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.