|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Constitutional Amendment 18 of 2007 - Index of articles, opinion and anaylsis
Constitutional
Amendment Number 18
Media
Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Extracted from Weekly Media Update 2007-37
Monday September 17th - Sunday September 23th 2007
September 27, 2007
Visit
the special index of articles, analysis and opinion on Constitutional
Amendment 18
All media failed
to coherently clarify the circumstances in which ZANU PF MPs and
their MDC counterparts 'unanimously' passed the Constitutional
Amendment Number 18 Bill, which proposed significant changes
to Zimbabwe's electoral dispensation. This was reflected in
their 79 reports on the subject: ZBC (25), government papers (16),
private electronic media (21) and private Press (17). Apart from
cursorily presenting the development as part of the search for an
internal settlement in the country by the SADC-backed mediation
efforts of South African President Thabo Mbeki, these media failed
to give an informed analysis of the behind-the-scenes manoeuvres
that gave birth to the compromise deal.
As a result,
it remained unclear whether the passing of the Bill was merely a
pre-condition for the MDC/ZANU PF talks to take off or the first
direct outcome of the negotiations. This was especially so as these
media projected the parties as still working on the modalities of
the talks' agenda.
Neither was
there a comparative analysis on the provisions of the original amendments
with the revised ones, nor serious attempts to examine the sanitised
halo of political correctness that the ruling party and opposition
attached to the development against the political realities in the
country. The government media were the main culprits. They simply
celebrated the passing of the Bill on the basis that it had the
'unanimous' support of all lawmakers, or gave the impression
that it would ease Zimbabwe's political and economic crises.
How, remained unexplained.
Most of the
government media reports on the matter were parliamentary updates
that paid tribute to the ZANU PF and MDC MPs for showing unity of
purpose in agreeing to the amendments. It was in this light that
Spot FM (21/9, 8am), for example, passively celebrated the passing
of the Bill, saying it demonstrated "togetherness and unity"
and political maturity on the part of lawmakers". Earlier,
The Herald (19/9) simply cited Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa
describing the event as an "historic moment" in the
country as Zimbabweans from "both sides of the political divide"
had shown commitment to "take charge of their own destiny".
The paper also reported MPs from the two MDC formations as saying
the development would "foster relations" between their
party and ZANU PF and "address the various social and economic
challenges facing the country".
There was no
relating these claims to public sentiment or to the situation on
the ground, especially as the official media suffocated the "few
voices that have condemned" the MDC/ZANU PF compromise deal
(The Sunday Mail 23/9). As a result, it did not explore the National
Constitutional Assembly (NCA)'s reservations on the amendments
or the process that created them. The government media only highlighted
the amended provisions of the Bill without seeking independent analysis
on their implications. For example ZTV (18/9), Spot FM (21/9,8am)
and The Sunday Mail did not explain how the amendments - which
include reducing the presidential term from six to five years, harmonise
elections and expand the Senate and House of Assembly - would
benefit the country or guarantee the holding of free and fair elections.
In fact, The
Sunday Mail missed a great chance to clear the air on the conditions
of the compromise during an interview with one of ZANU PF's
chief negotiators, Nicholas Goche. Rather than ask him exactly how
the deal was struck, the paper's political editor, Munyaradzi
Huni, just allowed the minister to divert attention from the crux
of the matter with mostly trivial political rhetoric. For example,
apart from simply outlining the issues making the agenda for the
talks, glorifying his party and the opposition's cordial meetings
and blaming outside "interference" for the country's
problems, he revealed nothing of significance. Neither was he encouraged
to. The reporter actually contributed to the minister's sanitised
responses with petty questions such as: "Did you share any
jokes during the talks?" Although the government media's
sourcing patterns appeared diverse (Figs 1 and 2), their over-reliance
on official and pro-government views meant there was very little
critical analysis on the subject.
Fig 1: Voice
distribution on ZBC
Zanu
PF |
MDC |
Government |
Alternative |
War
veterans |
Ordinary
people |
Local
government |
12 |
6 |
13 |
4 |
4 |
9 |
2 |
Fig 2: Voice
distribution in the government Press
Govt |
MDC |
Zanu
PF |
Alternative |
Foreign |
Judiciary |
Lawyers |
12 |
9 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
Notably, MDC
voices, like those of the ruling party, were cited in the context
of justifying the Bill's passage. The private electronic media
also failed to give a holistic picture on the mechanics of the compromise.
They mostly rehashed the MDC and ZANU PF defence of the development.
For example, they failed to probe the source of MDC's newly
found optimism that the compromise was a 'necessary political
risk' and a "gesture of goodwill and acknowledgement
of the on-going negotiations with ZANU PF" (ZimOnline (21/9).
Neither did
Studio 7 (22/9) and The Standard (23/9) extract clarity from MDC
leader Morgan Tsvangirai. For example, The Standard failed to establish
whether the passing of the Bill was indeed "academic"
as argued by the opposition leader. It quoted him saying his party
had endorsed the amendments after SADC had "guaranteed ZANU-PF
would not renege on the ongoing dialogue on a new constitution before
next year's elections". The exact nature of the guarantee
was not mentioned.
The previous
day, Studio 7 quoted Tsvangirai calling his party's collaboration
with ZANU PF as the "first step towards the final resolution
of the national crisis, a bold and correct decision the party has
taken to locate the exit points to the political logjam".
But he didn't explain this statement. And while he attributed
the negative reaction to the opposition's support for the
Bill to the "people's mistrust" of ZANU PF and
less than complete information of the Mbeki mediated crisis talks
from which the constitutional compromise arose, he did not volunteer
any clarifications.
However, unlike
the government media, the private media carried several stories
highlighting civic society's displeasure with the amendments,
with Zimdaily (20/9) and SW Radio Africa (21/9) reporting National
Association for NGO spokesman Fambai Ngirande describing them as
a "great betrayal of the people of Zimbabwe". The Financial
Gazette (20/9) quoted Crisis Zimbabwe Coalition chairman Arnold
Tsunga raising similar sentiments. It cited him accusing ZANU PF
and the MDC of tinkering with the Constitution without addressing
its fundamental flaws, adding that civic society was "worried
by attempts to identify Zimbabwe's problems as an issue that
can be resolved by drafting constitutional amendments".
For example,
he claimed that on the day the two parties were "celebrating"
the passage of the amendments, state security agents "abducted"
trade unionists who had been planning job boycotts against worsening
economic conditions.
The paper and
NewZimbabwe.com (20/9) also reported civic society, especially the
NCA, as cutting ties with the MDC over its constitutional deal with
ZANU PF. Moreover, the private media exposed some shortcomings of
the provisions of the amendments. For example, NewZimbabwe.com (20/9)
reported NCA chairman and constitutional law expert Lovemore Madhuku
criticising the expansion of Parliament, saying it was beyond the
capacity and requirement of the country, while the Zimbabwe Independent
(21/9) cited analyst Michael Mhike saying the harmonising of all
four elections next year would result in chaos.
The private
media's sourcing patterns are shown in Fig 3 and 4.
Fig 3: Voice
distribution in the private electronic media
Alternative |
Government |
Foreign
dignitaries |
MDC |
NCA |
7 |
1 |
1 |
16 |
4 |
Fig 4: Voice
distribution in the private Press
Govt |
MDC |
Zanu
PF |
Alternative |
Foreign
diplomat |
Lawyers |
2 |
8 |
1 |
10 |
1 |
1 |
Visit the MMPZ
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
|