|
Back to Index
Is
govt, opposition finally agreeing?
David
Coltart, The Citizen (Tanzania)
November 16, 2007
http://allafrica.com/stories/200711160680.html
The recent passage
of Constitutional
Amendment 18 through the Zimbabwean Parliament with the consent
of both Zanu PF and the opposition MDC has caused much alarm and
confusion within Zimbabwean civil society and even amongst MDC supporters
within Zimbabwe and abroad. Some have gone so far as saying that
the opposition has sold out. Others think that the opposition has
made a serious error of judgment and has compromised not only principle
but political advantage. This arises from a perception that Amendment
18 only helps Zanu PF and that there is no benefit for those struggling
to bring democracy to Zimbabwe. The press has enhanced this view
by its reporting that Amendment 18 allows Robert Mugabe to handpick
his successor. Whilst I think we in the opposition did ourselves
and our colleagues in civil society a disservice by proceeding with
unseemly haste in passing the amendment, and by failing to explain
our actions sufficiently to our colleagues, I do not think our consent
per se was a mistake. There is no doubt that the process used to
pass the amendment was flawed. But had we been able to consult widely
and argue our case with our civic partners I am sure they would
have agreed that we should consent. Accordingly save for the one
reservation about the flawed process I think history will show that
it was the right thing to pass the amendment.
Firstly, the amendments,
to put it negatively, do not introduce any worse provisions than
any that already sully our Constitution. In other words the amendments
do not make the Zimbabwe Constitutional order any worse than would
have been the case had the original draft of Amendment 18 tabled
by Zanu PF been passed. That document would have, for example, allowed
further gerrymandering of the delimitation process (the original
amendment proposed the existing 20% maximum variation between constituencies
to be increased to 25% - which would have allowed Zanu PF to create
even more rural constituencies and to further dilute the urban vote).
Secondly, and on the contrary, the final Amendment 18 has introduced
several improvements to our Constitutional order. For example aside
from a token 5 Senatorial seats, the President no longer has the
power to appoint members of the legislature - all 210 Members
of Parliament will be directly elected by the Zimbabwean electorate
as will the vast majority of Senators. This is a welcome break from
the provisions in place since 1987 which have allowed the President
to handpick 20% of Parliamentarians.
Concern has been expressed
about the alleged power now given to the President to handpick a
successor. In fact Amendment 18 grants no such power. Prior to the
amendment if the President died, resigned or was impeached a Presidential
election would have to be held within 90 days of the termination
of his or her office. Amendment 18 now states that Parliament will
elect a successor pending the next scheduled election, which is
similar to the position in South Africa and the United Kingdom.
This is better in some respects to the relevant US provision which
allows the US Vice President to assume office for the balance of
the original term. Accordingly the new Zimbabwean provision is a
logical and fair provision designed to ensure that elections are
held at predictable times and that all parties will have some say
in the election of a temporary Head of State. However perhaps the
main fear about the amendment is that it is part of a process which
will allow Zanu PF to wriggle out of the hole it has dug for itself.
There is deep concern that Zanu PF, through the Mbeki mediation,
will agree to a variety of legislative changes without materially
changing the political environment. In other words people fear that
we may in the next few months witness a much fairer legislative
environment being agreed to without genuinely free and fair electoral
conditions being created. We may see, for example, our media legislation
amended which in theory will allow independent papers to operate
freely, but which in practise will not be implemented early enough
to enable independent papers to have a material effect on the electoral
process.
In the short term these
are valid concerns. There is a real danger that the Mbeki mediation
process will result in all the form of a free and fair electoral
environment being created without any substance. We may well in
the short term see the implementation of a new democratic constitution
without a democratic environment being created prior to the elections
scheduled for 2008. It will take time for constitutional and legislative
amendments to take root and change the way we conduct our politics
in Zimbabwe. 27 years of oppression has created a certain mindset
within the Zimbabweans electorate. It will take time to liberate
the minds of Zimbabweans. The concern of many is that if elections
are held too soon Zanu PF will be able to claim legitimacy through
a process which has a democratic façade but which in reality
does not allow for a genuinely free expression of the informed will
of the electorate.
Many are worried that
by agreeing to Constitutional Amendment 18 the opposition has helped
Zanu PF create a mere façade of democracy. Only time will
tell whether this is the case. Much depends on whether the Mbeki
mediation results in an acceptable period being agreed to between
the promulgation of a new Constitution (and other laws) and the
holding of Presidential and Parliamentary elections. There is no
doubt that if an election is held too soon after the passage of
these new laws it cannot not be free and fair. Moreover Zanu PF,
in the event of it winning, would be able to claim legitimacy having
been elected in a theoretically free and fair environment. In that
event the agreement to Amendment 18, and for that matter any agreement
regarding the rest of any new legislative changes arising out of
the Mbeki mediation, will be seen in the short term to have merely
bought time for an oppressive regime.
Let me assume for the
moment that this is what does in fact happen over the next few months;
that the opposition is forced to agree to an unacceptably short
period between the passage of new legislation and the holding of
elections and that that results in a Zanu PF victory which is endorsed
by SADC at least as legitimate. Will that automatically mean that
Amendment 18, and indeed our participation in the Mbeki mediation
process as a whole, was a terrible mistake? That leads me to the
third and final argument why I think the opposition has not erred.
I believe in the medium to long term it will shown that even in
this worst case scenario the opposition was correct to act in the
manner it has. This is for one reason - which I will term
the "Gorbachev Factor". Mikhail Gorbachev never wanted
to destroy the Soviet Union or communism. As President of the Soviet
Union and leader of the Communist Party he was committed to the
preservation of both institutions. However with the collapse of
the Soviet economy in the 1980s he realised that if he did not make
certain political reforms he would not be able to hold Soviet Union
together. It was in this context that he agreed to the new policies
of Perestroika "comprehensive rebuilding of society" and
Glasnost "candour or openness". It was his hope that through
the moderate liberalisation of Soviet society he would be able to
hold on to power and keep the Soviet Union intact. However history
shows that once he started the process of reform, the process then
ran away from him and he was left powerless in controlling the course
it followed. Ultimately both perestroika and glasnost led to the
destruction of the Soviet Union and the near collapse of the Communist
Party.
One of the reasons why
this happened is because the core of the Soviet Union was so weak
that once laws were liberalised it became impossible for the core
of the Communist Party to control every aspect of governance. This
stands in marked contrast to the the Communist Party in China which
has been able to implement economic and some political reforms without
adversely affecting its political control. The difference in outcome
lies in the fact that the Chinese started liberalising their economy
long before the core of their political power became undermined.
The Chinese in essence anticipated the need for economic reform
whereas the leaders of the Soviet Union reacted to the need for
economic reform. Zanu PF has, ironically, not followed the example
of its Chinese mentors. It has tried to maintain tight controls
over the Zimbabwean economy for 27 years. It never wholeheartedly
liberalised the Zimbabwean economy at a time when it was politically
powerful enough to withstand the turmoil which sometimes accompanies
such reforms. It is now reacting to the collapse of the economy
by agreeing to the implementation of political reforms - but
it is too little and too late. Accordingly I have no doubt that
we will see the Gorbachev Factor unfold in Zimbabwe over the next
few years, if not in the course of 2008. Whilst Amendment 18 may
well result in Zanu PF gaining the legitimacy it craves in an election
next year, it will not in itself provide any solution to the collapsed
economy and the thoroughly weakened political core of the Zanu PF
regime. The new Constitution and other new laws will require the
regime to liberalise society. The terms for economic assistance
which will be insisted upon by international financial institutions
will do likewise.
Once these terms are
implemented Zanu PF-s remaining control over Zimbabwean society
will unravel. For example when the current dual exchange rate is
abolished, Zanu PF-s principal means for dispensing patronage
to the ruling elite will end. That in turn will end its last remaining
core of support because it has already lost the support of Zimbabwean
workers, the business sector and the rank and file of the civil
service and the military. And the same will apply to every single
aspect of governance. In conclusion the opposition has in my view
been correct in participating in the Mbeki mediation and in agreeing,
as part of that process, to Constitutional Amendment 18. Whilst
that may not in itself yield any change in government in the short
term, it has introduced the Gorbachev Factor to our political climate
and that will ultimately be the catalyst for far reaching political
and economic changes in Zimbabwe. We have in essence now unleashed
a process that no-one will be able to stop.
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
|
