Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Election Watch Issue 9 - 2012
The Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe
September 07, 2012

Download this document
- Acrobat PDF version (711KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking here

ZANU PF rewrites draft constitution

The decision by ZANU PF's Politburo to rewrite large sections of the Constitutional Parliamentary Select Committee (Copac)'s final draft constitution was the highlight of the media's coverage of Zimbabwe's protracted constitution-making process.

All media reported ZANU PF as having made wholesale changes to the draft and declaring that its amendments were non-negotiable, setting the stage for possible confrontation with its coalition partners, who were reportedly in favour of Copac's draft.

It reportedly took about five meetings for the ZANU PF Politburo to come up with its draft, a development which Veritas - an independent legal and parliamentary watchdog - viewed as an indication of considerable internal disagreement within the party (Constitutional Watch, 15/8/12).

The ZANU PF-controlled state media defended ZANU PF's actions even though they amounted to a rejection of the jointly negotiated Copac draft and threatened to stall the constitution-making process.

These and the private media, all reported ZANU PF scrapping clauses on "so-called gay rights"; devolution of power; dual citizenship; and presidential running mates (ZTV, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, & 24/8, 8pm and The Herald & Sunday Mail, 10, 22 & 26/8). The party also rejected the proposed establishment of a Constitutional Court, a land commission and the restructuring of the Attorney-General's Office. ZANU PF also demanded that the new constitution recognize the significance of Zimbabwe's liberation struggle; and reflect the role and rights of youths, women and traditional leaders and empowerment of Zimbabweans.

Instead of assessing the implications of ZANU PF's actions, the official state media reported senior party officials such as Patrick Chinamasa, Paul Mangwana and Rugare Gumbo and "experts", such as Jonathan Moyo and Goodwills Masimirembwa, claiming that ZANU PF's proposed amendments were in line with "people's views", gathered during the outreach programme, while discrediting concerns by the two MDC formations.

In one such case, The Sunday Mail (26/8) splashed a front-page lead: 'ZANU PF won't move an inch' in which it reported the party's Politburo declaring that it had "resolved not to open negotiations on the amendments, saying the changes are final".

Speaking after one of the Politburo's lengthy meetings, Gumbo dismissed MDC threats to declare the amendments void, claiming that his party had the right to amend the draft, "even after party representatives in Copac appended their signatures". He added: "They (party representatives) are not the principals. Therefore, they should accept amendments . . . It (the draft) is not an MDC-T document but an effort of all the parties . . . "

Earlier, The Herald (10/8) failed to assess the validity of the MDC's concerns and gave more space to Gumbo to dismiss them. MDC-T spokesman Douglas Mwonzora had accused ZANU PF of "using factional politics in dealing with the constitution" and "deviating" from the Global Political Agreement (GPA) by taking the document to the principals. Mwonzora complained: "We are totally against any further negotiations because it is time-wasting and unproductive. Besides, this document is a product of the outreach and negotiation process. The document must be taken to the Second All Stakeholders Conference where ZANU PF is included . . . Our position as a party is that this is decision-time for the people of Zimbabwe to decide and not for one party to make a decision on their behalf".

The private media also viewed ZANU PF's move as a desperate attempt to sabotage the constitution-making process to facilitate the holding of the next harmonized elections under the current Lancaster House Constitution.

Even if the MDCs were to back down and re-open negotiations with ZANU PF, Veritas expressed doubts over the prospects of the parties reaching a consensus within a reasonable time (Constitutional Watch, 15/8/12).

Veritas also expressed reservations over suggestions by the MDCs to include ZANU PF's draft in any constitutional referendum, warning that such move would not only be "difficult" especially in the absence of "a binding commitment from all parties to respect the outcome of the referendum", but also increase "the danger of inter-party conflict degenerating into violence".

Download full document

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