means is that, even if one wins an election by one vote, the opinions of the section of the voters who would have lost will not find political representation or expression. It is a system that excludes ‘losers’ and, as we are learning from Kenya, a base for fuelling other deep seated tensions and questions to do with the legitimacy of the winner as a representative of all interest groups, if voting patterns are also put into consideration.
Its Presidential parliamentary system places more power in the executive, including power to legislate. The executive has a monopoly over national resource distribution, with the legislature being reduced to a powerless club of sessional critics or patronage driven loyalists. With a Constitution that bestows enormous powers on the executive and because there are no constitutional provisions to ensure equitable distribution of the country’s resources, perceived loss of the vote carries a heavy meaning for those who lose. In regions and amongst groups perceived to be less prioritized by the victors, this arrangement fuels anger. It means another five years of being isolated, another five years of exclusion, another five years of poverty.
The disproportionate powers the executive have, including that of legislating, compromises the others arms of government. The legislature and judiciary become overly dependent on the executive, undermining their role to provide for checks and balances. Executive accountability erodes. Corruption and its attendant defense systems set in: with regionalism and identity cleavages taking centre stage in national determination. Regions or communities without a ‘representative’ in power suffer.
Democratic transformation in Kenya, as in Zimbabwe, gained its momentum in the demands for Constitutional reform, with Kibaki defeating Moi on the banner of ‘a people driven Constitution’. Kenyans are yet to see it, two Presidential terms down the line. Most of those in civil society would be absorbed into the luxurious benefits of the State and soon forget the principled demands of institutionalizing democracy, and facilitating the writing down by the people of a framework under which they want to be governed – a Constitution. The disasters are what we are seeing today: those who feel excluded and watching their vote becoming meaningless are resorting to ‘all means necessary’ to reclaim the vote from the gutters. The death toll keeps rising as neighbor turns against neighbor, and identity replaces value in deciding who is a friend or foe.
The primacy of identity politics becomes breeding ground for the most deprived tendencies. It fosters an identity based nationalism which regresses democratic values necessary for nation building. As we have seen in Kenya, the electoral loss/victory soon takes the form of one identity grouping having defeated the other and the nation dividing along ethno-tribal lines. Ethnic identity is now equated with political identity.
Is Zimbabwe the next Kenya?
A similar threat confronts Zimbabwe, risking the negation of genuine national debate on democratic transformation.
Given our history, and the need to foster a common identity in our diversity, a political system and Constitutional framework which allows for this is critical. The incumbent regime has set the country back into the socio-psychology of identity in determining who can participate or not in national discourse. Our white population has been effectively wiped out from being Zimbabwean. Even in the most liberal of opposition spaces, they are regarded with suspicion and are politely censored from making public representation. Zimbabweans of Indian descend or Mixed-race are have been purged from public political participation. Amongst the black population, it has begun to matter whether one is Zezuru, Karanga or Ndebele. As if this is not enough, gender, even within these clusters of divisions, has been so entrenched to qualify exclusion, with our women compatriots having to endure structural abuse to assert the mere fact that they to are citizens.
Human character is secondary in the estimation of man and women. These identities have also informed people’s perceptions of who is excluded or included in the economic, social or political benefit – be they in the patronage of the State, or in civil society and opposition or business.
The violence that is manifest in Kenya, though based on identity, is reflective of failures in the country’s Constitution and institutions to be responsive to the crises of nation building. Many Kenyans have doubts about the validity of country’s Constitution, especially the process under which it was written. This is of relevance to Zimbabwe; where sadly as in the Kenyan case history could be vengefully repeating itself.
The MDC has consistently argued that a new Constitution must be put in place before the elections. Yet it seems to be doing everything to confirm its participation in the electoral process before this key demand has been met. Gabriel Chaibva, spokesperson of one faction of the MDC, in an interview with VOA is categorical about participating in the March elections. Nelson Chamisa, the spokesperson for the other faction, suggested the same in his widely condemned rally speech where he threatens Kenyan style protests should Mugabe do what he knows best: manipulate the vote.
Despite this grandstanding and pontification about a new Constitution, the MDC – in itself a product of the Constitutional movement – does not seem to place value in the importance of a democratic, public participatory process of Constitution making. The Constitution it is fighting for in the talks is a product of ‘four wise men’, determining the permanent fate of 13million of their fellow citizens! The Constitution they are proposing has not been seen or shared by Zimbabweans. Speaking during a visit to the US end last year, leader of one of the factions, Morgan Tsvangirai is quoted in an interview suggesting that ‘we have graduated from process’, in deviation from the principles. Welshman Ncube in his speech to Parliament in support of the widely condemned 18th Constitutional Amendment to the Constitution of Zimbabwe went to depth to explain that the principles of an ‘open, transparent and participatory manner’ in Constitution making were not a ‘fundamentalist decree’.
On the 3rd of January, Morgan Tsvangirai published an opinion piece suggesting that a Transitional Constitution had been finalized, with the sticking point being that of implementation. The nation or even members of the MDC are yet to see it. Our experience has been a bitter one: reforms made in the dark, excluding national dialogue are partly the reason why we are where we are today: a reason for us to be very afraid of the Kenyan ‘demons’ visitation or better still of being ‘kibakised’.
But what is even more frightening, if it is to be believed, is the revelation by Nathaniel Manheru a columnist for government controlled Herald who wrote in last Saturday’s edition that the so called ‘transition’ constitution agreed by Zanu PF and the MDC is nothing more than the 2000 government draft that, lost the referenda.
The South African Model
Model countries such as South Africa do offer learning curves on national reconstruction. Emerging from its brutal past, as the rest of post-colonial Africa, South Africa underwent a process of Constitutional building that pitched public participation at the centre of Constitutional development. Public opinion and debate would take place, with its Constitutional Assembly, civil society and political parties opening the nation to dialogue with itself. What resulted was amongst other things, an electoral and political system that is modestly inclusive, guaranteeing proportional representation, and allowing all views brought to an electoral contest and receiving electoral support, to find a measure of expression.
Greater devolution of power in provinces has and local municipalities have created a system of greater accountability and service delivery. There is freedom of electoral contest and democratic expression. The result has been limited violent contestation of election results and a harmonious existence of political formations and civic groups despite their competing ideologies or perspectives. Those who lose an election will still salvage their proportional representation of the vote.
The National Constitutional Assembly has advocated for a similar system of Constitution making based primarily on the principles of ‘public participation, openness and transparency’. Its 2001 draft addresses some of the key issues of proportional representation and institutions that safe-guard democracy: Electoral Commission, Human Right Commission, Gender Commission etc. The draft also argues for a strong legislature and judiciary and the effective separation of powers between the varying arms of the State. Parliament, elected through a mixed system of constituency based and party-proportional based representation would elect the leader of government who would account to it. This system was drawn out of the views gathered from ordinary Zimbabweans, by both the NCA and the Constitutional Commission. The government draft presented to the referendum in 2000 ignored all these views, and was wisely rejected. In arguing that elections should be deferred until such a time as there is a Constitutional and electoral framework, it aims to pre-empt the possibility of national degeneration.
The Kenyan scenario points to the things we can avoid and toward the importance of working on developing and putting in place structural systems that ensures barbarism and exclusion are not part of our politics and national life. The democracy movement must also learn that short-cuts to freedom lead to spurious regimes and the entrenchment of anti-democratic practices. The MDC, carrying with it the mantle of the nation’s hope for change, must rethink its options. The current opportunism and intellectual laziness that is becoming so pervasive should be stopped and give way to the principled call for a just and free nation.
Tapera Kapuya is with the National Constitutional Assembly. He writes in his personal capacity. He can be reached on kapuyat@gmail.com
The Kenyan Cautionary Tale
Since its December 27th General Election, Kenya has been experiencing a wave of political conflicts that should serve as a lesson to Zimbabwe’s pro-democracy movement, as these problems are rooted in the same democratic deficit.
Much of the media coverage on Kenya seems to have been consumed by a focus on the ensuing violence with very marginal efforts to investigate issues at the centre of this conflict: absence of political democratic institutions and the shortfalls of ‘executive’ fundamentalism. With Zimbabwe facing a potential election in March, a look into the Kenyan scenario would be helpful in avoiding a worse repeat. In order to build agency, around a proper constitutional reform process, whose outcome will insulate Zimbabwe from the problems those in Kenya are going through and those experienced in past elections.
Since the Kenyan election, over a thousand people have since lost their lives and 250 000 more have been displaced. As in most post-colonial conflicts, much of these tensions have taken an ugly ethno-tribal character.
According to observers, the elections themselves were held in a manner that can be deemed ‘free and fair’. In the run-up to the vote, all political parties had relative space to organize and campaign. Kenya has a growing free media, and unlike Zimbabwe does not have such notorious legislations as the Public Order Act or the Access to Information Act. The Election Day itself was rather peaceful.
The opposition, Orange Democratic Movement, won majority of the parliamentary seats. The ruling party would be announced as having won the Presidential vote. Problems were then reported in the tallying of the vote, throwing the Mwai Kibaki’s victory into dispute. The Chairperson of the Kenya Electoral Commission has since acknowledged that there was manipulation of the vote.
Independent observers have suggested that the Election was too close. The US Ambassador to Kenya, Michael Rannesberger, is quoted saying whoever won the Election, did so by a margin between 23 000 to 100 000 votes. And that is where part of the problem and why building Constitutional frameworks that harness the spirit of nation building lie.
Kenya like Zimbabwe, has its Lancaster House Constitution, drawn in 1963 as a settlement document when the British colonists were withdrawing from the territory to allow for Kenya’s independence. Consequently, this Constitution, now with its fair share of amendments, has not abhorred well for a transformational state, therefore allowing for dictatorship tendencies to set in. The Daniel Moi regime, would master repression under the shoulder of Constitutional righteousness.
As it relates to Elections, state administration and governance, Kenya has a winner-takes-all/loser-leaves-all electoral system. This system is what we have in Zimbabwe. What this means is that, even if one wins an election by one vote, the opinions of the section of the voters who would have lost will not find political representation or expression. It is a system that excludes ‘losers’ and, as we are learning from Kenya, a base for fuelling other deep seated tensions and questions to do with the legitimacy of the winner as a representative of all interest groups, if voting patterns are also put into consideration.
Its Presidential parliamentary system places more power in the executive, including power to legislate. The executive has a monopoly over national resource distribution, with the legislature being reduced to a powerless club of sessional critics or patronage driven loyalists. With a Constitution that bestows enormous powers on the executive and because there are no constitutional provisions to ensure equitable distribution of the country’s resources, perceived loss of the vote carries a heavy meaning for those who lose. In regions and amongst groups perceived to be less prioritized by the victors, this arrangement fuels anger. It means another five years of being isolated, another five years of exclusion, another five years of poverty.
The disproportionate powers the executive have, including that of legislating, compromises the others arms of government. The legislature and judiciary become overly dependent on the executive, undermining their role to provide for checks and balances. Executive accountability erodes. Corruption and its attendant defense systems set in: with regionalism and identity cleavages taking centre stage in national determination. Regions or communities without a ‘representative’ in power suffer.
Democratic transformation in Kenya, as in Zimbabwe, gained its momentum in the demands for Constitutional reform, with Kibaki defeating Moi on the banner of ‘a people driven Constitution’. Kenyans are yet to see it, two Presidential terms down the line. Most of those in civil society would be absorbed into the luxurious benefits of the State and soon forget the principled demands of institutionalizing democracy, and facilitating the writing down by the people of a framework under which they want to be governed – a Constitution. The disasters are what we are seeing today: those who feel excluded and watching their vote becoming meaningless are resorting to ‘all means necessary’ to reclaim the vote from the gutters. The death toll keeps rising as neighbor turns against neighbor, and identity replaces value in deciding who is a friend or foe.
The primacy of identity politics becomes breeding ground for the most deprived tendencies. It fosters an identity based nationalism which regresses democratic values necessary for nation building. As we have seen in Kenya, the electoral loss/victory soon takes the form of one identity grouping having defeated the other and the nation dividing along ethno-tribal lines. Ethnic identity is now equated with political identity.
Is Zimbabwe the next Kenya?
A similar threat confronts Zimbabwe, risking the negation of genuine national debate on democratic transformation.
Given our history, and the need to foster a common identity in our diversity, a political system and Constitutional framework which allows for this is critical. The incumbent regime has set the country back into the socio-psychology of identity in determining who can participate or not in national discourse. Our white population has been effectively wiped out from being Zimbabwean. Even in the most liberal of opposition spaces, they are regarded with suspicion and are politely censored from making public representation. Zimbabweans of Indian descend or Mixed-race are have been purged from public political participation. Amongst the black population, it has begun to matter whether one is Zezuru, Karanga or Ndebele. As if this is not enough, gender, even within these clusters of divisions, has been so entrenched to qualify exclusion, with our women compatriots having to endure structural abuse to assert the mere fact that they to are citizens.
Human character is secondary in the estimation of man and women. These identities have also informed people’s perceptions of who is excluded or included in the economic, social or political benefit – be they in the patronage of the State, or in civil society and opposition or business.
The violence that is manifest in Kenya, though based on identity, is reflective of failures in the country’s Constitution and institutions to be responsive to the crises of nation building. Many Kenyans have doubts about the validity of country’s Constitution, especially the process under which it was written. This is of relevance to Zimbabwe; where sadly as in the Kenyan case history could be vengefully repeating itself.
The MDC has consistently argued that a new Constitution must be put in place before the elections. Yet it seems to be doing everything to confirm its participation in the electoral process before this key demand has been met. Gabriel Chaibva, spokesperson of one faction of the MDC, in an interview with VOA is categorical about participating in the March elections. Nelson Chamisa, the spokesperson for the other faction, suggested the same in his widely condemned rally speech where he threatens Kenyan style protests should Mugabe do what he knows best: manipulate the vote.
Despite this grandstanding and pontification about a new Constitution, the MDC – in itself a product of the Constitutional movement – does not seem to place value in the importance of a democratic, public participatory process of Constitution making. The Constitution it is fighting for in the talks is a product of ‘four wise men’, determining the permanent fate of 13million of their fellow citizens! The Constitution they are proposing has not been seen or shared by Zimbabweans. Speaking during a visit to the US end last year, leader of one of the factions, Morgan Tsvangirai is quoted in an interview suggesting that ‘we have graduated from process’, in deviation from the principles. Welshman Ncube in his speech to Parliament in support of the widely condemned 18th Constitutional Amendment to the Constitution of Zimbabwe went to depth to explain that the principles of an ‘open, transparent and participatory manner’ in Constitution making were not a ‘fundamentalist decree’.
On the 3rd of January, Morgan Tsvangirai published an opinion piece suggesting that a Transitional Constitution had been finalized, with the sticking point being that of implementation. The nation or even members of the MDC are yet to see it. Our experience has been a bitter one: reforms made in the dark, excluding national dialogue are partly the reason why we are where we are today: a reason for us to be very afraid of the Kenyan ‘demons’ visitation or better still of being ‘kibakised’.
But what is even more frightening, if it is to be believed, is the revelation by Nathaniel Manheru a columnist for government controlled Herald who wrote in last Saturday’s edition that the so called ‘transition’ constitution agreed by Zanu PF and the MDC is nothing more than the 2000 government draft that, lost the referenda.
The South African Model
Model countries such as South Africa do offer learning curves on national reconstruction. Emerging from its brutal past, as the rest of post-colonial Africa, South Africa underwent a process of Constitutional building that pitched public participation at the centre of Constitutional development. Public opinion and debate would take place, with its Constitutional Assembly, civil society and political parties opening the nation to dialogue with itself. What resulted was amongst other things, an electoral and political system that is modestly inclusive, guaranteeing proportional representation, and allowing all views brought to an electoral contest and receiving electoral support, to find a measure of expression.
Greater devolution of power in provinces has and local municipalities have created a system of greater accountability and service delivery. There is freedom of electoral contest and democratic expression. The result has been limited violent contestation of election results and a harmonious existence of political formations and civic groups despite their competing ideologies or perspectives. Those who lose an election will still salvage their proportional representation of the vote.
The National Constitutional Assembly has advocated for a similar system of Constitution making based primarily on the principles of ‘public participation, openness and transparency’. Its 2001 draft addresses some of the key issues of proportional representation and institutions that safe-guard democracy: Electoral Commission, Human Right Commission, Gender Commission etc. The draft also argues for a strong legislature and judiciary and the effective separation of powers between the varying arms of the State. Parliament, elected through a mixed system of constituency based and party-proportional based representation would elect the leader of government who would account to it. This system was drawn out of the views gathered from ordinary Zimbabweans, by both the NCA and the Constitutional Commission. The government draft presented to the referendum in 2000 ignored all these views, and was wisely rejected. In arguing that elections should be deferred until such a time as there is a Constitutional and electoral framework, it aims to pre-empt the possibility of national degeneration.
The Kenyan scenario points to the things we can avoid and toward the importance of working on developing and putting in place structural systems that ensures barbarism and exclusion are not part of our politics and national life. The democracy movement must also learn that short-cuts to freedom lead to spurious regimes and the entrenchment of anti-democratic practices. The MDC, carrying with it the mantle of the nation’s hope for change, must rethink its options. The current opportunism and intellectual laziness that is becoming so pervasive should be stopped and give way to the principled call for a just and free nation.
Tapera Kapuya is with the National Constitutional Assembly. He writes in his personal capacity. He can be reached on kapuyat@gmail.com
Monday, January 21, 2008
Zimbabwean Human Rights Activist Dies
PRESS RELEASE:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Stanford G. Mukasa. NAP Communications
Phone: (724) 357 3097 Office
(724) 467 0001 (CELL)
email: mukasa@iup.edu
Date : January 20, 2008
The North American Province of the Movement for Democratic Change today joins millions of oppressed Zimbabweans in mourning the death of firebrand human rights activist, Miss Gertrude Mtombeni, who died at the weekend. Affectionately known as Gettie by her friends and colleagues, Miss Mthombeni was a visionary and a dedicated activist for human rights in Zimbabwe.
Miss Mtombeni, MDC secretary for the environment and a member of the party’s national council, joins the long list of MDC activists who have died in the struggle for the liberation of Zimbabwe from the oppressive dictatorship of Robert Mugabe regime. She was harassed, jailed and severely assaulted by Mugabe’s police from whom she sustained serious injuries in her body. Yet she never gave up the struggle. She once declared that, if by joining the struggle it meant a certain death for her “so be it.”
In addition to her struggle against the oppressive regime of Mugabe, Miss Mthombeni was also engaged in another struggle to maintain unity after the leadership split in the MDC in 2005.
When a splinter group in the leadership broke away from the MDC and established its head office in Bulawayo, there were widespread reports that the people of Matabeleland would join the splinter group. Miss Mthombeni was one of the MDC leaders who played a critical and strategic role in keeping the national unity of the MDC intact.
She addressed many rallies and stressed that the people of Matabeleland were not, and did not define themselves as, a tribal or ethnic group but part of the national character of Zimbabwe. She did not mince her words when she poured scorn and contempt on the so-called analysts and propagandists who spread malicious and misleading information that the splinter movement of the MDC would be attracted to the people of Matabeleland on the basis of their ethnicity.
When Miss Mthombeni visited the United States last year she made an effort, despite her deteriorating health, to visit and meet with the Zimbabweans in Diaspora. Her lasting advice to all Zimbabweans was “Love one another.”
We cannot agree more with what Miss Mthombeni’s compatriot in the struggle, Sekayi Holland, said, namely:
[Miss] Mthombeni worked under extremely difficult conditions in her Bulawayo province. [Miss] Mthombeni stuck to MDC principles whatever obstacle was cast in her way, in all her political and union work to the end. We will all Miss Gertrude Mthombeni.
The North American Province of the MDC sends our deepest condolences to Miss Mthombeni’s family, relatives as well as to the MDC. We have lost a colleague, a fellow citizen, and a friend.
But we make this promise that we will finish the struggle that she and her compatriots started. There can be no doubt that Miss Mthombeni’s deteriorating health was a direct result of all the torture and detention she suffered under the Mugabe regime.
To this extent, we hold Robert Mugabe and ZANUPF directly responsible for Miss Mthombeni’s death. If Mugabe thinks that by killing Miss Mthombeni and other freedom fighters he has suppressed the struggle for freedom and democracy he is dead wrong. The spirit and determination by Zimbabweans to free themselves from Mugabe’s oppressive rule live on and will continue until victory is won, no matter how long it will take.
When Mugabe regime and ZANUPF are defeated, dead and buried in the dustbin of history Miss Mthombeni’s name will forever be remembered and memorialized among Zimbabwe’s authentic and true heroes who shed their blood for the second liberation of their country from the evil dictatorship of Mugabe.
Chinga Maitiro. Guqula Izenzo. Change Behavior.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Stanford G. Mukasa. NAP Communications
Phone: (724) 357 3097 Office
(724) 467 0001 (CELL)
email: mukasa@iup.edu
Date : January 20, 2008
The North American Province of the Movement for Democratic Change today joins millions of oppressed Zimbabweans in mourning the death of firebrand human rights activist, Miss Gertrude Mtombeni, who died at the weekend. Affectionately known as Gettie by her friends and colleagues, Miss Mthombeni was a visionary and a dedicated activist for human rights in Zimbabwe.
Miss Mtombeni, MDC secretary for the environment and a member of the party’s national council, joins the long list of MDC activists who have died in the struggle for the liberation of Zimbabwe from the oppressive dictatorship of Robert Mugabe regime. She was harassed, jailed and severely assaulted by Mugabe’s police from whom she sustained serious injuries in her body. Yet she never gave up the struggle. She once declared that, if by joining the struggle it meant a certain death for her “so be it.”
In addition to her struggle against the oppressive regime of Mugabe, Miss Mthombeni was also engaged in another struggle to maintain unity after the leadership split in the MDC in 2005.
When a splinter group in the leadership broke away from the MDC and established its head office in Bulawayo, there were widespread reports that the people of Matabeleland would join the splinter group. Miss Mthombeni was one of the MDC leaders who played a critical and strategic role in keeping the national unity of the MDC intact.
She addressed many rallies and stressed that the people of Matabeleland were not, and did not define themselves as, a tribal or ethnic group but part of the national character of Zimbabwe. She did not mince her words when she poured scorn and contempt on the so-called analysts and propagandists who spread malicious and misleading information that the splinter movement of the MDC would be attracted to the people of Matabeleland on the basis of their ethnicity.
When Miss Mthombeni visited the United States last year she made an effort, despite her deteriorating health, to visit and meet with the Zimbabweans in Diaspora. Her lasting advice to all Zimbabweans was “Love one another.”
We cannot agree more with what Miss Mthombeni’s compatriot in the struggle, Sekayi Holland, said, namely:
[Miss] Mthombeni worked under extremely difficult conditions in her Bulawayo province. [Miss] Mthombeni stuck to MDC principles whatever obstacle was cast in her way, in all her political and union work to the end. We will all Miss Gertrude Mthombeni.
The North American Province of the MDC sends our deepest condolences to Miss Mthombeni’s family, relatives as well as to the MDC. We have lost a colleague, a fellow citizen, and a friend.
But we make this promise that we will finish the struggle that she and her compatriots started. There can be no doubt that Miss Mthombeni’s deteriorating health was a direct result of all the torture and detention she suffered under the Mugabe regime.
To this extent, we hold Robert Mugabe and ZANUPF directly responsible for Miss Mthombeni’s death. If Mugabe thinks that by killing Miss Mthombeni and other freedom fighters he has suppressed the struggle for freedom and democracy he is dead wrong. The spirit and determination by Zimbabweans to free themselves from Mugabe’s oppressive rule live on and will continue until victory is won, no matter how long it will take.
When Mugabe regime and ZANUPF are defeated, dead and buried in the dustbin of history Miss Mthombeni’s name will forever be remembered and memorialized among Zimbabwe’s authentic and true heroes who shed their blood for the second liberation of their country from the evil dictatorship of Mugabe.
Chinga Maitiro. Guqula Izenzo. Change Behavior.
Unity of purpose needed right now in Zimbabwe
TSVANGIRAI AND MUTAMBARA UNDER SEIGE
The two MDCs failure to unite at this crucial time in Zimbabwe’s history is indeed sad and disappointing. Many activists have sacrificed life and limb for their beloved country, the common man is experiencing unprecedented suffering while the ZANU PF fat cats continue to benefit from this quandary. Our only hope lies in the two men who are at the helm of the main opposition in Zimbabwe, Arthur Mutambara and Morgan Tsvangirai.
Unfortunately, the duo have been besieged by a very dangerous yet influential coterie of bootlickers who thrive on the politics of patronage which is synonymous with the ZANU PF way of attaining recognition from the party leader. This group of people from both camps is only self-serving and thrives on posturing. These are individuals who lack the gravitas that Arthur Mutambara often refers to when it comes to moving the country forward. They are a liability to the democratic struggle and should be dealt with if the opposition is to move towards the right direction. These political sycophants are not capable leaders but pretenders who were caught up in the moment. The crisis created overnight politicians without the pedigree to lead. They are opportunists manipulating the leaders of the opposition because of kinship ties or a false sense of political achievements and experience gained before and after 1999 when the MDC was formed.
We, the people of Zimbabwe should expeditiously liberate these two men first from this band of pretenders before we focus our attention on the dictator, Robert Mugabe. It is a fact that Mutambara and Tsvangirai need each other right now and they know that. Parallels can be drawn with the situation existing in ZANU PF currently. An equally influential group has contributed to Robert Mugabe’s paranoia. It is therefore a culture now characterizing Zimbabwean politics and if we are to achieve a new dispensation this should be nipped in the bud as a precondition for success.
CHARLES M. MUTAMA
Washington DC, USA
The two MDCs failure to unite at this crucial time in Zimbabwe’s history is indeed sad and disappointing. Many activists have sacrificed life and limb for their beloved country, the common man is experiencing unprecedented suffering while the ZANU PF fat cats continue to benefit from this quandary. Our only hope lies in the two men who are at the helm of the main opposition in Zimbabwe, Arthur Mutambara and Morgan Tsvangirai.
Unfortunately, the duo have been besieged by a very dangerous yet influential coterie of bootlickers who thrive on the politics of patronage which is synonymous with the ZANU PF way of attaining recognition from the party leader. This group of people from both camps is only self-serving and thrives on posturing. These are individuals who lack the gravitas that Arthur Mutambara often refers to when it comes to moving the country forward. They are a liability to the democratic struggle and should be dealt with if the opposition is to move towards the right direction. These political sycophants are not capable leaders but pretenders who were caught up in the moment. The crisis created overnight politicians without the pedigree to lead. They are opportunists manipulating the leaders of the opposition because of kinship ties or a false sense of political achievements and experience gained before and after 1999 when the MDC was formed.
We, the people of Zimbabwe should expeditiously liberate these two men first from this band of pretenders before we focus our attention on the dictator, Robert Mugabe. It is a fact that Mutambara and Tsvangirai need each other right now and they know that. Parallels can be drawn with the situation existing in ZANU PF currently. An equally influential group has contributed to Robert Mugabe’s paranoia. It is therefore a culture now characterizing Zimbabwean politics and if we are to achieve a new dispensation this should be nipped in the bud as a precondition for success.
CHARLES M. MUTAMA
Washington DC, USA
Urgent Appeal for a Diaspora Vote
Write to the participants in the SADC- Initiated inter party Dialogue to urgently uphold the following:
1. Article 5 of the SADC Treaty objectives which among other issues state the following:
Evolve common political values, systems and institutions;
2. Section 2.1.1 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections which states that:
Member states should guarantee full participation of the citizens in the political process;
3. Section 2.1.6 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections which states that:
Member states should guarantee equal opportunity to exercise the right to vote and be voted for;
4. Section 2.1.8 states that:
Member states should guarantee that there is voter education.
All these make it mandatory for the Zimbabwean government to allow Zimbabwean citizens living abroad to register and participate in all national elections.
SADC SECRETARIAT
Private Bag 0095
Gaborone
Botswana
Fax: 267 3972 848
Tel: 267 3951 863
Zimbabwe
Mr. F. MAONERA
Department of Regional and International Co-operation
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
PO BOX 4240
Causeway, Harare
Telephone: 263 727 005/794 681
Fax: 263 470 6293
Email: sadczim@yahoo.com
Cc: fmaonera@mweb.co.zw
gumbezererata@yahoo.com
South Africa
Ambassador J.Y. Duarte
Department of Foreign Affairs
Private Bag X152
Pretoria 0001
Tel: 27 12 351 0430
Fax: 27 12 351 0449/0546
Email: duartej@foreign.gov.za
Cc:madumanem@foreign.gov.za
mamabolol@foreign.gov.za
1. Article 5 of the SADC Treaty objectives which among other issues state the following:
Evolve common political values, systems and institutions;
2. Section 2.1.1 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections which states that:
Member states should guarantee full participation of the citizens in the political process;
3. Section 2.1.6 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections which states that:
Member states should guarantee equal opportunity to exercise the right to vote and be voted for;
4. Section 2.1.8 states that:
Member states should guarantee that there is voter education.
All these make it mandatory for the Zimbabwean government to allow Zimbabwean citizens living abroad to register and participate in all national elections.
SADC SECRETARIAT
Private Bag 0095
Gaborone
Botswana
Fax: 267 3972 848
Tel: 267 3951 863
Zimbabwe
Mr. F. MAONERA
Department of Regional and International Co-operation
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
PO BOX 4240
Causeway, Harare
Telephone: 263 727 005/794 681
Fax: 263 470 6293
Email: sadczim@yahoo.com
Cc: fmaonera@mweb.co.zw
gumbezererata@yahoo.com
South Africa
Ambassador J.Y. Duarte
Department of Foreign Affairs
Private Bag X152
Pretoria 0001
Tel: 27 12 351 0430
Fax: 27 12 351 0449/0546
Email: duartej@foreign.gov.za
Cc:madumanem@foreign.gov.za
mamabolol@foreign.gov.za
The need for a diaspora vote in Zimbabwe
DISENFRANCHISED ZIMBABWEANS ABROAD DEMAND YOUR VOTE!
The 2008 joint Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Zimbabwe will not be considered free and fair if they are not all- embracing and all-inclusive. About 4million Zimbabweans live outside the country due to the adverse economic and political situation wrought on the small nation by the ruling ZANU PF. A large portion of this alarming figure of Zimbabweans now lives in South Africa and the United Kingdom whilst the rest of the portion is scattered all over the world in countries such as Canada, USA, New Zealand and Australia.
The result of this exodus which is a direct product of the ZANU PF misrule was the Southern African Development Community (SADC) initiated- talks between the main opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and ZANU PF, the protagonist and antagonist in the current Zimbabwean political situation, respectively. The reason for the dialogue is to end animosities between the two political parties paving the way for an agreement on certain fundamental political concessions that would allow the country to abide by the SADC Guidelines on Free and Fair Elections. In short, the idea behind the dialogue is to facilitate in the re-establishment of democratic norms and values in Zimbabwe.
Lately, according to the participants there has been some “progress” in the talks with the recent bills on the amendment of POSA, AIPPA and the Electoral Act being fast-tracked in parliament to show the “true spirit” of the talks. Shockingly, the issue of the disenfranchised millions in the Diaspora has not been given the priority it deserves. Therefore, the subject of Voter Registration and Vote-casting by Zimbabweans in the Diaspora, has not been tackled with the prominence it deserves for the SADC initiated-talks to be considered progressive.
The blame lies squarely on us, the people in exile, because we have not come up with a grassroots movement to petition the political actors in the dialogue, that is, SADC, ZANU PF and the MDC. It is never too late to do so. It’s up to us to show our African brothers in particular and the international community that Robert Mugabe and his ruling ZANU PF have lost the moral authority to govern, let alone the mandate to do so.
The 2008 joint Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Zimbabwe will not be considered free and fair if they are not all- embracing and all-inclusive. About 4million Zimbabweans live outside the country due to the adverse economic and political situation wrought on the small nation by the ruling ZANU PF. A large portion of this alarming figure of Zimbabweans now lives in South Africa and the United Kingdom whilst the rest of the portion is scattered all over the world in countries such as Canada, USA, New Zealand and Australia.
The result of this exodus which is a direct product of the ZANU PF misrule was the Southern African Development Community (SADC) initiated- talks between the main opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and ZANU PF, the protagonist and antagonist in the current Zimbabwean political situation, respectively. The reason for the dialogue is to end animosities between the two political parties paving the way for an agreement on certain fundamental political concessions that would allow the country to abide by the SADC Guidelines on Free and Fair Elections. In short, the idea behind the dialogue is to facilitate in the re-establishment of democratic norms and values in Zimbabwe.
Lately, according to the participants there has been some “progress” in the talks with the recent bills on the amendment of POSA, AIPPA and the Electoral Act being fast-tracked in parliament to show the “true spirit” of the talks. Shockingly, the issue of the disenfranchised millions in the Diaspora has not been given the priority it deserves. Therefore, the subject of Voter Registration and Vote-casting by Zimbabweans in the Diaspora, has not been tackled with the prominence it deserves for the SADC initiated-talks to be considered progressive.
The blame lies squarely on us, the people in exile, because we have not come up with a grassroots movement to petition the political actors in the dialogue, that is, SADC, ZANU PF and the MDC. It is never too late to do so. It’s up to us to show our African brothers in particular and the international community that Robert Mugabe and his ruling ZANU PF have lost the moral authority to govern, let alone the mandate to do so.
March Elections in Zimbabwe too early
The anticipated March 2008 elections in Zimbabwe are not realistic since the ZANU PF regime is attempting to hold on to power through a brazen disrespect of the wishes of the people of Zimbabwe. A number of issues need to be addressed ranging from allowing the diaspora to vote, introducing a new constitution, abolishing the current electoral commission and getting rid of the boundaries created by the Delimitation Commission, allowing freedom and the freedom to assemble among a plethora of vices that are suffocating the Zimbabwean political space.
It is the view of this writer that elections in 2008 should be boycotted and condemned as they fall short of the minimum standards set by the SADC Guidelines on Democratic Elections. Robert Mugabe's futile posturing should be exposed and his grand plans of hanging on to power quashed.
Zimbabweans in the diaspora should set an agenda on the future of country they cherish so much. This writer believes this is the time to unite and embark on a sustained and systematic campaign to put pressure on the government of Zimbabwe to accede to international standards regarding the holding of elections.
The stance of the MDC announced by the party leader, Morgan Tsangirai, deserves support and should be applauded by all progressive Zimbabweans. The opposition MDC needs material, financial, and moral support on this issue because the campaign is noble and the eradication of tyranny in Zimbabwe is long over due.
It is the view of this writer that elections in 2008 should be boycotted and condemned as they fall short of the minimum standards set by the SADC Guidelines on Democratic Elections. Robert Mugabe's futile posturing should be exposed and his grand plans of hanging on to power quashed.
Zimbabweans in the diaspora should set an agenda on the future of country they cherish so much. This writer believes this is the time to unite and embark on a sustained and systematic campaign to put pressure on the government of Zimbabwe to accede to international standards regarding the holding of elections.
The stance of the MDC announced by the party leader, Morgan Tsangirai, deserves support and should be applauded by all progressive Zimbabweans. The opposition MDC needs material, financial, and moral support on this issue because the campaign is noble and the eradication of tyranny in Zimbabwe is long over due.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)