|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Index of results, reports, press stmts and articles on March 31 2005 General Election - post Mar 30
Election
campaigning during the 2005 Zimbabwe parliamentary elections
Selby Matloga
and Maureen Moloi, Electoral Institute of Southern Africa (EISA)
Extracted from Election Talk No. 20
May 10, 2005
There were five
political parties that took part in the elections - Zimbabwe African
National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU PF), Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC), Zimbabwe People's Democratic Party
(ZPDP), Zimbabwe African National Union-Ndonga (Zanu- Ndonga) and
Zimbabwe Youth Alliance (ZIYA) and 17 independent candidates. They
were contesting for 120 of the 150 seats in the National Assembly."1
Introduction
This paper covers the campaign process during the 2005 Zimbabwe
parliamentary elections. These elections in Zimbabwe were aimed
at offsetting controversies that occurred in the 2000 parliamentary
and 2002 presidential elections. Notwithstanding, as campaign issues
are not legislated in the Zimbabwe Electoral Act, it was the SADC
Principles that provided the basis in creating a peaceful process.2
The SADC Principles and Guidelines give clear guidelines on how
campaigning in any SADC country should be conducted. They clearly
articulate that "there should be freedom of assembly, freedom
of expression, political tolerance, voter education and equal access
to media."3 This article seeks
to examine whether the campaign in the recent parliamentary elections
in Zimbabwe conformed to these regional guidelines.
Issues on which
both ZANU-PF and MDC Campaigned President Robert Mugabe officially
launched ZANU-PF's election campaign under the "Anti-Blair"
slogan at the Harare International Conference Centre (HICC) on 11
February 2005. The MDC launched its campaign, based on economic
issues, on 20 February in the Masvingo's Mucheke stadium. The MDC
slogan "New Zimbabwe with jobs and food"4
was intended as a reaction to the economic crisis that is currently
prevailing in Zimbabwe. ZANU-PF's anti-imperialist rhetoric was
intended to discredit the MDC as a puppet of western powers. ZANU-PF
banners were clear in this regard: "2005 election - time to
bury Blair and his puppets, MDC; 2005 anti Blair election - Blair
keep your England, I'll keep my Zimbabwe; and Zimbabwe will never
be a colony again"5
.The MDC instead promised to restore macro-economic stability and
provision of free basic socio-economic services, such as education
and health.6 On the land
issue, both parties pledged extensive reforms, ZANU-PF promised
agricultural support mechanisms and long term financial assistance.7
Similarly, MDC promised the "recovery of the agriculture sector"
and promotion of security of tenure in order to improve the viability
of farming to stimulate investment and boost production.8
Both ZANU-PF and the MDC campaigned extensively, in a violence-free
environment. However a level of mistrust and suspicion between the
two parties was ever present.
Constraints
and Obstacles to an Easy Campaign
Legislation
during campaign
The 2005 election campaign was free from the intimidation, coercion
and political violence that characterised prior elections in Zimbabwe.9
The level of political tolerance was heightened by an appeal by
the two leaders - President Robert Mugabe of the ZANU PF and Mr.
Morgan Tsvangirai of the MDC - to their supporters to stay clear
from violence or else face the wrath of the law.10
However there were still incidents of intimidation
that occurred, especially in the rural areas with chiefs and police
'harassing and barring' oppositions' party's candidates and supporters
from freely campaigning.11
In addition, the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) in force during
the election, deprived opposition parties and independents from
holding meetings without prior police clearance. POSA regulates
that if more than five individuals intend holding a meeting, they
must apply for a written authorisation from police four days in
advance.12
Political
funding and election campaign
An effective election campaign requires sufficient funds. In Zimbabwe
the law, Political Parties (Finance) Act stipulates that political
parties with at least five percent of total votes from the most
recent election qualify for state funding. This meant that only
ZANU-PF and MDC parties obtained funding during the 2005 parliamentary
elections.
ZANU-PF received
Zim$3.5 billion ($578,608) and the MDC, Zim $3 billion ($495,949)
for their campaigns.13 Small
Zimbabwean parties and independents complained that 'unfair legislation'
froze them out of the elections by denying them access to government
funding for political campaigns. Other smaller parties such as the
Democratic Party (DP), ZAPU a former liberation movement; the National
Alliance for Good Governance (NAGG); and the Multi-racial Christian
Democrats failed to register due to critical shortage of money to
finance their campaign.14
Media and
election campaign
The importance of the media in the election campaign is to link
parties to citizens and educate voters to make informed choices.
In terms of access to the media and contrary to what was witnessed
in the 2002 election, the public media devoted a great deal of time
to the opposition.15 However,
the MDC viewed the electoral "playing field", especially
the access to the media as still "not level." 16
Indeed, while opposition parties were allowed access to the state
broadcast for the first time during an election, the media coverage
was extensively biased in favour of ZANU-PF. The National Public
Broadcasting Corporation, (ZBH) failed to provide "balanced,
fair, complete and accurate" coverage during campaigns - 85%
airtime focused on ZANU-PF, whereas only 15% was allocated to the
MDC.17
Use of state
resources during campaigning
Equally important during the 2005 elections was the use of state
resources. There are reports that , ZANU-PF was involved in vote
buying gimmicks including giving food (maize meal) to its "supporters"
and donation of computers to schools "that did not even have
reading material".18
President Mugabe used Air force helicopters as transport during
campaign and this was clear violation of electoral laws which forbid
competing parties from using government resources during campaign
without reimbursement.19
Conclusion
The 2005 elections went well in a relatively peaceful environment.
No major incidents of intimidation and violence were reported. This
contributed to a remarkable improvement in the electoral processes
in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe however, still needs much improvement in certain
areas of its electoral process. These include the abandoning of
draconian laws such as POSA and AIPPA which severely limit freedom
of association and political tolerance during election campaign,
monitoring of the use of state resource which will require that
Zimbabwe puts in place a truly independent Electoral Commission,
and an impartial public media. However, from a regional perspective,
Zimbabwe election was a landmark since it was organised within the
framework of the SADC Principles and Guidelines which were confirmed
in Mauritius during 2004.20
1. This paper
will focus mainly on the two major political parties, the MDC which
is the main opposition and ZANU-PF, the ruling party. From time
to time we will raise issues relating to other smaller parties and
independents.
2. Sokwanele, "Zimbabwe Electoral Legislation: Checklist against
the SADC Principles Governing Democratic Elections".
3. Preamble to SADC Principles and Guidelines.
4. Ncube, N. Anti Blair vs. Better Zimbabwe; 17 February 2004: http://www.rastafarispeaks.com
5. Banda, C. "Mugabe Sets for Ugly Campaign". Institute
for War and Peace, Africa Reports: Zimbabwe Elections No 6, 12 February
2005
6. Zimbabwe Election Support Network, Report on the Zimbabwe's 2005
GeneralElections Final Copy April 2005
7. Zimbabwe Election Support Network, Report on the Zimbabwe's 2005
GeneralElections, Final Copy April 2005
8. Sifelani Tsiko & Caesar Zvayi. Manifestos show policy congruence;
23 February 2005
9. Not a Level Playing Field: Zimbabwe's Parliamentary Elections
in 2005, Human Rights Watch Briefing Paper, 21 March 2005
10. Caiphas Chimhete, Violence: Zanu PF's poll trump card, The Zimbabwe
Situation, 21 March 2005
11.Op cit, 21
March 2005. p15
12.Ibid, p. 31
13. Zimbabwe Smaller Parties hamstrung by lack of Funds, in IRIN
News.org,
http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=45766,
24 February 2005
14. Ibid, 24 February 2005
15. EISA election Update 2005 Zimbabwe Number 2 31 March 2005
16. Ibid, 21 March 2005
17. Zimbabwe Election Support Network, Report on the Zimbabwe's
2005 General Elections" Final Copy April 2005
18. Ibid, 21 March 2005
19. EISA election Update 2005 Zimbabwe Number 2 31 March 2005.p
7
20. Op-cit, ZESN April 2005
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
|