Deciphering the blind support for Article VI and Copac

Deciphering the blind support for Article VI and Copac

By Terence Chimhavi

The much talked about constitutional reform process as outlined in Article VI of the GPA and as led by Copac has generated a lot of debate especially within Zimbabwean civil society, who by their very nature, ought to be the vanguards of ensuring movement and adherence to democratic principles that they so clamor for. It goes without saying that as civics, we ought to tow that rigid line, in line with our principles as enunciated through the numerous gatherings through which we have and continue to make our demands and vision for a democratic and socially just Zimbabwe known. Unlike politicians and political parties, we can never compromise such principles as they form the back-bone and very basis of our existence. It is through the work of these civic movements that the aspirations and desires of the general populace can clearly and concisely by captured and championed.

Gift Tandare - a victim of March 11 2007.

I vividly remember the time after the March 11 2007 Save Zimbabwe Campaign prayer meeting that was viciously suppressed by the police in Highfields. It was this event that ultimately led to inter-party talks brokered by then South African president Thabo Mbeki. Eventually, the parties made a raft of agreements that included electoral reforms used in the March 2008 elections and of course the Kariba Draft. Many right thinking civics with a memory sharp enough will remember the noise they generated as they clamored to be part of the talks in South Africa. However, their most immediate ally in the talks then, the opposition MDC saw no need to afford their allies space in deliberations for a way forward for the country.

I also remember well the talking points for civics who gathered in their thousands at the Rainbow Towers Gardens on 8 and 9 February 2008 for the Zimbabwe People’s Convention. Many civics then felt greatly betrayed by the MDC for having gone for talks with Zanu PF alone when the events that culminated in these talks were the result of a concerted effort, at the time led by the civics through Save Zimbabwe Campaign. And knowing well the behavior of politicians, civics knew that in their absence, the MDC would be easily swayed into making petty concessions with Zanu PF. Their main concern was on unlocking a people-driven process of coming up with a democratic constitution for the country as enunciated in all these gatherings mentioned. True to principle, they all agreed, then, that constitutional reform or review could never be a preserve of politicians and their political parties and therefore any process thereof had to be led by an independent commission agreed to by various stakeholders in the body politic of the country.

Many may now begin to remember the events that followed the March 29 2008 elections: the election results that were to take so long in coming out; the arrest of elections officials and subsequent recounts; the violence and murders especially of MDC members and supporters that marred the run up to the run-off and the eventual pulling out of the MDC presidential candidate from the June 27 run-off election.

Caught in the act...
Soldiers looting at the height of economic meltdown.

Again, like before, this violent period was to culminate in more negotiations, and Thabo Mbeki was again to be the mediator-in-chief. And true to the style of the 2007 negotiations, the MDC was to succumb into signing the September 15 2008 GPA. Many critics of this process and the eventual September 15 event point out that had the MDC not signed this agreement, Zanu PF would have self-destructed. They had lost legitimacy to govern because of the sham that was June 27 and despite having been sworn in as president a few hours after the announcement of election results, it was clear that Zanu PF could no longer sustain a functional government on its own. The economy was their biggest enemy then and they clearly were struggling to contain the soldiers who had hitherto acted as a strong bastion of support for the ailing regime. The only reason they acceded to talks was because they saw an opportunity to salvage themselves, to give them time to regroup and re-strategize, so they could live to fight another day.

The morale of the story

Now, the morale of the story thus far is the fact that in all these happenings, the people of Zimbabwe and even through their civic movements have played largely spectator roles despite the fact that all these shenanigans have been at the behest of the people of Zimbabwe – in putting the interests of Zimbabwe the country at the fore.

Supping with the devil - Copac leaders
 Mwonzora and Mangwana

When  the Copac  charade was launched to push through Article VI of the GPA in 2009, there was a lot of noise in civic circles as arguments ensued as to whether as civics, we should be part of such an openly flawed process, in defiance of resolutions some almost a decade old that had stood firm thus far. Just prior to this launch, the MDC had met with its most vocal and mass-based allies to deliberate and proffer a way forward with regards to constitutional reform for the country. At a meeting attended by the party, ZINASU, NCA and ZCTU, they all agreed that Article VI fell far short of the expectations of the country in coming up with a new constitution. This position was aptly supported through the various resolutions of the 1999 National Working People’s Convention, the People’s Constitutional Convention of the same year, the Zimbabwe People’s Convention of 2008 and the People’s Constitutional Convention of 2009.

Just weeks after this meeting rubbishing Article VI, the MDC was to perform a spectacular somersault, outrightly abandoning their allies and pushing through with Article VI and starting the now very infamous journey that Copac is still seized with. At the time, they were to tell everyone who dared to listen that as a political party they carried the mandate of the electorate in bedding their erstwhile enemy in coming up with a new constitution.

The NCA launched its Take Charge campaign
to oppose Copac.

For many observers, this somersault by the MDC has been linked with the eventual ‘sponsored’ split of the students’ movement ZINASU and the eventual split of the ZCTU a few years later. In civic circles, similar divisions were to take root, with battle lines being drawn against camps that came to be referred to as ‘Take Charge’ – opposed to Copac and ‘Take Part’ – moving with Copac. As time went on and the flaws in Article VI began to show, first through the First All-stakeholders Conference, another off-shoot camp was to emerge, dubbed ‘Take Money’. These were civics drawn largely from the ‘Take Part’ camp that were clearly not concerned about whether Article VI was going to produce anything worthwhile or not, with their effort aimed at benefitting as much as possible financially from the windfall that Copac and its chaotic processes offered.

Inconsistent - MDC-T leadership.

Having clearly made a somersault in supporting a process they had earlier dismissed as not adequate, the MDC set a very bad precedence in terms of their ability to stand up to their decisions and actions. However as a political movement of politicians, they were quickly forgiven by their members and supporters.  After all they had been party to the negotiations that brought about Article VI in the first place. However, instead of staying true to some of the fundamental tenets of democracy – to allow for divergent opinions – the party went into overdrive, discrediting, ridiculing and at times meting out violence against civic groups that stood steadfast in opposing Article VI and Copac and their apparent betrayal. And because of this fear of the known and unknown, many civics were cowed into submission with one clear threat over their heads – give into Copac and support it or face cutting of funds. It was as simple as that. A lot of civic organizations were arm-twisted into supporting this flawed process on the threat of a cut in funding. The NCA having stood out in defiance was punished through the withholding of funding.

And this is the matrix that is behind the blind support for Article VI and Copac. It is not so much that many of the civics that support Copac today believe in the process delivering a democratic constitution – rather, theirs is a quest for sustaining donor funding. I am confident that had civic organizations stood firm in rejecting the fraud that is Article VI, this process would have collapsed a long time ago and we could even have been talking of a different process by now. At least one which would not have resulted in the death of a civilian due to undue political interference.

The MDC has in the past benefited
immensely from a united civil society.

However, in all these goings-on, it is the MDC that stands to be the biggest loser. This is so because their stance and ultimate under-hand machinations have left civic society divided and unable to push through the legitimate demands of the people of Zimbabwe. The MDC managed in 2007, in the words of Morgan Tsvangirai, to ‘drag Zanu PF to the negotiating table kicking and screaming’ because they had the backing of united and focused civic allies. That they managed to divide these civic allies is not bearing any fruit for them. Rather, as the recent surveys by Afrobarometer, Freedom House and MPOI will point out, their support is waning when it ought to be going up. This is a direct consequence of their failure to adhere to principle and keep their allies united. Instead of this, they have gone on to sow seeds of division among civics in the hope of getting blind support, and in the process getting backing for some very silly and myopic decisions.

If the truth be told, the attempts to cow civic society into blindly following and endorsing decisions of the party will come back to haunt the MDC in the future. This is the same culture popularized by Zanu PF that now seems to be taking root in the MDC. What is clear at the present moment particularly with the constitutional reform process is that the MDC dragged itself into the mud and are now trying by all means necessary to arm-twist civic organizations into the same mud. It is also imperative to note that the blind loyalty to Article VI by a sizeable number of civic organizations is not really borne out of a desire to see a better Zimbabwe with a democratic constitution – it is simply a question of positioning themselves in line for political rewards through political appointments in the event that the MDC eventually assumes power and forms a unitary government.  And of course in the process fattening their pockets from the windfall generated through the donor support of the Copac process.

Copac draft constitution, election roadmap and free and fair elections in Zimbabwe

Copac draft constitution, election roadmap and free and fair elections in Zimbabwe

The buzz talk these days seems to be all about the draft constitution produced by Copac and the current tug-of-war between the parties on what will constitute the final draft to be taken to the second all-stakeholders conference and later to be debated in parliament. This is of course aside the Prime Minister’s marriage fiasco which has and continues to be over-sensationalized as if the country has no other urgent and important business to deal with. As has been the norm even before the signing of the GPA in September of 2008, there is constant bickering between Zanu PF, MDC-T and MDC-N, formerly MDC-M. In the run-up to the most recent SADC summit both the PM Morgan Tsvangirai and Welshman Ncube declared a dead-lock on the constitution and were clamoring for SADC intervention, while Zanu PF was also insisting that unless and until there is consensus, the process will come to a halt. While there seems to be movement now with the principals agreeing to take the 18 July Copac draft alongside the National Report to the second all-stakeholders conference, it remains to be seen whether anything positive will come out of the planned second all-stakeholders conference, given the likely jostling for constitutional clauses favorable to each of the parties.

The SADC troika is expected to deal
with the constitutional impasse

What is clear though from the constitution debacle in relation to its position in the matrix of the parent GPA is that no draft will be presented for a referendum before all the parties agree to its final content. And that is primarily why the facilitation team from South Africa was in the country, albeit prematurely to meet with the parties’ negotiators – to facilitate negotiations, break the impasse and ensure that the parties present a single document to the referendum which they will all back. Such is the simple matrix of the GPA. Unfortunately, as expected, theirs was a futile attempt and now the SADC Troika is expected to deal with the constitutional impasse.

Zanu PF, as has been the norm continues to play truant to the process, knowing well and abusing the various loopholes in the GPA and in particular in Article VI. It is then regrettable that in trying to deceive the people of Zimbabwe, the two MDC formations hurriedly endorsed the first draft, knowing very well that for the draft to be presented to a referendum it has to be backed by all the parties in government. What with SADC recently admitting at its Heads of State summit of what they have termed ‘few hitches’ impeding the conclusion of the process. It is clear that we are going to have further negotiations among the parties and the current draft is by no means the final. It is this lack of conclusiveness on the part of SADC as a bloc and in particular the President of South Africa as facilitator that has given in to this seemingly unending debacle and in the process eroding their credibility and usefulness.

The GPA is a direct consequence of an
inconclusive election

The existence today of this tri-partite inclusive government can be directly traced to the inconclusive June 2008 plebiscite. In their inconvenient marriage, the parties in government are all well aware of the fact that their government primarily exists to create an environment conducive for the holding of a free and fair election, one that will put to rest the sham that was June 27 2008, and hopefully usher in a new substantive government that is born out of the people, through their own free will.

The 2010 SADC Summit brokered the election roadmap.

In acknowledging the complexities that surround the holding of such a free and fair election, the parties in government, with the indulgence and guidance of SADC acknowledge the various impediments that may once again stall the realization of a free and fair election. At the SADC Summit of Heads of State and Government held in Windhoek on the 17th of August, 2010, it was resolved among other things that the inclusive government and the political parties should “find an interrupted path to free and fair elections and the removal of all impediments to the same”. Having assigned their respective party negotiators, the parties debated and agreed on an election roadmap – and the issue of the conclusion of the constitutional reform, as led by Copac is just but one of eight issues captured within this roadmap.

It is interesting to note that while many politicians in our midst have been trying to convince the general public to support this ‘unfinished’ draft at the referendum and falsely claiming that it will guarantee free and fair elections, they have also been conspicuously silent on the roadmap and its other provisions. This is despite the fact that the roadmap itself captures some very fundamental issues, many of which are even more critical for the holding of a free and fair election than just the constitution alone. In an earlier article on my blog, I have tried to spell out why a new constitution alone will not guarantee our beautiful nation a free and fair plebiscite.

A credible voters' roll is vital for a free and fair election.

For me, one of the most fundamental issues contained in the roadmap is issue D on electoral reforms. Our recent electoral history, especially in 2008 will tell us that it is at the level of electoral reforms that meaningful gains can be made in terms of creating conditions to sustain a somewhat free and fair election. A total of six activities are contained under this section including the enactment of agreed electoral reforms, voter education, preparation of a new voters’ roll and the staffing of ZEC among others. And it is clear that a constitution alone, even the Copac draft will not guarantee that this is done. 

Another important issue raised in the roadmap is issue E on the rule of law and by its very own nature should be where the two MDC formations ought to be hammering on given that the break-down of the rule of law is one of the major reasons why we find ourselves as a country in the despicable state we are in. It is clear that state security organs such as the police, army and intelligence institutions are operating with utter disregard of the existence and context of the inclusive government. Even the attorney general and his entire office are clearly working to undermine the work of the inclusive government and ultimately the eventual conduct of a free and fair election.

The police commissioner has openly declared
his support and allegiance to Zanu PF,
in defiance  of the provisions of the Police Act.

According to the roadmap, the inclusive government principals agreed on 8 June 2010 that ‘there will be meetings of the Principals with the Attorney General, Commissioner General of the Police, Heads of the other security and intelligence institutions to ensure full commitment to operate in a non-partisan manner consistent with the GPA’. This is in line with the parties’ commitment to articles 11 and 13 of the GPA. However, over two years to this agreement, we are yet to hear of any meeting with any of the above people. In fact, the opposite has happened, as exemplified by the confusion caused by Brigadier-general Nyikayaramba in Copac and other army personnel in the recent census fiasco and the continued blatantly partisan actions of the attorney general.

It is abundantly clear that while constitutional reform is key to unlocking a democratic transition in the country, it would be equally foolhardy to ignore other issues that will in the short-term ensure the holding of a free and fair election. And the election roadmap agreed to with the indulgence of SADC in 2010 aptly captures some of the most pertinent issues that can indeed facilitate a nationally and internationally accepted election. The current log-jam in the constitutional reform process is a real threat to the holding of elections as prescribed through the GPA. This is so because for as long as the constitutional reform process remains inconclusive, we are unlikely to have elections in the country. However, given the fact that if any draft constitution is presented to a referendum, it faces two possible fates – acceptance or rejection – then it should be clear to all right thinking Zimbabweans that given such a scenario, there are other more pertinent issues that form part of the elections road-map that we ought as a country to clamor for their resolution and realization. This is not by any means to say that the constitutional reform process is not important. It remains vital to building and enhancing democracy in Zimbabwe and that is primarily why such an important national process ought to be led by other people outside politicians, who do not have obvious vested political interests as is the current case.

Copac a betrayal of the people and their right to author a new constitution

Copac a betrayal of the people and their right to author a new constitution

Now that Copac has produced what it has termed the first draft of the new constitution, Zimbabweans should begin to assess and gauge for themselves the true meaning and sense of what is meant by the term ‘people-driven’ and what it really means to have a people driven and people-centred process of coming up with a new constitution for the country. At the first level, the draft allows for the citizens to assess for themselves whether the process of going to the people, to solicit for their views and aspirations in a new constitution was as necessary and done to the book as we have been made to believe by Copac. Secondly, it gives all stakeholders involved from their various stand-points in the constitutional reform exercise, an opportunity to assess their roles and discern an ideal out of the challenges and opportunities that have come out of the process thus far.

Part of the rowdy elements that disrupted Copac's
 First All-Stakeholders conference

To a very large extent, the journey that Copac has travelled so far in its quest to facilitate the authoring of a new democratic constitution for the country has been bumpy and at most chaotic. From untold disorganization, political interference and violence to lack of donor confidence and ultimately under-funding, the process has thus far worked against itself to prove its critics correct; that politicians, with their obvious vested interests are not the suitable candidates to lead and facilitate the authoring of a new constitution.

What is clear at present is that despite their assertions to the contrary, the constitutional reform process provided for in Article VI of the GPA and as spearheaded by Copac is nothing more than a negotiation process that will result with a negotiated constitution, in more or less the same fashion as the Lancaster House negotiation, only now with a different cast, men of the same race, with only one common factor being the presence of Zanu PF in the equation. It is better that our dear politicians in Copac be truthful to the Zimbabwean nation that the constitution we are now debating is not a product of wide consultation of the people in their diversity, but is purely a product of inter-party negotiations. ‘People-driven’ for now is definitely out of the question.

Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo at Lancaster House, 1979

In light of this, there still remains that question for many that what should we do now that a document has been presented to the people, never mind its source? For many people that I have interacted with, there is that deep predication of skepticism with the draft, though many are still hung over by the tired and incorrect lie that the draft is better than what ‘we currently have’ in the form of the Lancaster House constitution and its nineteen amendments. 

For starters, without putting too much emphasis into an analysis of the draft as per its content, it is equally worthy to assess and define the role of the constitution in a country as well as the role that people can and should play, firstly in the authoring of any such charter as well as in ensuring adherence by those entrusted to lead in keeping to the letter and spirit of the charter. As the founding document upon which any worthy nation derives its sovereignty, a constitution lays out the societal foundations for the functionality of society while also providing for the administrative and technical setup for the running of a country. Precisely, a constitution gives order to the system that is the country, ensuring that those entrusted to govern do so in a nationally prescribed manner, with functional checks and balances provided through the people, with who ultimate national power should reside.

Copac, like Lancaster, will be agreed to behind closed doors.

The Copac scenario is a perfect departure from what should be the norm in constitutional reform and fundamentally proves why it is of utmost importance that the real beneficiaries as it were, of the constitution and constitutional reform, the people, should always be given an opportunity and space to author the ‘rules’ within which their government will preside over them, in enforcing the letter and spirit of the constitution, the foundation of a nation’s aspirations and vision for the future. What is clear from current events in the constitutional reform saga, with Zanu PF still keen to further negotiate amendments to the draft is that the role of the people is non-existent. It is simply politics at play and like the Lancaster House document, the final product will be decided behind closed doors, only this time the politicians hope to present the draft for a referendum. Lancaster House and the Copac process for me illustrate a fundamental similarity where vested political interests override what is fundamentally morale and just as defined within the interests of the people. In any give-and-take scenario as has been the constitutional negotiation process, personal political interests override national interests with the quest to position oneself for political office and power taking precedence even over common sense. That is why you will find that even such an important national process will leave in its wake, the injured and the dead, as politicians battle to outdo each other.

Now, for the politicians in Copac to try and start persuading the general populace into supporting a negotiated constitution under the guise that it is people-driven and is a product of the people’s views as expressed through the outreach exercise is foolhardy and a complete insult of the intelligence of the people. So does this imply that the people, in their assessment of Copac should conveniently forget that ‘Operation Chimumumu’ ever existed and that many were kept away from outreach meetings because someone was afraid they would say the ‘wrong’ things? The people witnessed some of these things and are fully aware that the outreach meetings were a badly done gimmick of soliciting for the people’s views in writing a constitution. 

Both factions of the MDC have endorsed the draft and want
 no further amendments to it.

It would certainly be more diplomatic and respectable for the two MDC formations to admit their mistake in agreeing to Article VI and be truthful that they agreed to it and are in the process of negotiating a constitution with Zanu PF which they will eventually bring to the people for a referendum. 

For them to blatantly lie through their teeth that the draft constitution is a product of the people’s views further exposes their dying affinity for democratic principles which characterized the once united movement that emerged from the Working People’s Convention of 1999. It equally exposes some of their recent recruits who not so long ago were at the fore-front of defining ‘people-driven’ within the context of constitutional reform and vehemently and tirelessly worked to oppose the Constitutional Review Commission’s work in 2000 on that basis. One is really left to wonder if the term and concept of people-driven can really be sacrificed simply because of one’s new political standing, never mind the noise they have been making in the past about the people’s inherent right to author a constitution on their own. For some, it really defies logic and severely erodes their morale standing in terms of articulating important national issues when they parrot what they do not necessarily believe in.

The GPA though commendable has certain fundamental
flaws such as Article VI.

And again as in the past, there is a tag-of war between the political parties on further negotiations towards amendments of the draft constitution. President Mugabe has said that the new draft constitution will only be presented for a referendum when the three ruling parties agree on all contentious issues. The MDCs on the other hand are adamant that no more horse-trading should be entertained. It then boggles the mind as to what these politicians were thinking when they agreed to the provisions of Article VI in the first place. What then would be the reason for going to a second all-stakeholders conference when no further input from the people will be permitted? Why debate the draft in parliament when no further changes will be entertained? It is apparently clear that whatever else other interested parties may want to put forward as recommendations or their views with regards to certain constitutional provisions will fall on deaf ears.

Amendment 19 provides for parliament to fully debate the
draft constitution and its accompanying report in one month.

It is also abundantly clear that for the three parties to be able to present a draft for the referendum, firstly after debate and unanimity in parliament and after the president approves it for a referendum, then only further horse-trading will suffice. And this is the very reason why the undertaking of such key national events cannot be led by those with narrow political blinkering. Politicians can never be better placed to lead such a fragile process. After all, we have enough credible and non-political people in the country that can constitute an independent commission. This does not mean that politicians should not participate in authoring a new constitution. They have to be there and knock sense into their members why it is important for them to take centre stage in such issues. The moment a political structure is entrusted with leading a process, and with the caliber of some of our dear leaders, it is clear that only political interests will be best served. In a nutshell, all interested parties and critical stakeholders should be able to meet at a platform, as equals, where they debate and agree on a nationally accepted framework for coming up with a new constitution.

While ‘people-driven’ is a term that we can debate days on end, the Copac story is a phase that allows for greater introspection for the people, into how eventually as a nation, we can be able to learn from the constitutional reform exercises that we have experienced so far. It is only from closer analysis of these processes, their challenges and successes, that we can be able to discern what would be ideal, in our own unique situation, in coming up with consensus on the role of the people in the writing of a constitution and ensuring that this consensus is carried through in coming up with a genuinely democratic and people-driven constitution for Zimbabwe.

Let no hope be lost.. we, the people shall write our own constitution...

‘Each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it.’

‘Each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it.’

Franz Fanon

The above words by the great thinker and proponent of human liberation, Franz Fanon many years ago still remain relevant as they did those many years ago, and better still, will remain relevant for many more years to come. However, their relevance is more profound for us, the younger generation of the day. This is so, because to a greater extent, the older generations, our fathers and those before them have managed to discover their mission and managed to fulfill it, though the extent to which they have done so may be a question for debate. More so, the words are a chilling reminder to the young people of contemporary Zimbabwe of the reality we have to face as a generation, given the outright obscurity which we have and continue to face especially since the turn of the millennium and more specifically over the last decade.

In our Zimbabwean context, contemporary social and cultural norms and values as well as economic and political realities consign us, the young people of the day to a position of extreme marginalization and insignificance in terms of the national developmental discourse. The truth is that the older generations continue to dictate the pace of this development, or lack of it, and it is their views on how such development should unfold that carries the day. To a very pronounced extent, the older generation in our country, the bulk of whom constitute the current ruling elite had their mission cut out for them. Having been born at a time when colonialism and imperial occupation of Africa was a reality, the immediate and main task for them was to exorcise and rid their countries and the continent at large of the evils of white colonial settlement and restore the right to self-determination to the black majority.

The eventual fall of colonialism in Zimbabwe, having been preceded by its fall in other African countries and the few after it, meant that from relative obscurity, the generations of our fathers and those before them had managed to fulfill their immediate generational mission. The next task for the country (and they as the leaders)  obviously revolved around consolidating the gains of the liberation struggle that had been fought to rid the country of colonial rule: this in essence meant fulfilling the various factors which had formed the basis of the waging of the liberation struggle – the land question, wealth disparities based on skin colour and universal suffrage and the right to self-determination, essentially being able to elect, through free and fair elections, a government of the people by the people.

Harry Houdini - famed for
his death-defying stunts. 

It is however worth noting that it is with regards to this consolidation of the gains of the liberation struggle that our erstwhile liberators have fared very low, in fact they seem to have gotten drunk on power to the extent that they forgot all about consolidating these gains for close to 20 years after independence was won in 1980. And it was only after the formation of the biggest opposition party to emerge post-independence Zimbabwe, the Movement for Democratic Change, that they were jolted into action and tried to do a ‘Houdini act’ of implementing what they had neglected or failed to do during their first nineteen years in power, to save them from the jaws of a glaring electoral defeat in the 2000 general elections, randomly unleashing rogue elements amongst the war veterans and youth militias onto the farms where they forcibly evicted white farmers and their farm workers. At times, callous murders, rape and other forms of torture were committed as the Zanu PF administration launched what it termed the ‘fast-track land reform program’ – their main aim not being to genuinely redistribute land and correct the injustices of the colonial regime of Ian Smith but to reclaim their waning support amongst the electorate and in so doing, setting up a patronage system that to this day forms the greater chunk of those that continue to vote for them to this day. What followed in the ensuing decade plus two years to today now forms part of the worst period in the living memory and history of our beloved country’s citizens, post 1980.

A queue for sugar at the height of the economic
crisis.

The challenges that we have faced as citizens over the last twelve years and the precarious position that the young people of today find themselves in is a direct result of this gross dereliction of duty by our erstwhile liberators and further confirms the fact that the prophetic words of Franz Fanon are still alive today. Young people in Zimbabwe today remain not in relative obscurity, but in almost absolute obscurity, thanks to outrightly exclusionary policies propounded by our government. Again, this obscurity has become entrenched not only where government is concerned but even where political formations are concerned. Worse still such exclusion has become all too evident even amongst civic formations who are supposed to be the torch-bearers of the democracy that we all yearn for, the democracy that so many of the gallant sons and daughters of Zimbabwe – the youth in their day – sacrificed their all – soul and limb – to ensure that the dream of a democratic Zimbabwe remains alive.

The misgivings of our erstwhile liberators and those that occupy positions of authority today have indeed helped to define the mission of the new generation, those who count themselves amongst the youth of today. One can easily identify that entrenching democracy and good governance in our country forms the basis of what should be the mission of today’s youth. And this is not just about having free and fair elections, but it is essentially about building a new political culture in Zimbabwe, based on the equality and tolerance of one another, cognizant of all our differences, and more importantly our ability to defend our national sovereignty, not in the narrow and parochial sense of Zanu PF, but genuine patriotism and love for country, itself a result of the genuine recognition of each and every citizen’s rights, the defense, promotion and upholding of these rights.

Kwame Nkrumah

He has been accused of holding
onto power.

The greatest impediment to the realization of this generational mission remains the current political hegemony in the country, which puts emphasis on the youth playing peripheral roles in national development. The great pan-Africanist and former president of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah once noted ‘Seek ye first the political kingdom and all else will be added unto you’. It is no secret today that our elderly politicians remain trapped in the warped thinking that the role of young people in the politics of the day remains to be campaign tools during political rallies and where necessary and convenient, the running dogs of those that believe violence has a role to play in the political dynamics of today. These are the same politicians who have over the years impoverished the youths, rendering them economically disempowered so that they can, from time to time, use their ill-gotten wealth to manipulate and abuse them for their selfish political ends. These are again the same politicians who have run-down the education system – once the pride of Africa and the globe at large – so as to ensure that the youth remain without any viable tool to uplift themselves out of the despicable levels of poverty and underdevelopment that they are in. The callous decimation of the once vibrant students movement in Zimbabwe is testimony enough to the fact that the elderly politicians loath an enlightened and empowered youth. Their parochial thinking is that they and they alone should rule this country – till horns emerge on the donkey’s head. God forbid!

Africa continues to be blighted by civil wars.

We can never continue to run away from the truth – the youth today remain the leaders not of tomorrow, but today and tomorrow. Zimbabwe and the African continent at large face the daunting task of building and securing stable and just peace and security across the continent, conducive for the equal participation of all citizens in the affairs of any nation, including how national resources and wealth are distributed and used. This also goes in as far as identifying and addressing the actual causes of conflict and instability on our continent, including the institution of conflict management processes. Conflict in itself may not be such a bad phenomenon, but as young people especially in Zimbabwe, we have often been accused as being the proponents of such conflict which more often than not degenerates into open conflict and violence. Those who often accuse the young people of this vice also often neglect to point out to the main drivers of such open hostility, in the name of our dear ‘elderly’ politicians. It is true that many of us – youths- are shut out of critical decision making processes and structures and many of us are made to believe – either out of sheer naivety, ignorance, or convenience – that perpetrating violence is also a form of contributing to decision making. The greatest challenge we face is to find space to take a leading role in the affairs of our country. For me, three key issues stand out as a priority not only for the youth of Zimbabwe, but our continent as a whole.

Police brutality is common within autocratic regimes.

The first and foremost is to carry through the key aspiration of those who spearheaded the liberation struggle around the continent – which was to have democratic dispensations in members states throughout Africa. When we talk about democracy, there is a tendency by the undemocratic among us who only look at democracy from the Western liberal stand-point. Democracy can also be defined in a truly African sense, based on values of ‘ubuntu/hunhu’ which indeed bodes well for us as Africans. Whilst the first part of such a mission has been achieved through the dismantling of colonial regimes, Africa, Zimbabwe included it still being drawn back by autocratic regimes and their leaders who do not believe in or deliberately choose to trounce upon democratic ideals in mostly futile attempts to continuously hold on to power. As young people in an increasingly global world, we face the challenge of confronting such a hegemony and working, proactively working to entrench democratic ideals, based on tolerance and appreciation of our various differences as citizens of one country, Zimbabwe.

A dilapidated classroom.

Secondly, another great challenge that confronts us today is the issue of education on a continent which lags behind in terms of actual development, but boasts of so many of its sons and daughters who have and continue to drive industry and overall development in the developed world. With the old and new challenges confronting the African continent, Africa need a new breed of educated individuals and ‘cohorts’ to address the various challenges confronting a new world with ever-changing challenges, including climate change. In Zimbabwe, a country that used to boast the highest literacy rate on the continent, thanks largely to liberal education policies of the 1980s, the education sector is in shambles, driven by an unstable economy, poverty, corruption and high levels of unemployment which are demotivating a lot of potential learners. As young Zimbabweans, we face a reality of being called a ‘lost generation’ because there has been so much disinvestment within the education sector so much to the extent that our schools and tertiary institutions are failing to satisfy the demand for learned professionals to not only fill into existing industries, but also innovative entrepreneurs to create the much needed employment in economies like Zimbabwe which obviously have not that much industry to talk about. It then becomes one of our key challenges to proactively advocate for the revival of the education sector, safeguarding academic freedoms and students’ rights, including the right to organize.

Democratic Alliance youths march in
support of the youth wage subsidy.

Lastly, it is eminent that as young people we work towards demanding and then safeguarding our right to economic empowerment. While government still has the greatest responsibility of building the future of citizens, this cannot be done without young people’s involvement in the economic affairs of the country. The recent COSATU and Democratic Alliance debacle in South Africa though regrettable, illustrates that at least there are various players within that country who have time to think about the lives of their young people. That COSATU chose to bring out their other darker side on this issue of the youth wage subsidy should not be condoned. My point here is that such efforts by the Democratic Alliance should not be misconstrued or taken along partisan lines but should be viewed solely on merit – addressing the plight of millions of young South Africans who face a bleak future of poverty and unemployment. The same is also true in our Zimbabwean context where young people face an even bleaker future than their counterparts in South Africa. Various government and non-government initiatives aiming to economically empower youth are most welcome, and if administered well, can go a long way in according young people economic independence which may translate into greater autonomy and capacity to make informed and progressive decisions on their own, without manipulation and abuse by elderly politicians.

Once again, I maintain that the onus is on the youth to organize themselves so that they are able to claim the space to positively influence development in their various spheres and countries. This should of course start at the level of organizing ourselves within our various organizations, including political, so that we begin to define our generational mission as history prescribes it. For as long as we remain divided along superficial lines, perpetuated by an elderly gang hell-bent on self-perpetuation, then we will definitely be counted as a generation who betrayed a generational mission and mandate. There can be no better time than now to, ‘out of near-absolute obscurity, discover our mission, fulfill it and not betray it…’

A new constitution alone will not guarantee a free and fair election

A new constitution alone will not guarantee a free and fair election

Some of the Copac political leaders

The misguided notion being peddled by many a politician who is in support of the current constitution making process being led by Copac that the new charter will lead to free and fair elections should be quickly discarded and not entertained as it is a great travesty to common sense and logical thinking. Not only is this view a blatant lie on the part of those peddling it, it also smacks of cheap political rhetoric and subterfuge on those trying to justify the millions of donor funds that they fruitlessly spend in hotels and bars, under the guise of coming up with a democratic and people driven constitution for the country.

A Copac outreach meeting

Almost two years beyond its initially set deadline, the constitution making process has tottered from one crisis to the other, encountered numerous hurdles, including at one time a crippling shortage of funds due to waning donor support and confidence in the process. As it stands, Copac has since delivered what it has termed the first consolidated draft constitution to the ‘management committee’ made up of six negotiators from the three governing parties, albeit with ‘parked issues’, though it is still not clear who is to decide on these parked issues before the draft constitution can be brought to parliament and eventually to a referendum. What is clear as of now is that it is no longer relevant what the people might have or have not said during the chaotic outreach meetings conducted by Copac, but that the discretion now lies with a few party representatives to agree and decide on what they will present in the form of a draft constitution to a referendum. Talk about a people-driven constitution.

His powers remain intact in the Copac draft

However, after reading the current draft, one is struck by the glaring similarities between this draft and the current constitution, especially with regards to the powers that remain vested in the proposed executive presidency, itself singled out as one of the key factors behind the governance crisis gripping the country. Simply too much power is vested in one individual, itself a very undemocratic practice that is a slap in the face of participatory democracy. The same crisis is certainly behind the infighting in Zanu PF driven by the succession issue and is the main reason why they cannot discuss leadership renewal amongst themselves. This is now manifesting in the serious infighting and violence that has characterized the district coordinating committee elections and the current restructuring exercise. 

There is certainly no need and defies logic in this day and age to concentrate so much power in an individual in any government or political power structure for that matter. In no way should any individual from the executive arm of state be above and beyond reproach of the other two arms of state – the legislature and the judiciary. No democracy can work under such ludicrous conditions, and most certainly such an arrangement cannot support a free and fair election, especially one in which the incumbent participates.

His party seems to no longer support the diaspora vote

Many of the provisions in the draft constitution in circulation gravely exposes the two MDC formations as being not genuine in their self-proclaimed mandate as the leaders of democratic change and reform in the country. Even as we acknowledge the fact that whatever constitution will be brought for a referendum will be largely a negotiated document, the extent to which the new charter neglects and omits fundamental tenets inherent of any democratic constitution relevant and alive to the realities of us as a people and as a nation clearly betrays the selfish and monetary interests that drove the three parties to author a new constitution for the country on behalf of the people, while all along trying to convince the public that they were being consulted and included all the way. It was very treacherous of the MDC, especially the formation led by the PM to vilify and victimize its civic friends and strategic partners for trying to knock sense to the party and its leadership that they were playing their cards wrong in allowing themselves to fall for the Zanu PF trap by making it a preserve of the politicians alone to author a constitution on behalf of the people. It is also mind-boggling as to why the current draft is mum on the diaspora vote. After all, we heard Copac during earlier episodes of its on-going circus loudly proclaiming that it had gone on an overdrive to consult the diaspora in the writing of the new charter.  And to think that the two MDC formations are also in support of the two vice presidents agenda clearly betrays how easily they can be swayed by Zanu PF into changing earlier positions and principles. In all this, it is clear that Zanu PF is in the driving seat. Never mind that they seem not to want the constitution; for them it makes just perfect sense to be wasting and buying time in government.

Some schools of thought have and continue to suggest that a new constitution alone is not the panacea to a free and fair election. They go on to argue that apart from the level of the constitution, there are also two subsequent levels that have a bearing on the conduct of a free and fair election, being the statutory level (acts of parliament relevant to the holding and conduct of elections) as well as the codes of conduct and non-statutory regulations relevant to various stakeholders with direct and indirect interest to any election. They further argue that it is at the latter two levels where you are most likely to effect greater impact in safeguarding the conduct of a free and fair election. For example in the current Copac first draft, section 4.18 subsection 1 (a) provides for every Zimbabwean the right to make political choices freely, but the stark reality is that various acts of parliament and a lax code of conduct affecting various players’ and stakeholder participation in elections all make it difficult to realize a free and fair election. Proponents of violence during elections will always be at work and get away with it because there is a lack of proper code of conduct for political parties with regards to the behavior of their supporters during elections, and even if it were there, there would be need for proper coordination with law enforcement agents to make this work effectively. Again, a constitution alone cannot guarantee this.

SADC has urged the three parties
to come up with an election roadmap

The parties in government also indirectly acknowledge that a new constitution alone will not guarantee that Zimbabwe will have a free and fair election. The ‘Roadmap to Zimbabwe’s Elections’ as proposed by the SADC Summit of 17 August 2010 and subsequently negotiated by the parties’ negotiators in April of 2011 has the issue of constitutional reforms as one of eight issues identified as being critical for the holding of a free and fair election. So it would be foolhardy for any of the three parties to then go ahead and assure its supporters or membership that once the new Copac constitution is in place, the country can have a free and fair election. This is a blatant lie.

It is against this background that the government and especially the three parties in that government should wake up to the reality that their futile project code-named Copac is a waste of the country’s time and resources. Clearly this constitution is a product of negotiations and horse-trading between the political parties, a key point in explaining the delays that have hit the drafting stage of the process. What is also clear from the current draft is that it does little in advancing a democratic culture in Zimbabwe, especially one which is premised on the supremacy of the constitution. This alone is exemplified in the manner in which the draft keeps intact most of the presidential powers present in the current Lancaster House constitution.

They will have to negotiate and agree on a new constitution before the referendum

While at the moment, it may not be really relevant to scrutinize the Copac first draft clause by clause, primarily because of the ‘parked issues’ that it still contains, it remains fact and not fallacy that the adoption of this new constitution alone will not guarantee a free and fair election in the short-term. Furthermore, the process that the inclusive government is undertaking to come up with this constitution fundamentally takes away the people of Zimbabwe’s inherent right to author a constitution for themselves, free of political interference and arm-twisting as is the current case. Even if the eventual constitution is going to be ‘better than the current’ to borrow the words of some of our conservative optimists, this will never make it a constitution by the people of Zimbabwe and as such their ownership and subsequent allegiance to such a constitution will always be questionable and in doubt.

Youths Should Know and Defend the Genuine Gains of the Liberation Struggle

Youths Should Know and Defend the Genuine Gains of the Liberation Struggle

The liberation struggle or fight against colonial and racial rule that was fought by our erstwhile liberators and the many that perished during that civil war in then Rhodesia, is an important chapter in the history of our country. That this liberation war was fought mostly by the young people goes without saying. What is and should be more important however, is what that struggle fought to achieve and more importantly how we as young people of today can be active in defending these gains and, in our lifetime contribute to the making of the Zimbabwe that so many died for.

Three fundamental points summarize the aspirations of the nationalist leaders as they led the black majority in the fight for political independence: the wide disparities in wealth distribution, largely favouring the white minority at the expense of the black majority; majority rule and the right to vote for leaders and a government of their choice (commonly referred to as ‘one man (woman), one vote’) and the redressing of the land question as many had been removed from their fertile lands and driven into reserves, keeps and other such barren areas.

When political independence came about in 1980 after a protracted armed struggle, it was greeted with enthusiasm and euphoria from the black majority. Expectedly, this majority was expectant that the ideals that had driven the war and what they sought to get out of the armed struggle would be fulfilled by the leaders they had entrusted with political power to drive a new Zimbabwe through the elections of 1980.

32 years after independence however, the ordinary black majority continues to face the same, if not worse challenges to what they did those many years ago before political independence. In essence, the yoke they carried under white oppression has been painted ‘black’ as they continue to suffer and wallow in poverty under a black administration. Ironically, the three fundamentals that drove and spurred many to fight white injustice and racialism remain unfulfilled and a pipe-dream for the majority, and a painful reminder that the struggle for a better Zimbabwe for all that live in it is still far from over and the dream far from realized.

In Zimbabwe today, there is glaring evidence of wide disparities in wealth distribution – a new black political elite has replaced the white minority in ownership of critical state and non-state resources. While ‘one man (woman), one vote’ has been realized, the majority are still not free to elect leaders and a government of their choice – there is evidence of election fraud in elections dating as far back as 1985, which has worsened over the years and finally culminated in the sham June 2008 election, the bloodiest in the electoral history of Zimbabwe. 

While we have and continue to be told the contrary, the noble initiative of land redistribution has by-and-large benefitted this new black political elite, at the expense of the formerly landless peasants in the ‘reserves and keeps’ – prime land has been parcelled out along political patronage lines, with many of those holding some form of political power being multiple-farm owners when other ordinary civilians have nothing.

Solomon Mujuru with Robert Mugabe.

Just as a reminder, the war of liberation was not fought so that a few Zimbabweans (and non-Zimbabweans) can enjoy the fruits of the resource-endowed nation that is Zimbabwe. What Comrades Tongo, Zvogbo, Chitepo, Mugabe, Nkomo, Sithole, Dabengwa and Mujuru amongst others fought for was that each and every Zimbabwean, regardless of ethnicity, colour, tribe or other considerations is able to live peacefully, enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms and enjoy an equal opportunity to prosper and achieve self-actualization in a socially-justiciable manner. At the height of that protracted struggle, they all acknowledged and defended this line wherever they went, even in the British and other capitals they continued to grace through diplomatic efforts. Then, they were very clear that despite assertions to the contrary, suggesting that they were Marxist extremists, the nationalist leaders were able to present a formidable and morally justified reason for waging this armed struggle – their quest to rid Zimbabwe of the injustices of colonialism and ushering in of majority rule, a phrase that has commonly come to be replaced by democratic rule.

However, despite the insurmountable evidence that all these noble causes and fundamental ideals formed the basis of the liberation struggle, evidence on the ground today point to a scenario in which this noble African agenda has been driven off the rails by an insensitive sect of greedy politicians and plunderers who have usurped the power of the masses and vested it in a closely-knit political cabal. Some members of this murderous crew have forgotten that just 35 years ago they led the armed struggle on the backdrop of popular support for majority rule. They even had the support of the same British, American and other nations across the globe backing them in calling for majority rule, which the Rhodesians worked tirelessly to prevent, but albeit eventually surrendered through negotiations as the war heated up.

Despite the fact that such history is well recorded and documented, the new black ruling elite of Zimbabwe have over time managed to re-write history to suit their own parochial intentions. They have chosen to negate and plagiarize the rich history of our nation through telling it in their own concocted way so as to justify the various heinous crimes that they have and continue to perpetrate on the civilian masses. This they have managed to achieve largely by destroying or willingly neglecting to document the numerous physical evidence of our liberation struggle.

Our national heroes acre.

Today, it is very difficult for any young person in this country to know of the true history of our liberation struggle. The only few available places to learn about this history have been so politicized and abused out of any meaning that they have lost meaning to what we all know, through one means or the other, as the real reasons and chain of events behind our liberation struggle. The issue of our National Heroes Acre quickly springs to mind. Despite being a noble initiative in respect of entrenching the history of our liberation struggle, it has been hounded and degraded of any moral value by the manner in which this ruling black elite under the guise of Zanu PF have clandestinely determined through their Soviet-style ‘politburo’ who is buried there. This has been to the extent that known cheats, thieves and murderers such as Chenjerai Hunzvi lie buried at our national shrine. It is a real pity. This case of our national shrine is just but one case in point.

The history of apartheid South Africa and its subsequent post-apartheid era poses huge lessons for Zimbabwe as it struggles to meet the dreams and expectations of those who waged and supported liberation struggles. This is true not only for Zimbabwe, but for a whole range of African and non-African nations that have fought colonialism and white imperialism over the years, in pursuit of self-determination as indigenous people. While Zimbabwe and many other African nations attained their political independence well before South Africa, it is the manner in which South Africans have been able to build on their history in resolving the various injustices and inequalities of the past. And this has to a greater extend been achieved through the manner in which government particularly the ANC has managed to push for the documentation and preservation of the country’s history, partly through the Truth and Reconciliation processes as well as building of physical structures to preserve the memory of their struggle against apartheid and why it was necessary to fight this struggle.

It is in this regard that Zimbabwe as a nation has failed dismally. Of the many lived realities, peoples, sites, documents, and other such paraphernalia that depicts and is relevant to our liberation struggle, very few are of any value today, especially to the younger generation who may have not been present to witness for themselves the uncensored truth of the liberation struggle or still, were too young to have known anything significant was happening in the country. Ask any young person what is ‘Gonakudzingwa’ or where it is (if it is still there) and this sad reality will dawn to you. What we have seen is the complete abdication of this very valuable history of our country, to serve the interests of our new black elite, who behave in every sense colonial as did the Rhodesians during that sad period of the liberation struggle and the times before it.

If you are going to speak to a lay person on the street about the lived realities of the many people who lived during the liberation struggle and how they understood the struggle and the reasons for waging it, you would be baffled at how the reality today does not resonate with the wishes and aspirations of the black majority that lived through and suffered under colonialism. What is further perplexing is the ‘new ideals and values’ that form the DNA of the new ruling black elite who today occupy the top echelons of power in Zimbabwe. It seems their first and foremost rule and ideal is self-enrichment and aggrandizement at the expense of the Zimbabwean masses. Look at our minister Chombo and you will begin to understand this DNA of our new ruling black elite.

The important questions young men and women of today must ask ourselves are: Did the attaining of independence after a protracted armed struggle fought by the young people of that time more than three decades ago usher in the expected results? If not, (as is the obvious case here) then what are we going to do as the youths to ensure that our country attains true independence and defend the genuine gains of the struggle?

As young people, we need to ensure that the ‘one wo/man one vote’ principle is adhered to and the subsequent result of any election is respected. This entails fighting for peace in our country and encouraging each other to participate positively in all elections. Without fighting for and defending our votes, our situation is not much different from that in the 60s when our parents could not determine who leads our lovely Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia).

Wealth distribution has seen even worse skewedness after independence, with the majority of the young people owning or controlling no means of production while a few, because of their again skewed liberation war credentials, feel they should own everything and anything. It is our duty as young men and women to fight for the equal distribution of wealth, to make sure that we also have access to resources and these privileges can never be delivered to us on a silver platter, we must demand and fight for them until we also get a piece of the cake.

Whilst ZANU PF claims that land was redistributed, it is important to note that the re-allocation was fundamentally wrong with the political elite clandestinely getting all the fertile landmasses while the few peasants who benefited only got sandy and dry areas. The youths of today must demand an audit into the land redistribution exercise and demand to know what criteria was used to allocate certain fertile pieces of land to the subsequent beneficiaries and put in place measures to ensure that such malpractices are not repeated in future.

It becomes important to critically think of Frantz Fanon’s words of wisdom: “Each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it.” Do we know our mission and are we going to fulfill it or betray it, spelling doom for future generations?