Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Government media intent on keeping Zimbabweans in the dark on talks
Extracted from Media Update 24/2008
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
August 24, 2008

The government media continued to take advantage of the secrecy surrounding the SADC-led power-sharing talks between ZANU PF and the two MDC formations to cloud fundamental governance issues relating to the dialogue. For example, there were hardly any useful updates on the fate of the power-sharing deal, especially in light of President Mugabe's decision to convene parliament in the middle of the talks, in violation of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the negotiators.

Neither did the official media query the current conflicting role of South African President and chief mediator in the talks, Thabo Mbeki, whose recent appointment as SADC chair effectively made him supervisor of his mediation. Instead, these media presented a distorted version of the progress of the negotiations, reportedly deadlocked over the roles and powers of Mugabe and MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai in an envisaged coalition government.

Moreover, the government media never bothered to question SADC leaders' seemingly tacit approval of Mugabe's claims to legitimacy by giving him the signal to convene Parliament, including parading him as head of state when his authority was still a subject of arbitration.

Radio Zimbabwe (21/8, 6am), merely cited ruling party deputy information secretary Ephraim Masawi noting that the regional body had "recognized the outcome of June 27 election" and that Mugabe was "legally elected". However, the station did not reconcile SADC's alleged endorsement of Mugabe as president to the regional body's criticism of his controversial re-election. Earlier, The Herald (19/8) emphasized Tsvangirai's alleged pressure from the SADC leaders to sign the proposed settlement, projecting his steadfast refusal to do so as unreasonable without coherent substantiation. It noted reports from "insiders privy to the discussions" as "indicating that Tsvangirai was demanding executive powers to hire and fire ministers and to chair cabinet in any new government".

No elaboration of this was made except for quoting the alleged insiders claiming that leaders of the minority MDC faction, Arthur Mutambara and Welshman Ncube, had "vigorously opposed" Tsvangirai's demands at the summit. Reportedly, they contested that "the will of the people" in the elections reflected a power sharing arrangement among the parties not a "transfer of power to Tsvangirai". No comment was sought from Tsvangirai.

It was against this background that these media approvingly reported officials announcing preparations for the opening of Parliament, passively justifying this on SADC's recommendations that it "may be necessary to convene Parliament to give effect to the will of the people as expressed in the Parliamentary elections held on March 29" (ZBC [20/8, 8pm] and The Herald [21/8]) Further, ZBC (20/8pm) quoted selected members of the public endorsing the decision and calling upon new legislators to "deliberate on key issues that will spur the economy to recovery" while The Herald (21/8) cited war veterans' leader Jabulani Sibanda urging Mugabe to "appoint the next cabinet".
Otherwise the government media simply intensified their onslaught on Tsvangirai by narrowly presenting him as a stumbling block to the signing of the agreement, which ZANU PF and the smaller MDC formation led by Mutambara have already endorsed. For example, The Herald's Manheru column [23/8] misleadingly presented ZANU PF's participation in the talks as solely motivated by its "magnanimous gesture" that should never indicate "self-doubt with the mandate given it, or the process yielding it" while maliciously depicting the MDC leader's reluctance to sign the deal as unpatriotic and underpinned by his Western puppetry.

The Herald stories Just whose tune is Tsvangirai singing (19/8); "Why Zimbabweans feel betrayed (20/8); and Is Tsvangirai's signature so special? (23/8) reflected this perception so did their cartoons.

Only the private media critically examined these developments in their 103 reports on the topic. They lamented the secrecy surrounding the talks, which they argued would have allowed the public to judge for themselves the alleged vacillation of Tsvangirai regarding the signing of the deal.

The private media viewed the convening of Parliament as a negative development in the country as it violated the spirit of the dialogue. They also interpreted the development as evidence that Mugabe was losing patience with MDC (Tsvangirai) over its reluctance to sign the agreement and noted conflicting statements by the opposition regarding its position on the matter. For example, Studio 7, The Zimbabwe Times and ZimOnline (20/8) quoted the party's secretary general Tendai Biti arguing the opening of Parliament was "a clear repudiation" of the MoU and could "decapitate the dialogue" while his boss, Tsvangirai, had earlier on told ZimOnline (19/8) his party had "no problem" with the development saying: "Let Parliament reconvene".

The private media also assessed the implications of an MDC dominated parliament, saying it would constrict the presidential powers by refusing to endorse government plans on important national issues like passing of budget since ZANU PF had lost its two-thirds majority. The Financial Gazette (21/8) predicted a "tug-of-war between parliament and government" arguing that it was "likely to delay economic reforms and bring the decade-long political crisis to a head".

In addition, they continued to highlight the reasons why the talks were deadlocked, blaming Mugabe for refusing to make significant concessions to Tsvangirai. ZimOnline and SW Radio Africa (22/8) reported the ZANU PF's supreme decision making body, Politburo, as having resolved "not to give in to Tsvangirai's demands" and "give him up to Monday to sign" failure of which it would implement Plan B, which it did not disclose. Earlier, Madhuku told SW Radio Africa (18/8) that it was "obvious" that Mugabe was not going to make further concessions to Tsvangirai and that SADC was not likely to "force" him to do so.

At the weekend, The Standard (24/8) gave insight into why Tsvangirai had refused to sign the deal. Citing leaked documents detailing some aspects of deal, the paper alleged that the proposed 50-50 power sharing arrangement was "clearly in favour of Mugabe who would remain Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and head of government as well as head of state".

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