| |
Back to Index
ZIMBABWE:
Doubt over extent of electoral reform ahead of poll
IRIN
News
February 23, 2005
Http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=45746
HARARE - Even
before the ballots are cast in Zimbabwe's legislative elections
next month, controversy has surfaced over the fairness of the poll.
The opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has argued that
recent reform of the country's electoral laws has been too little
and too late. They contend that repressive legislation governing
public assembly and free speech remain on the statute books, and
together with growing political violence, will serve to undermine
the poll's legitimacy.
The Zimbabwean government has countered that by the standards of
the region, its electoral process is above board.
"It is now again the time to demonstrate to the world that it is
we who established democracy in Zimbabwe," President Robert Mugabe
told ZANU-PF delegates at the launch this month of the ruling party's
campaign, a reference to the nationalist struggle that ended white
minority rule in 1980.
The fears of the opposition and pro-democracy groups are based on
the experience of the legislative election in 2000 and the presidential
poll in 2002 - both won by President Mugabe and ZANU-PF - but marred
by serious irregularities, according to observers.
The MDC, formed only a year earlier, challenged the 2000 results
in a number of constituencies, and its leader, Morgan Tsvangirai,
is still contesting the presidential election results in the courts.
The party pointed to problems with the voters' roll and accused
government-instituted electoral bodies, such as the Electoral Supervisory
Commission, the Registrar-General's office and the polling personnel,
of bias.
International monitoring bodies, including the European Union (EU)
and the Commonwealth, also voiced their reservations.
In August last year Zimbabwe adopted Southern African Development
Community (SADC) guidelines governing democratic elections and subsequently
modified its electoral laws, but the government has rejected calls
from the MDC and pro-democracy groups for a still more level playing
field.
The South African government - under pressure to mediate in Zimbabwe's
political crisis since 2000 - recently expressed the hope that its
neighbour's 31 March poll would be credible.
"There are some positive developments, which give us hope that Zimbabwe
should come as close as possible to the protocols that have been
agreed by SADC," Joel Netshitenzhe, a South African government spokesman,
told Zimbabwe's official Herald newspaper recently.
Electoral reforms
Among the changes to the electoral process are that voting will
be conducted on a single day, instead of on two or three days as
was previously the case, in order to minimise the possibility of
irregularities.
Translucent ballot boxes will now be used; the number of polling
stations will be increased; and verification of ballots will take
place at the stations, again to avert rigging.
In accordance with the SADC principles, the new legislation specifies
that an electoral court will deal with disputes among individuals
or political parties arising from the conduct of polls.
Another new law, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission Act, also passed
recently, provides for an independent electoral body - the Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission (ZEC) - to be responsible for preparing and
conducting elections and referendums.
President Mugabe has announced the members of the ZEC, headed by
George Chiweshe, a High Court Judge and former army major.
Chiweshe claims the commission is geared for the work ahead, and
has opted for a senior civil servant, Lovemore Sekeramai, to be
his chief election officer for the March poll. ZEC agents will be
drawn entirely from the civil service.
Prior to the establishment of the ZEC, elections were conducted
by the Electoral Supervisory Commission (ESC) and the Registrar-General.
The ESC will supervise the ZEC, with justice minister Patrick Chinamasa
saying that Zimbabwe was following models in countries like Mauritius,
where the electoral body is monitored by another institution.
Despite these reforms, politicians and commentators feel much more
needs to be done to ensure democratic elections in March and beyond.
The Zimbabwe Electoral Support Network (ZESN), a coalition of NGOs
formed to co-ordinate electoral activities, said in a recent report,
'The SADC Electoral Principles and Guidelines and Zimbabwe's New
Electoral Legislation', that the country was not ready for free
and fair polls.
"There is little in the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission Act or the
Electoral Act to ensure an environment in which human and civil
rights are fully enjoyed ... The freedoms specifically mentioned
in the SADC principles - freedom of assembly, association and expression
and political tolerance - are not respected in Zimbabwe," ZESN alleged.
The biggest attack on the reforms has centred on the independence
of the ZEC.
David Chimhini, director of the Zimbabwe Civic Education Trust (Zimcet),
said the positive electoral changes were being overshadowed by "lack
of clarity [regarding the] independence" of the ZEC.
"From last year, when government began to make changes, many people
were optimistic that good things were coming. However, the latest
developments, particularly regarding the setting up of an independent
electoral body, have dampened that optimism," Chimhini told IRIN.
"The ZEC will not be independent at all, considering that it will
have to be monitored by yet another body - the Electoral Supervisory
Commission - whose members are elected by government. It is confusing
- why there has to be another body above the ZEC - and one might
be tempted to believe that there are fears that the ZEC might become
too influential, considering that it also consists of top figures
from the MDC and [the] ZANU (Ndonga) [opposition party]," he added.
People were bound to be sceptical of the electoral bodies, Chimhini
said, because the ESC and the Registrar-General's office had been
tainted by alleged irregularities in previous polls.
"[The ESC supervision of the ZEC] takes away the independence of
the ZEC, and it would be safe to say the government has failed one
of the most important tests of SADC because, in the absence of an
independent body, free and fair elections cannot be guaranteed,"
he commented.
Also, given that the Registrar-General presided over the much-maligned
voters' roll, the ZEC will have to rely on a document it had no
hand in compiling.
As a former military figure, Chiweshe is viewed by the opposition
as too pro-government to be an impartial head of the ZEC. ZESN noted
its concern over the Electoral Act provision allowing civil servants,
including soldiers and policemen, to be seconded to the staff of
the ZEC and ESC.
Chinamasa has defended Chiweshe, saying the new chair of the commission
had vast knowledge of electoral issues, having been a member of
the constituency delimitation commission, as well as a judge. In
an interview with the Herald shortly after the names of the ZEC
members were announced, Chinamasa described Chiweshe as an objective
and impartial person.
Restrictive laws
Legal experts and civil society groups have bitterly complained
that some of Zimbabwe's laws are too restrictive to ensure free
and fair elections, and run contrary to SADC guidelines on democratic
polls.
They often cite the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the
Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), which
can restrict freedom of assembly, the right to make an informed
choice of a candidate and the freedom of expression required for
credible elections.
"For as long as POSA and AIPPA exist in their current form, we can
just as well forget about democratic elections. They run contrary
to the tenets of free and fair elections, and something should have
been done long back to amend them," James Mutizwa, a member of the
Law Society of Zimbabwe told IRIN.
POSA, which purports to "make provision for the maintenance of public
order and security", became law in January 2002, about two months
before the presidential elections, replacing the Law and Order (Maintenance)
Act (LOMA) promulgated by Ian Smith's Rhodesia to deal with nationalists
fighting for the independence of the country.
Even though POSA replaced LOMA, experts say it has retained most
of the repressive provisions in the Rhodesian legislation.
Under sections 17 and 19, the law defines a political gathering
as a group of two or more people and requires those intending to
hold meetings in a public place to notify the police four days in
advance at the latest, failing which the police might restrict or
prohibit the meeting (sections 25 and 26), and are entitled to shoot
to kill if there is resistance (section 29).
In Part II, sections 12, 15 and 16, POSA says it is illegal to engage
in activities that might cause disaffection for police officers
or members of the defence force; or communicating a statement that
promotes disrespect for the president or institutions of government.
At the discretion of the police
Chimhini, the director of Zimcet, said the police often misapplied
the law when dealing with public gatherings.
"There is confusion among police officers regarding the handling
of public gatherings. The law directs that those wishing to hold
meetings should merely notify the police of their intention but,
since the law came into force, they have been insisting that the
law enforcers should authorise the meetings," he noted.
"In most cases, where the opposition is concerned the notifications
have been declined, with the police giving one excuse or another;
where meetings have gone ahead, they have often been violently disrupted,"
Chimhini told IRIN.
"The obvious effect is that citizens are denied the right to fully
participate in the political process, as stipulated under Section
2.2 of the SADC guidelines," he pointed out.
The police have often been accused of applying POSA selectively.
"One gets the impression that POSA was created for the MDC, civic
society and the opposition. I am yet to come across an instance
of ZANU-PF supporters being arrested for holding an unsanctioned
rally, yet we know they have been organising so many of them," Chimhini
alleged.
The police have also been accused of raiding meetings in non-public
places, such as the recent arrest of an MDC campaign manager during
a meeting with candidates in a hotel room.
According to analysts, AIPPA also denies the electorate the freedom
to make informed decisions regarding their votes because of the
restrictions it places on the media.
Journalists must adhere to stringent requirements in order to be
registered by the government, and the act also criminalises the
publication of falsehoods, which law experts and media analysts
say has not been clearly defined.
Since AIPPA's enactment in 2001, numerous journalists - all from
the private media - have been arrested for allegedly publishing
falsehoods, but none have been convicted.
The MDC, a broadbased party formed in 1999, is the main political
challenge to President Mugabe and ZANU-PF's hold on power. In 2000
the party clinched 57 parliamentary seats against the ruling party's
62 elected seats - a result whittled away in successive by-elections.
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
|
