|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
New Constitution-making process - Index of articles
What
is the future of the COPAC draft Constitution - Constitution Watch
Veritas
September 03, 2012
What
is the Future of the COPAC Draft Constitution?
ZANU-PF have
rejected the COPAC draft constitution
They have produced
a redraft of it
which has altered the COPAC one to such an extent that it may as
well be called the ZANU-PF constitution.
Both MDCs have
rejected the “ZANU-PF Constitution” - President Mugabe
handed copies of ZANU-PF’s re-draft to the principals Mr Tsvangirai
and Professor Ncube, after the Cabinet meeting on 21st August. Both
MDC groupings were quick to reject the ZANU-PF document and the
idea of further negotiations
on the COPAC draft. They have reiterated their statements that
the COPAC draft
was signed by all party negotiators and that they are committed
to the COPAC draft.
Impasse unresolved
- The ZANU-PF Politburo confirmed its endorsement of the ZANU-PF
re-draft at a meeting on 25th August. It was now, said ZANU-PF spokesman
Rugare Gumbo, up to the principals to decide the way forward. But
the MDCs have said they have compromised enough during the COPAC
process. Mr Tsvangirai for MDC-T said “to open the draft constitution
debate now is like opening a floodgate, for once you start you will
never know where to stop”. Prof Ncube spoke more strongly:
“I am astonished at the sheer scale of disrespect, contempt,
insult and audacity exhibited by the amendments. . . . In fact,
the draft is not just an insult on us but is also a mockery of the
people who took time to make representations to COPAC . . . . There
is no way we could ever accept those amendments. Anyone who does
so would be committing political suicide.” He went on to interpret
it as a ploy by ZANU-PF to go for early elections. And the impasse
continues unresolved.
The
SADC Factor
President Zuma’s
facilitation team was in Harare on 28th and 29th August, and met
the three party negotiating teams separately on the 28th before
a joint meeting on the 29th. The MDC negotiating teams maintained
their position that they were not prepared to have further negotiations
over the COPAC draft. ZANU-PF would not budge from its position
that insisted changes to the COPAC draft could still be made at
the level of the party principals. The MDC teams declared a deadlock
and invoked the recent SADC Summit resolution requiring intervention
by President Zuma, as the SADC Facilitator, and President Kikwete
of Tanzania, as chairperson of the SADC Organ on Politics, Defence
and Security Cooperation, in the event of difficulties arising over
the constitution. They were requested to confirm this in writing
to President Mugabe. Talk of an imminent visit by the two Presidents
is premature until the principals have met over the present impasse.
Any
Chance of Further Negotiations
Mr Tsvangirai
has suggested that the position might have been different had ZANU-PF
questioned only one or two issues. This may be seen as leaving some
space for consideration of more modest changes to the COPAC draft
in discussions at the level of the GPA
party principals – for example, the removal of the presidential
running-mates provision from the COPAC draft in return for ZANU-PF’s
abandonment of what the other parties have described as its outrageous
and insulting rejection of the draft’s provisions on presidential
powers, devolution, etc.
In fact the
principals have not yet met to discuss the issue. The principals
usually meet on a Monday, but the President was out of the country
on Monday 27th August, having left the day before on his way to
the Non-Aligned Movement Summit in Teheran. And it is not yet clear
whether he will have returned in time to be available for a meeting
on Monday 3rd September. The impatience of SADC leaders for progress
on the constitution, as shown by the resolutions adopted at the
Maputo Summit on 18th August, is likely to be a major factor in
the principals’ discussions.
Comment: As
the GPA set up a Parliamentary process to produce a new constitution,
correctly it is COPAC that should have the last say [and they have
already signed off on the COPAC draft], rather than the principals.
Meanwhile
MDC-T Announce YES Campaign for COPAC Draft
Start on 8th
September
On 30th August
Mr Tsvangirai told leaders of civil society organisations that MDC-T
would, starting 8th September, be campaigning to inform the people
about and seek their support for the COPAC draft constitution.
Comment: It
is puzzling why the MDC-T have made this decision. In statements
endorsing the COPAC draft after its release, both MDC parties made
it clear that the draft was a less than ideal compromise document,
and that each of them had made concessions to permit a consensus
to be arrived at between the three parties. Why, then, has the MDC-T
chosen to run with the COPAC draft when it contains provisions with
which MDC-T is not happy? If ZANU-PF feels free at this late stage
to push for what it really wants, why shouldn’t they come
up with their own draft constitution putting back what they surrendered
during the long drawn-out negotiations at Management Committee level,
from the Nyanga Retreat in June to the initialling of the COPAC
draft in the early hours of 18th July?
More
than One Draft for the Referendum?
The possibility
of submitting two drafts – COPAC’s and the ZANU-PF re-draft
– has been mentioned by President Zuma and others. ZANU-PF
spokesman Rugare Gumbo said on 29th August that ZANU-PF was against
the idea of taking both the COPAC draft and the ZANU-PF re-draft
to the Referendum. In fact, in terms of the Referendums Act there
is no reason why two or more drafts should not be put to the vote,
but it would be impractical for other reasons [see below]
Fear
of Referendum Violence
There is a growing
fear that if ZANU-PF go for a NO vote and MDC-T for a YES vote,
or if ZANU-PF and MDCs [and anyone joining in] are rallying supporters
to vote for different drafts, the Referendum would become a party
popularity contest and likely to be accompanied by the same degree
of violence
and intimidation that characterised the 2008 elections.
In Fact
No Party Can Go It Alone
If ZANU-PF remains
opposed to any draft but their own, the reality is that even it
the MDC-T could garner enough support for a YES vote for the COPAC
draft [or their own draft], it would probably be pointless. A YES
vote in the Referendum is not the final stage in the constitution-making
process. The new constitution needs to be passed by two-thirds majorities
in both Houses of Parliament. Neither grouping alone has a two-thirds
majority in the House of Assembly nor the Senate. It is unlikely
that MDC-T would persuade a two-thirds majority to vote with them.
And then it has to be signed by the President [ZANU-PF] for his
assent.
COPAC
Activities Still Stalled
COPAC’s
preparations for the remainder of the constitution-making process
are still stalled pending a resolution of the impasse that has followed
the production of the ZANU-PF re-draft. Translation and printing
arrangements continue shelved, as do other preparations for the
Second All Stakeholders’ Conference. This is because all important
decisions require consensus among the parties, something that is
not possible as long as the impasse continues.
Still
No Publication of National Report
Discussion of
issues surrounding the draft constitution continues to be hampered
by COPAC’s failure to publish the national report on the Outreach
process. ZANU-PF claims that the COPAC draft constitution published
on July 18 ignores views of the people gathered during the national
outreach programme and contained in the national report, and that
amendments made in the party’s re-draft used the national
report as a yardstick. But both MDCs have said the COPAC draft expresses
the people’s wishes and the ZANU-PF re-draft does not. ZANU-PF
has challenged COPAC to make the document public.
It would clarify
the issues and be of interest to the public if COPAC made the national
report available, but COPAC seems to be avoiding the issue. Jesse
Majome, COPAC’s spokesperson [also MDC-T Secretary for Constitutional
and Parliamentary Affairs], has dismissed as nonsensical ZANU PF’s
call to make public the COPAC national report. She insisted: “There
is nowhere in the GPA where it says after the process you release
the national report. Article 6 of the GPA is clear on the functions
of COPAC. And in any case, the Select Committee is answerable to
Parliament and that body has not demanded such action from us.”
[Comment: This statement seems to invite an interested Parliamentarian
to make such a request.]
Does a complete
national report really exist? COPAC has mentioned in the past both
a statistical report and a narrative report, so a complete national
report should include both. COPAC has also said it would make it
available at the end of the process. If it exists, why not just
make it available now? ZANU-PF has said it will publish the national
statistical report itself, but has not yet done so. There is a natural
suspicion, because of lack of a clear methodology, and the constant
arguments about quantitative data and quantitative data during the
collation of the analysis of the public consultations, that there
is in fact no narrative report. [Comment: Considering all the other
“leaks” from the process, surely if it exists it would
have been “leaked by now”?]
Some months
ago ZANU-PF supporter Goodson Nguni said he proposed suing COPAC
to get a High Court order forcing COPAC to release the national
report. So far no court papers have been served on COPAC.
Veritas
makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take
legal responsibility for information supplied
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
|