Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Zimbabwe Briefing - Issue 96
Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (SA Regional Office)
October 24, 2012

Download this document
- Acrobat PDF version (949KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking here

COPAC: Minimalism Remains the Viable Option for the Zimbabwean Diaspora

The Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition recently provided me with the privileged opportunity to travel to Harare and participate as a delegate at the long awaited second all-stakeholders conference that was held under the auspices of the Constitution Select Committee (COPAC) The much anticipated event was held at the Harare International Conference Centre between the 21st and 23rd of October 2012.

The second all-stakeholders were a key milestone in terms of the fulfillment of the crucial provisions of Article Six of the historic Global Political Agreement (GPA). The GPA was signed by three of the leading Zimbabwean political parties on the 15th September 2008. This of course was achieved under the active facilitation of the regional body, the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

My participation at the conference was no under any form of illusion since it was predicated on the premise that the COPAC led constitutional reform process, just like the GPA is in essence part of the broader democratisation process of Zimbabwe.

In other words, both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative are to all practical purposes and intents a transitional process in terms of determining the political destiny of our beautiful motherland. Zimbabwe is and remains on a long-term arduous journey towards real democracy.

As such I have never had any serious issues with the exclusionary nature of both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative. It is in essence a political party led process. It is not a broad national agenda at all.

Indeed just like many other nation-al stakeholders, the Diaspora was excluded from the mainstream aspects of the signing of the GPA and also the setting up of the COPAC led constitutional reform process.

This then has always and continues to inform my level of expectations with regards to both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative. I have always viewed it at best as a small window of opportunity that could help to unlock the political impasse that has bedevilled Zimbabwe since the end of the 1990s. Put in other words, both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative is not in any way an end in themselves but part of a means to an ultimate end. As such, they must never be viewed in isolation but always in the broader context of an on-going struggle for a new democratic and prosperous Zimbabwe.

We as the Zimbabwean Diaspora community, just like any other national stakeholders that feel excluded by the political parties must continue to focus on how much momentum can be derived from both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative in our on-going efforts to build a new Zimbabwe.

We must seek to gain as much democratic impetus out of both processes. This in essence is what I prefer to call the minimalist approach.

The minimalist approach assumes that even though we do not have a direct say in the dynamics of both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative, we as the Diaspora must not seek to discredit and disengage ourselves from them.

Instead we must continue to explore any pockets of political space that may be available to us to minimally provide some influence on the dynamics of both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative. I was very fascinated by the honesty of President Robert Mugabe during his address at the opening ceremony of the second all-stakeholders conference. While other speakers like Deputy Prime Minister Arthur Mutambara tried to pretend that the people of Zimbabwe are at the centre of both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative, Mugabe did not mince his words at all.

He clearly asserted what I feel is the more realistic position that by their very nature, both the GPA and COPAC led initiative are political party led processes. In particular, it is the leadership of the three political parties that by and large have the final say on the outcome of both processes.

The truth is that the facilitative role of the Parliament in the COPAC led initiative has been over inflated. The bottom line is that after all has been said and done, it remains for the political leaders to decide if they are indeed happy with the final draft Constitution derived from the COPAC led initiative.

This then explains why Mugabe openly tried to undermine the credit that had prior to his speech been accorded to the Constitution Select Committee, especially the Co-Chairpersons.

This also explains why he openly challenged the decision by COPAC to have a compromised approach of the data analysis by using both the qualitative and quantitative methods. Mugabe clearly reproached COPAC for using the qualitative instead of the quantitative approach that he felt could have come up with provisions in the draft Constitution that were more favourable to his own interests.

But crucially, this further explains why he managed to ensure that Mutambara addressed the opening ceremony as an original principal of the GPA. This of course resulted in the MDC led by Professor Welshman Ncube boycotting the entire morning sessions.

So after all has been said and done, what then are the take aways from the COPAC led process for the Zimbabwean Diaspora?

The following then are my recommendations going forward:

• The Zimbabwean Diaspora must accept that both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative are by and large transitional processes in the broader struggle for a new Zimbabwe. It is common cause that life in general for many Zimbabweans has changed for the better since the all-inclusive government was set up in early 2009.
• The Zimbabwean Diaspora must recognise the minimal gains from both the GPA and the COPAC led initiative as small milestones as we march on towards a new and better Zimbabwe. A specific example of this is the mere fact that the draft Constitution allows for the possibility of dual citizenship for all people who are Zimbabweans by birth.
• The Zimbabwean Diaspora must hope for a YES vote for the proposed Constitution when the referendum is held. This is based on the simplistic assumption that the new Constitution could provide more democratic space than the current constitutional dispensation derived from the original Lancaster House Constitution.
• The Zimbabwean Diaspora must also continue to openly advocate and campaign for the best possible framework and environment prior to the referendum and the next elections that are due to be held in 2013.
• The Zimbabwean Diaspora must also use the year ahead to continue to get more organised and networked so that it may continue to play an increasingly influential role in the national agenda beyond both the referendum and the elections. The role of the Diaspora as a key player in the national development agenda must be something we should always be prepared to fight for and defend continually. After all, Zimbabwe belongs to us too!

Daniel Molokele is a Zimbabwean human rights lawyer and political analyst. He has been based in South Africa since January 2004.

Download full document

Visit the Crisis in Zimbabwe fact sheet

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP