|
Back to Index
How
the elections were rigged - MDC report on March 2005 parliamentary elections
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
April 12, 2005
Download
the full document
- Word
97 version (267KB)
- Acrobat
PDF version (327KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your
computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking
here.
Executive Summary
Periodic and
genuine democratic elections are the cornerstone of any functioning democracy.
Zimbabwe does have periodic elections but they are not democratic.
The
March 2005 parliamentary elections cannot be judged to be free and fair
nor can they be deemed an accurate reflection of the will of the Zimbabwean
people. The distorted nature of the pre-election playing field and the
failure to address core democratic deficits, in the context of both the
legal and administrative framework, and the political environment, precluded
a free and fair election from the very beginning.
The
determination of the Zanu PF government to manipulate the electoral process
and to eschew the need to ensure adequate levels of transparency and fairness
led to them breaching their own rules on polling day. They were determined
to have a system in place with sufficient capacity to enable them to rig
the ballot in the event that initial voting trends indicated an MDC victory.
The
MDC participated in the elections under protest. More than 133,000
voters attempted to participate on election day but were turned away.
Unknown thousands of voters were either added or subtracted from vote
tallies in 72 of 120 constituencies where figures were made available
by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC). We still have received no
explanation from the ZEC for the serious inconsistencies in the ZEC’s
own figures.
- ZEC must supply
the polling station returns (Form V11) for independent audit.
- ZEC must supply
a copy of the voters roll in electronic format.
MDC
agreed to participate on the basis that the prevailing view amongst our
structures and supporters on the ground was in favour of participation.
The issue of our participation, however, does not confer legitimacy on
the result.
If
the MDC had won the elections, and secured a parliamentary majority, it
would have been a testament to the courage and determination of the people
of Zimbabwe to overcome the nefarious obstacles deliberately placed by
Mugabe and Zanu PF to frustrate their collective desire for a new beginning
and a new Zimbabwe.
The
electoral reforms introduced by the Zimbabwe Government were woefully
inadequate and failed to ensure that Zimbabwe’s electoral framework and
political environment adhered to the new democratic benchmarks encapsulated
in the SADC Protocol On Guidelines and Principles Governing Democratic
Elections.
This
report provides compelling evidence to substantiate the MDC’s position
that the elections cannot be judged free and fair.
Chapter
Two exposes the fallacy of claims that the electoral process was managed
and run by ‘impartial, all-inclusive, competent and accountable national
electoral bodies’. Those who pronounce such claims site the role of
the new ‘independent’ electoral commission.
The
new Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), as an institution, failed to
demonstrate its independence. Its chair, Justice Chiweshe, was directly
appointed by President Mugabe, without consultation, and failed to discharge
his duties in an impartial manner. Moreover, the ZEC was established too
late in the day to have any meaningful role in the management of the electoral
process. By the time it was officially established most of its core duties,
such as voter registration and the compilation of the voters’ roll, had
already been carried out.
The
elections were managed and run by the same institutions that presided
over the wholesale rigging and subversion of the electoral process in
the 2000 parliamentary elections and 2002 presidential elections. Nothing
had changed.
It
is important to note, however, that the MDC retains a degree of confidence
in the ability of the four ZEC commissioners, appointed upon the recommendations
of Parliament. We believe that their task has been made impossible by
the Commission chair and the staff seconded to the Commission. Given the
irregularities that have occurred, in particular the discrepancies in
a large number of constituencies between voter turnout and final totals,
the onus is now firmly on these commissioners to demonstrate their independence,
fairness and integrity in unequivocal terms.
Chapter
Three outlines how the administrative processes for the elections
were manipulated to secure political advantage for the ruling party. The
voter registration exercise was carried out in a discriminatory manner
under the directions and guidance of the Registrar General who openly
supports Zanu PF. Thousands of people in urban areas (especially the youth),
perceived MDC strongholds, were disenfranchised through gratuitous proof
of residency requirements. Hundreds of thousands of Zimbabwean citizens
outside the country were denied their legitimate right to vote, while
the notorious Citizenship of Zimbabwe Act prevented thousands of Zimbabweans,
whose descendents came from other southern African countries, from registering
to vote.
The
voters’ roll used for the elections was a shambles. It was inaccurate
and grossly inflated. The MDC was denied access to the electronic copy
but was eventually given a hard copy. Data extrapolated from an audit
of 10% of the roll indicated that there were over one million dead people
on the roll. The names of MDC activists who have been killed were still
on the voters’ roll. The names of thousands of people who have left the
country in the past few years, and who were denied their moral right to
vote, are still on the roll. This created tremendous capacity for ‘ballot
stuffing’, especially when one considers that members of the military,
the ruling party or the intelligence service (CIO) were in charge of a
large number of polling stations.
The
delineation of constituency boundaries by the Mugabe appointed Delimitation
Commission resulted in Harare and Bulawayo losing two constituencies each.
Three new constituencies were created in areas perceived to be pro-Zanu
PF. The MDC had technically lost three seats before a single ballot had
been cast.
The
allocation and location of polling stations was again a clear attempt
to boost the electoral chances of the ruling party. A disproportionate
number of polling stations were allocated to rural areas compared to urban
areas. Moreover, a number of polling stations were located at the homesteads
of local headmen renowned for their support for the ruling party.
Chapter
Four illustrates the extent to which voters were unable to access
the wide variety of information necessary to make an informed choice at
the ballot box. Legislative curbs on a free press, and a flagrant lack
of equal access to the state controlled media, severely restricted the
free flow of information and ideas to the electorate, especially in rural
areas. In this context, the situation was worse than in the 2002 presidential
poll.
Chapter
Five describes the hostile political conditions on the ground, which
remained prevalent throughout the campaign period, and details the extent
to which the law enforcement agencies and traditional leaders were firmly
harnessed to the campaign agenda of the ruling party.
MDC
rallies and meetings continued to be banned under the Public Order and
Security Act. Not a single Zanu PF rally was banned. While the MDC was
obliged to comply with Section 24 of this Act and provide police with
notification of rallies/meetings four days in advance, this did not apply
to Zanu PF; it was free to hold public meetings and rallies without police
notification or permission.
While
political violence was lower compared to the 2000 and 2002 elections it
still remained at unacceptable levels. For this election, however, Zanu
PF did not really have much need to encourage its supporters to go out
and beat the electorate into submission. Five years of terror and violence
has had a severe psychological impact on the electorate, especially in
rural areas. People fear retribution if they freely express their political
preferences. This psychological impact enabled Zanu PF to engage in slightly
more subtle techniques to coerce and intimidate the electorate, as this
chapter clearly demonstrates.
Chapters
Seven and Eight demonstrate the extent to which Zanu PF breached the
very rules that it had introduced to improve the transparency and fairness
of technical and administrative procedures on polling day. These two chapters
also underline the abject failure of ZEC to demonstrate its independence
from the ruling party. Numerous incidents were recorded in rural areas
of local Zanu PF officials, headmen or CIO officials acting as ZEC representatives
at polling stations. This would have had a massive negative impact on
the voters at polling stations where this occurred. Chapter 8 in particular
details the unaccountable gaps in certain constituencies between the turnout
figures announced by ZEC and the final results announced by the same body
hours later. These discrepancies were facilitated by the deliberate
and systematic breaches of the Electoral Act during election day.
These
discrepancies, along with many others, were reported to the various observer
missions. The MDC remains deeply concerned that despite the weight of
evidence available, the various observer missions invited by President
Mugabe to observe the election process continue to claim that the MDC
has no evidence to back up its allegations of electoral malpractice. As
this report clearly demonstrates, this is not the case. Observer missions
have been provided with evidence of numerous allegations of malpractice
yet do not appear to have carried out full investigations.
We
are concerned that they have spent too much time in urban areas and not
sufficient time in rural areas, where most irregularities occurred.
The
MDC received assurances from all the observer missions that they would
conduct their duties in a fair, impartial and transparent manner. We were
assured that their final reports would be based on an objective assessment
and analysis of the situation on the ground.
Comments
during the election period by senior South African officials mandated
to observe the elections, raised suspicions that South Africa, from the
very beginning, was bent on declaring the results a ‘legitimate expression
of the will of the people’, regardless of the scale and extent to which
the liberation principle of one person, one vote was subverted.
We
are therefore not surprised that the SA Observer team was the first to
declare the elections free and fair.
It
is the MDC’s view that the findings in this report demonstrate in unequivocal
terms that the huge irregularities that occurred in both the pre-election
period and on polling day itself, make it impossible to judge the elections
as free and fair.
The
will of the people has not prevailed. This is a serious setback for the
democratization process in Zimbabwe and provides further confirmation
of the extent to which Zanu PF has become detached from the principles
that guided our liberation struggle.
The
final chapter, chapter nine, sets out the political and electoral reforms
that will be necessary to ensure that future elections in Zimbabwe are
free and fair and produce outcomes that accurately reflect the sovereign
wishes of the people.
Download
full document
Visit the MDC 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
|