Preamble

Periodic and genuine democratic elections are the cornerstone of any functioning democracy; they empower citizens to have a direct influence in shaping the society in which they want to live by enabling them to freely elect a government of their choice, a government which reflects their values and aspirations. Governments which are the product of a credible, transparent and trusted election process are an expression of the will of the people, a factor which bestows on them the legitimacy and credibility that are the essential pre-conditions for political stability and economic prosperity. 

It is only genuine elections, held in accordance with regional and international standards, that enrich and strengthen the process of democratisation. Elections are in effect a litmus test on the state of democracy and governance in a country. Elections which fail to conform to recognised standards erode the integrity of the electoral process, thereby retarding the institutionalisation of democracy. This is what has happened in Zimbabwe in recent years.

The failure of recent elections in Zimbabwe to accurately reflect the sovereign wishes of the people has resulted in a government chronically lacking legitimacy and moral authority. This severe democratic deficit goes to the heart of Zimbabwe’s current political and socio-economic crisis.

Lack of legitimacy has not always been the case in Zimbabwe. Elections held at independence in 1980, even with the limitations imposed by the compromises made at Lancaster House, were recognised as generally ‘free and fair’ and bestowed legitimacy on the country’s first truly representative government. At the time Zimbabwe was seen as the democratic template for the region, providing the springboard for the spread of democracy in Africa.   

Since Zimbabwe’s independence, a revival of multi-party democracy has spread across southern Africa. Beginning in Namibia in 1989; Zambia in 1991; Malawi in 1993; Mozambique and South Africa in 1994; and Tanzania in 1995. The region embraced human rights, the rule of law and sound electoral practices. New constitutions that enshrined core democratic values were drafted and new electoral systems that conferred integrity on the electoral process were established across the region. 

The significant progress made by most SADC countries over the past ten years, in terms of consolidating and deepening democracy, stands in stark contrast to developments in Zimbabwe during this period. In Zimbabwe, democratic gains have been gradually reversed, rather than consolidated and strengthened. Anti-democratic legislation has imposed severe limits on freedom of speech, assembly and association whilst the entrenchment and proliferation of a coercive and violent political culture has provoked wide-scale human rights abuses.

The integrity of the electoral process has been severely eroded due to the cumulative impact of the flawed polls that have been held in recent years. Elections have come to symbolise the subordination of the will of the people to the interests of a narrow ruling elite and are characterised by state sponsored violence and intimidation.

Rather than acting as a vehicle for the consolidation of democracy, elections in Zimbabwe are deliberately manipulated to have the opposite effect: that is the retention of power by an illegitimate ruling elite.

In the case of Zimbabwe therefore, the question simply cannot be about the need for new elections. What is needed are genuine, democratic elections, held in accordance with the SADC Norms and Standards, adopted by the SADC Parliamentary Forum Plenary Assembly on 25 March 2001 and accepted by the Zanu(PF) delegates present.

On behalf of the people of Zimbabwe, this document sets out a list of minimum conditions drawn from the SADC standards and observed in other SADC States, based around 5 guiding principles, that need to be addressed before any genuinely democratic elections can be held. It is important to note, however, that these minimum conditions are not definitive; they do not claim to encapsulate all the issues that currently preclude free and fair elections from taking place. The fundamental aim of this document is simply to inform the debate on the need to restore integrity, transparency and legitimacy to the electoral process in Zimbabwe.

We call upon the Government of Zimbabwe to work with political parties and civil society to take immediate steps to give practical effect to these minimum conditions in order to create a political environment and electoral framework conducive to a free and fair election. The multi-faceted crisis in Zimbabwe cannot be brought to an end until a legitimate and democratic government is established, based on the authority of the people, secured through a free and fair ballot.

We also call upon SADC, the AU and the broader international community to make a concerted effort to assist Zimbabwe to open up the political space, restore the democratic election process and restore the fundamental freedoms of speech and assembly, as established under the UN Charter and enunciated in AU and SADC Protocols.

In terms of the Zimbabwean Constitution, Parliamentary elections must be held before June 2005, and from recent pronouncements made by Zanu (PF) it appears that their intention is to hold the elections even earlier than that. It may well be that some of the demands listed above are met by Zanu (PF) in the run up to these elections. Two points must be stressed in this regard.

Firstly, these are minimum standards and as such every single condition should be complied with. A democratic election will not be secured if some of the conditions are complied with. A democratic election will only be secured if there is total compliance with the SADC Standards and the conditions set out in this document.

Secondly, a democratic election will not be secured if these conditions are met shortly before the election is to be held. The rule of law and political environment in Zimbabwe has been so badly subverted in the last four years that a democratic election will only be achieved if there is a minimum period of at least six months prior to the date of the election during which all of these conditions are in place. That period is necessary to restore equilibrium in Zimbabwe and to give all those parties wishing to contest a reasonable chance to campaign in a democratic environment.

1.    Restore the Rule of Law

1.1         Violence and Intimidation

1.1.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights states that “every individual shall have the right to liberty and security of his [or her] person.”

The Draft African Union Declaration on Elections, Democracy and Governance states that “respect for the rule of law on the part of all institutions and sectors of society [is] essential to democracy“ and that “it is the responsibility of governments to create an enabling environment [for elections].”

The NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance states that African governments are to enforce the rule of law.

The Election Commissioners Forum of SADC Countries Principles argues that “all electoral stake holders should commit themselves to a culture of peace and tolerance at all times” and that they should promote “a culture of peace and tolerance before, during and after election day.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”

The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “everyone has the right o liberty and security of person” and that “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention.”

1.1.2        SADC Experiences

Across southern Africa elections are generally peaceful events devoid of violence or intimidation throughout the voting process. Violence and intimidation have become the exception rather than the rule.  Where there are concerns about election related violence and intimidation, such as in KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa, the government has deployed police and security forces well in advance of elections to ensure peace and indeed the recently held elections in South Africa were overwhelmingly peaceful in all areas of South Africa outside of KwaZulu-Natal.

1.1.3        Zimbabwean Realities

Political violence and intimidation has become an endemic part of Zimbabwe’s political culture and is particularly intense during election periods. In its 2004 Report, Amnesty International stated that “During local council, mayoral and parliamentary by-elections on 30 and 31 August [2003] Zanu PF supporters armed with catapults, stones and iron bars intimidated polling agents and MDC supporters by blocking approaches to polling stations”.  

The report further observed that “there was an escalation in state sponsored attacks [in 2003] on critics of the government, particularly supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change. Incidents of ill-treatment and torture were reported throughout the year. Hundreds of people were detained for holding political meetings or peaceful protests.”

Both the June 2000 Parliamentary Elections and the March 2002 Presidential Elections were characterised by unprecedented levels of state sponsored violence, resulting in scores of deaths and thousands of injuries.

In 2002, human rights groups recorded that 1,062 MDC supporters were tortured, 58 murdered and 227 abducted and beaten. The Zimbabwe NGO Human Rights Forum compiled the following statistics on political violence during 2003:

- Abduction/kidnapping: 52

- Assault: 388

- Freedom of Expression/Assoc/Mvt: 809

- Murder: 10

- Political discrimination/int/vict: 466

- Torture: 497

(Note: The overwhelming majority of incidents that were recorded were committed by either Zanu PF supporters or members of the state security forces)

Statistics published by the above organisation for the period 1 Jan 04 – 29 Feb 04 revealed the following:

- Abduction/kidnapping: 10

- Assault: 66

- Freedom of Expression/Assoc/Mvt: 129

- Murder:2

- Political Discrimination/int/vict: 124

- Torture: 76

(Note: According to the report that was published all the victims of violence were either MDC supporters or civic society activists)

In March 2004, the Zimbabwe Institute published a report entitled ‘Playing With Fire’ which documented the personal accounts of human rights abuses experienced by 50 MDC MPs and 28 opposition election candidates. Below are some of the salient findings contained in the report.

1. The 78 individuals interviewed reported a total of 616 instances of human rights violations against themselves or those close to them

2. More than 90% of MPs reported human rights violations against themselves

3. 24% of MPs reported surviving assassination attempts

4. 16% of MPs interviewed have been the victims of torture.

5. 3 MPs who were the victims of vicious assaults have subsequently died

6. 50% have had their property vandalised or destroyed

7. 60% of MPs reported arrest and detention.

8. 22% reported physical assaults on members of their families

9. 3 MPs have had members of their staff brutally murdered

10. 32% of candidates reported assaults

11. 22% of candidates reported surviving murder attempts

12. 50% of violations are attributed by MPs to the police, CIO and army combined

The notorious Zanu PF youth militia, the subject of a recent BBC documentary are at the vanguard of political violence. Human rights organisations have compiled volumes of evidence pointing to the involvement of the militia in the perpetration of gross human rights abuses, including murder, rape and torture.  A report published on 5 September 2003 by The Solidarity Peace Trust[1] provided an informed and disturbing insight into the activities of the youth militia in advancing Zanu PF’s political agenda. It illustrates the role played by the militias in the areas of voter intimidation, political violence and food aid manipulation. 

Members of the militia are now present in virtually every constituency in Zimbabwe in what is a deliberate attempt to intimidate and cow the population. Polling days have become notorious for intimidation of voters by supporters of the ruling party whilst it is often the case that opposition candidates are unable to campaign in their constituencies. In a by-election held in the constituency of Gutu North in February 2004, the MDC candidate was prevented from entering the constituency due to the very real threat of violence by ruling party supporters.

 

The prevalence of state sponsored violence and systematic intimidation has seriously undermined the electoral process in Zimbabwe. In order to create an enabling environment for a free and fair election to take place there has to be an end to political violence and a disbanding of the youth militia. This in itself though, will not be sufficient as the violence can only be effectively tackled if the police and security forces comply with their statutory obligation of enforcing the law impartially. Urgent steps need to be taken to restore public confidence in these institutions in order to strengthen the integrity of the electoral process. 

1.2         Police and Security Forces

1.2.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa requires governments to “ensure that adequate security is provided to all parties participating in elections.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards requires that “all Government Security Forces should act impartially and professionally.”

The Election Commissioners Forum of SADC Countries Principles state that “security forces should maintain a neutral role in the provision of election security.”

1.2.2        SADC Experiences

All across the SADC region the police and security forces have largely stayed out of political affairs and have remained neutral.  In sharp contrast to other regions of the world, there has been no successful coup d’ etats in southern Africa.  The police and security forces are seen in SADC as loyal to the nation rather than the government of the day.

1.2.3        Zimbabwean Realities

In contrast to the security forces in other SADC countries, the police, the secret police (the CIO) and the army in Zimbabwe have become increasingly politicised and discharge their basic mandates on a partisan basis. In a statement issued on 5 May 2004 Amnesty International said that, “[it] is gravely concerned by the conduct of the Zimbabwe police, who continue to illegally and arbitrarily arrest, harass and ill-treat Zimbabwean citizens as part of a systematic clampdown on freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly”.

Since the MDC was formed in September 1999, only 7 out of the party’s 55 MPs have not been subject to arbitrary arrest; whilst out of 37 members of the MDC National Executive only two have not spent time in jail on trumped up charges.

The failure by the police to uphold the rule of law, and to respect the basic democratic principle that everyone is equal before the law, has eroded public confidence in the police as an institution. This erosion of trust has been accelerated by members of the police actively engaging in acts of violence against opposition supporters. During the MDC sponsored mass action of 2-6 June 2003 members of the police and army actively joined with members of the ruling party to attack MDC supporters, real or perceived.

Police collusion with the activities of the ruling party was demonstrated once again on May 20 [2004] when members of the police force escorted hundreds of Zanu PF supporters to the MDC Head Office in Harare. The supporters proceeded to attempt to break into the building, smashing windows and threatening the staff inside. The police did nothing to stop this. Instead, they arrested four MDC officials who were inside the building at the time.

Recent elections have witnessed the increasing involvement of members of the police and security forces in acts of violence committed on behalf of the ruling party. The psychological impact on the electorate, of the police and security forces’ complicity with the political agenda of the ruling party during election periods, has been immense. This blurring of the lines between key state institutions and the ruling party not only defines the collapse off the rule of law it also helps to explain why an increasing number of Zimbabweans no longer see any value in the electoral  process. 

1.3         Electoral Disputes

1.3.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that governments will commit themselves to “establish … competent legal entities including effective constitutional courts to arbitrate in the event of disputes arising from the conduct of elections.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “governments should establish by law ad hoc Electoral Tribunals to enforce electoral laws and codes of conduct during elections.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards calls for the strengthening of courts devoted to dealing with election petitions and offenses and further states that there must be clear time limits for resolving election petitions.

The Election Commissioners Forum of SADC Countries Principles requires that “clear provisions should be established for appeals against results and any other matters related to the conduct of the elections” and that “appeal procedures should be established for all elections and should be dealt with by the courts.”

1.3.2        SADC Experiences

In much of the SADC region the resolution of election related disputes remains problematic.  However, such delays undermine not only public confidence in the electoral process, but also faith in the judicial system.  Both SADC and AU documents clearly call for the swift resolution to election related disputes to ensure political stability.

1.3.3        Zimbabwean Realities

The principle of restoring the rule of law, as a minimum condition for a genuine election, does not just refer to ending political violence and ensuring the impartial conduct of the security forces, it also refers to the judicial framework for handling electoral disputes.

At present, election disputes in Zimbabwe are handled by the existing court structures; however, this system has failed to fairly and expeditiously resolve election disputes. In the immediate aftermath of the June 2000 parliamentary elections, the MDC filed petitions to the High Court challenging the ‘victories’ of Zanu PF in 37 constituencies. To date only 11 of these petitions have been heard and Judges have ruled in favour of the MDC in 7 of these cases. Less than a year away from the next parliamentary elections, the 7 Zanu PF MPs, whose victories were declared null and void by the High Court remain in parliament pending appeal hearings in the Supreme Court. Six of the appeal cases have been with the Supreme Court for over three years. The delay in hearing the appeal cases raises doubts about the independence of the judiciary and the commitment of the judiciary to issuing impartial rulings.

The issue of the MDC election petition, challenging the outcome of the March 2002 Presidential Election, raises similar concerns about the independence of the judiciary. The petition was submitted on 31 April 2002 and is nowhere near being completed. The trial began in November 2003 but awaits an interim judgment to be handed down by the presiding judge who himself has been the beneficiary of a farm granted to him by Zanu (PF).

The current delay in hearing electoral disputes is unacceptable and has no place in a functioning democracy. Justice delayed is justice denied. As such the legal framework for a genuine election needs to include a provision for the establishment of an impartial electoral dispute court, capable of resolving disputes expeditiously within an acceptable time-period.

2.    Restore Basic Freedoms and Rights

2.1         Personal Freedoms

2.1.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights states that “every individual shall have the right to assemble freely with others” and “the right to freedom of movement.”

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that African governments should “safeguard the human and civil liberties of all citizens including the freedom of movement, assembly [and] association.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”

The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “the right of peaceful assembly shall be recognised” and that “everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others.”

2.1.2        SADC Experiences

While repressive regimes, such as the racist Smith government in the then Rhodesia,  and the pariah Apartheid system in South Africa, sought to curtail personal freedoms, new and amended constitutions across SADC have enshrined the inalienable rights of citizens to freedom of association and movement.  Further, governments across southern Africa have acted to ensure that these freedoms are not only words in constitutions, but practical rights that their citizens can enjoy.

2.1.3        Zimbabwean Realities

The past three years in Zimbabwe have witnessed a concerted assault on the democratic space, through the creation of a legislative framework aimed at curtailing basic civil liberties.

The Public Order and Security Act (POSA), promulgated in February 2002, has been used as a weapon against the MDC and civic organisations critical of the Zimbabwe Government. It has been employed to prevent these organisations from holding public meetings, engaging in peaceful protest and freely expressing their criticisms of government actions. Thousands of people have been arrested under POSA. The Act makes it virtually impossible for opposition parties to campaign during elections.

The list below provides an indication of the extent to which POSA has closed down the democratic space in Zimbabwe.

 

In order to assist with the re-opening of the democratic space, those aspects of POSA that curtail peoples’ basic freedoms will need to be revoked. For instance provisions that: 

- Make it a criminal offence to intentionally make statements likely to engender feelings of hostility towards or cause contempt or ridicule of the State President, whether in his person or in respect of his office [2]

- Give the police powers to arrest anyone at a public meeting who is not in possession of an identity card

- Require police permission for meetings of two or more people to discuss political issues

- Empower the police to completely ban party political meetings for up to three months in any given jurisdiction

 

2.2         Print and Broadcast Media

2.2.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights states that “every individual shall have the right to receive information” and that “every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his [or her] opinions.”

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that African governments should “safeguard the human and civil liberties of all citizens including the freedom of access to the media on the part of all stakeholders, during electoral processes.”

The Draft African Charter on Elections, Democracy and Governance states that “special attention will be paid to … equitable access to public resources, including the Media, for all political parties and candidates in the pre-election period.”

The NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance states that African governments commit themselves to “ensure responsible free expression, inclusive of the freedom of the press.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards asserts that “governments should take the emergence of private media as a healthy development in the institutionalisation of the democratic process and the conduct of elections and should therefore refrain from taking decisions that thwart the development of a strong private media.  There should therefore be a domestic information law that reaffirms the existence of private media.”  Further, they declare that all political parties should have equal time and space on publicly owned media.

The Election Commissioners Forum of SADC Countries Principles state that “equitable access to the public media should be available to all contesting parties and candidates.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.”

The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his [or her] choice.”

The Windhoek Declaration on Promoting an Independent and Pluralistic African Press states “the establishment, maintenance and fostering of an independent, pluralistic and free press is essential to the development and maintenance of democracy in a nation.”

2.2.2        SADC Experiences

Print and broadcast media freedoms have expanded greatly in the last 15 years across the SADC region.  Independent newspapers and radio stations are now the norm rather than the exception.  Even independent television stations are emerging.  While independent print and electronic media are at times criticised by governments and have to operate responsibly within a legal framework, the right of independent print and electronic media to exist and operate is not questioned.

2.2.3        Zimbabwean Realities

In Zimbabwe, the right of independent print and electronic media to exist and operate is not only called into question by the ruling authorities; there is also a determined and sustained attempt by the authorities to muzzle and emasculate this cornerstone of democracy through coercion and repressive legislation, namely the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). AIPPA has drastically curtailed the fundamental right to freedom of speech, including the right of the press to disseminate information to the public and the right of the public to receive information.  

Under provisions contained in the Act, media organisations and journalists are required to register with the government controlled Media and Information Commission. 

Since it was promulgated in March 2002, AIPPA has been applied almost exclusively against the private press. 31 journalists from the independent media have been arrested and charged under AIPPA. In its annual report published in May 2004 the Media Institute for Southern Africa (MISA) confirmed that Zimbabwe has the worst record in terms of media freedoms. According to MISA’s findings, 54% of the total of 188 alerts issued last year on possible violations of press freedoms, concerned Zimbabwe.

No journalist working for the state media has been arrested or charged under AIPPA. Moreover, provisions contained within AIPPA were used as the basis for the recent closure of the Daily News, Zimbabwe’s only independent daily which also had the biggest circulation figures of all newspapers in Zimbabwe.

It is important to note that there is no independent broadcasting service in Zimbabwe and the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation, which provides the only radio and television services in Zimbabwe, is increasingly partisan in favour of Zanu (PF). Independent surveys have shown that the only time allocated to cover opposition political parties is to criticise or ridicule them.

The closure of the Daily News, the severe restrictions placed on the remaining independent papers and the absence of private broadcast media, makes it extremely difficult for opposition parties to communicate their messages to the people given that they are denied access to the state media.

The tight restrictions on the flow of information severely distorts the electoral process as it denies voters the opportunity to make an informed choice when it comes to casting their ballots.  

Balanced and equitable access to the state media for all political parties, and the lifting of restrictions on the activities of the private media, is essential if citizens are to be able to exercise their democratic right of accessing and receiving information that they require.

It is critical therefore that those aspects of AIPPA that curtail media freedoms are repealed or amended. For instance provisions that:

- Create a series of wide and vague offences that can be committed by journalists. These offences can attract severe penalties. They include falsifying or fabricating information and publishing a false statement, an offence which is punishable by up to two years imprisonment  

- Force Zimbabwean citizens to apply to the Information Minister for special permission to work for foreign media

- Force all journalists operating in Zimbabwe to register with the government-appointed (and, therefore, controlled) Media and Information Commission (MIC)

- Provide the MIC with wide-ranging powers that empower it to decide which newspapers may operate and which journalists may practice their profession

 

2.3         Right to Vote

2.3.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights states that “every citizen shall have the right to participate in the government of his country, either directly or through freely chosen representatives.”

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that “every citizen has the right to fully participate in the electoral process of the country, including the right to vote.”

The NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance states that African governments commit themselves to “ensure the inalienable right of the individual to participate by means of free, credible and democratic political processes in periodically electing their leaders..”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to take part in the government of his [or her] country, directly or through freely chosen representatives” and that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage.”

The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “every citizen shall have the right and opportunity … to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections.”

2.3.2        SADC Experiences

One of the main goals of the liberation movements in southern Africa was to secure the right to vote for those previously denied their humanity and hence their ability to determine for themselves their political destiny.  The importance of the right to vote is codified in constitutions and election laws across the region.  While countries across SADC have not expanded the franchise to citizens living outside their borders, the international trend is to permit citizens in the Diaspora to vote.  Countries like Malawi, while not providing for voting by non-resident citizens, do try to be as liberal as possible in defining voting rights and permit non-citizens who have resided in the country for seven or more years to vote.

2.3.3        Zimbabwean Realities

The right to vote is an inalienable right, a right that defines participatory democracy. Without the ability to vote a citizen is denied an opportunity to have a direct influence on how his/her country is governed. Obstacles to Zimbabweans exercising their basic democratic right to vote is the recurrent theme of this paper.   

One obstacle in particular though which is often overlooked, and which needs highlighting, is the right of citizens residing outside Zimbabwe to vote in elections back home. Under existing electoral laws, only members of the diplomatic service and armed forces, serving overseas, can vote outside the country. This provision disenfranchises an estimated 2 million Zimbabweans currently living in exile. The majority of those in exile are still Zimbabwean citizens and therefore should have the right to vote in elections.   

3.    Establish an Independent Electoral Commission (IEC)

3.1         Independent Management of Elections

3.1.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that governments will commit themselves to “establish impartial, all inclusive, competent and accountable national electoral bodies staffed by qualified personnel.”

The Draft African Charter on Elections, Democracy and Governance states that “special attention will be paid to the independence of the Electoral Commission.”

The NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance states that governments will commit to “strengthen and, where necessary, establish an appropriate electoral administration and oversight bodies.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “in the interest of promoting and entrenching pluralism, multi-party democracy and the integrity of the electoral process, the complete independence and impartiality of the Electoral Commission in dealing with all political parties should be reaffirmed in the constitution.”  Further, they call for the harmonising of electoral laws across the region.

The Electoral Commissions Forum of SADC Countries Principles states that the legal framework in every country should “provide for the establishment of an independent and impartial electoral management body” and that the election commission should be accountable to Parliament rather than a ministry.

3.1.2        SADC Experiences

The importance of the independent and impartial administration of elections is understood across the SADC region.  Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia all have independent election commissions.  While the independence and impartiality of the commissions is at times questioned, the assumption that these bodies must be independent and non-partisan is held across the region.

3.1.3        Zimbabwe Realities

Despite being a signatory to the SADC protocol on elections, Zimbabwe is yet to replicate steps taken by its SADC counterpart’s vis-à-vis constitutional and legislative amendments in relation to the electoral framework. As a consequence, Zimbabwe’s constitutional and legislative framework for elections is inconsistent with the principles set out in the SADC ‘Norms and Standards’, underlining how out of step Zimbabwe is when compared to other SADC countries.

The current management of elections in Zimbabwe is flawed as it is a process that is very much influenced and directed by the interests of the ruling party. The very structure that is in place to manage elections supports this argument. At present elections are managed and run by the Elections Directorate (ED) and Registrar General. The ED is chaired and run by senior civil servants, all appointed by President Mugabe. In addition, members of the military have been drafted into the ED. All these appointments are very much influenced by the strength of their loyalty to the ruling party. Similarly, the Registrar General, who is responsible for the day to day running of the election, is a senior civil servant whose loyalty to President Mugabe and Zanu PF is unquestionable.

With regards to the supervision and monitoring of the conduct of the electoral process, the responsibility lies with the Electoral Supervisory Commission whose members include former military personnel appointed by the President.  

Given the management and supervisory framework for elections it is therefore not surprising that public confidence in the impartial running of elections is extremely fragile, a factor that erodes the integrity of the overall electoral process.

Removing State and Executive control from the electoral process and consolidating the existing management and supervisory framework into a new single, independent, body, (Independent Electoral Commission) is an essential prerequisite to restoring public confidence in the electoral process.  For this to happen, the legislative framework for elections will need to be amended accordingly and a specific provision enshrining the needs for an independent body to manage elections, inserted in the constitution.

To assist in the establishment of a ‘level playing field’ other areas of the existing constitutional and legislative framework will also need to be amended or repealed in order to address the distortions that are currently in place. The Zimbabwe constitution, for instance, does not clearly enshrine the right of Zimbabweans to vote. The Zimbabwe constitution also allows for 30 non-elected Members of Parliament, appointed by the President and who are empowered to vote in the legislature – essentially creating a permanent majority for any ruling party. 

The Electoral Act, as it currently stands, does not provide procedures that ensure the integrity of the electoral process nor does it enable political parties or observers sufficient access to the process. More importantly, the Act provides the President with arbitrary powers to unilaterally change any aspect of the electoral process at his or her discretion at any time, something Mugabe did frequently in the run up to the 2002 Presidential election.

Zimbabwe’s electoral legislative framework does not, at present, facilitate the holding of genuine elections as existing statutes are designed to strengthen the status quo as opposed to strengthening democracy.  The existing framework requires serious amendment in order to harmonise its provisions with regional and international standards.

4.    Restore Public Confidence in the Electoral Process (Pre Polling Day)

4.1         Voter Registration

4.1.1        Regional and International Standards

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “a properly compiled register of voters provides a sound basis for the organisation of free and fair elections.”

The Electoral Commissions Forum of SADC Countries Principles states that “the voter registration process should promote broad participation and should not inhibit the participation of eligible voters” and that “parties should have access to the voters’ roll, without charge.”

4.1.2        SADC Experiences

Across the SADC region significant steps have been taken to ensure that all individuals who wish to register to vote have an opportunity to do so and, further, that they also have a chance to verify their registration.  In addition, political parties and observers have been encouraged to be part of the process to ensure that there is public confidence in the process.  For example, in 2003 Namibia conducted an entirely new voter registration exercise to ensure that the country’s voters’ roll was as accurate and up-to-date as possible.  The result around the region has been voters’ rolls that have been largely accurate and up-to-date. Electronic copies of the voters’ roll in South Africa was made available to all contesting parties in the recently held election.

4.1.3        Zimbabwean Realities

In Zimbabwe the voter registration process is complex and bureaucratic, discouraging many people from registering. Moreover, the process is conducted by the Elections Directorate, whose members are appointed by the President; a factor which raises serious questions vis-à-vis the integrity of the voter registration process. Suspicions are further raised by the fact that opposition parties are denied electronic copies of the voters’ roll and have so far been denied complete copies of the hard copy version. This precludes attempts to verify both the accuracy and completeness of the voters’ roll.

Studies which have been carried out on sections of the hard copy that have been made available, have revealed numerous glaring anomalies, indicating a deeply flawed and inaccurate voters’ roll. The anomalies include: missing names of eligible voters; the names of non-existent individuals, the names of dead people and ‘errors’ which could preclude eligible voters from casting their ballots or which allow ineligible voters to vote.

In order to restore confidence an Independent Electoral Commission will need to conduct a thorough ‘clean-up’ of the existing voters’ roll and ensure that it is electronically available to all interested parties. As in neighbouring countries, all eligible Zimbabweans should have the right to have their name appear on the voters’ list.

4.2         Polling Stations

4.2.1        Regional and International Standards

The Electoral Commissions Forum of SADC Countries Principles state that “there should be as many polling stations as the population density and settlement pattern demands, to ensure easier access, minimise waiting time and enhance efficiency.”

4.2.2        SADC Experiences

Across southern Africa, election commissions establish a sufficient number of polling stations for all voters to easily cast their ballots in one day.  Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia all limit voting to one day without any inconvenience to voters. In the recently held South African election millions of South Africans successfully voted in one day. The same applies further abroad in Africa – for example Kenya, with a much larger population than Zimbabwe and extremely remote districts, votes on one day.

4.2.3        Zimbabwean Realities

The disproportionate distribution of polling stations in Zimbabwe poses an additional obstacle for Zimbabweans, vis-à-vis exercising their right to vote. This is especially true in high density urban areas. In the 2002 Presidential Election, the number of polling stations in urban areas was reduced whilst in many rural areas the number was increased. As a result many people in urban areas declined to vote given the long queues or were unable to cast their ballots in the time period allocated under the Electoral Act. In Harare, for instance, some people who had queued for three days were unable to cast their ballots in time and were thus denied their democratic right to participate in the democratic process.

An adequate number of polling stations, proportionate to population density, needs to be introduced in order to enable people to cast their ballot expeditiously and to ensure that voting is completed within one day.

4.3         Peace Committees

4.3.1        Regional and International Standards

The Electoral Commissions Forum of SADC Countries Principles states that “An enforceable Code of Conduct to regulate the behaviour of political parties and their supporters should be adopted through a consultative process involving the [election management body], political parties and other electoral stakeholders.”

4.3.2        SADC Experiences

Peace committees that bring election commissions together with political parties and other interested organisations (such as domestic monitoring groups) to ensure the peaceful conduct of elections are becoming more and more prevalent in SADC.  In Zambia the 2001 tripartite elections, national and provincial level committees were established to bring all stakeholders together, to resolve informally, election related disputes.

4.3.3        Zimbabwean Realities

As a mechanism to help restore public confidence in police performance during an election period, peace committees will need to be set up to act as a watchdog in relation to police performance. The peace committees should be comprised of representatives from all political parties, civic organisations including the church, the police and the Independent Electoral Commission. 

4.4         Election Observers and Voter Educators

4.4.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Union Declaration on the Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that African governments commit themselves to “ensure the transparency and integrity of the entire electoral process by facilitating the deployment of representatives of political parties and individual candidates at polling and counting stations and by accrediting national and other observers/monitors” and to “promote civic and voters’ education on the democratic principles and values in close co-operation with the civil society groups and other relevant stakeholders.”

The African Union Guidelines for African Union Electoral Observation and Monitoring Missions states that “International, regional and national observers have come to play an important role in enhancing the transparency and credibility of elections and democratic governance in Africa.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “election observers should be accepted as apart of the process to institutionalise multi-party democracy.”

The Electoral Commissions Forum of SADC Countries Principles state that election management bodies “must ensure speedy, efficient and non-discriminatory accreditation processes for observers and monitors” and that “civil society capacity, such as NGOs, CBOs, the faith based organisations (FBOs) and other institutions should harness and support civic and voter education to ensure an effective distribution through the country.”

4.4.2        SADC Experiences

Across southern Africa, domestic, regional and international election observers are taken as granted and seen as contributing to the legitimacy of the process.  Domestic, regional and international organisations have observed elections in the past decade in Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia without controversy.  Further, civic organisations play a central role in all of these countries, working with election commissions to conduct voter education in order to ensure voters understand the importance of voting as well as the mechanics of the process.

4.4.3        Zimbabwean Realities

When a country has a history of conducting elections that do not conform to international standards, the presence of local, regional and international observers is essential to help confer legitimacy on the outcome or provide the crucial objective analysis supporting claims that the outcome was fraudulent. Observers therefore help to provide transparency and reassurance, thereby injecting confidence into the electoral process.

In the 2002 Presidential Election a number of foreign observer missions were denied entry to Zimbabwe whilst many domestic observers were denied accreditation due to the discriminatory procedures that remain in place today.

The attitude of Zimbabwe towards observers is in stark contrast to its SADC partners. Across the region, the necessity of having domestic and international observers and allowing them unfettered access, is now accepted practice. For genuine elections to take place in Zimbabwe an adequate number of observers need to be accredited and deployed well in advance of polling day so that the whole campaign process leading up to polling day can be properly observed and accurately assessed. 

Similar to the case of observers, the non-discriminatory and expeditious accreditation of voter educators, and their deployment well in advance of the polling day, is a key ingredient for a genuine election.

The Zimbabwe Government has recently tabled amendments to the Electoral Act which will ban civil society organisations from conducting voter education. Instead, under the terms of the proposed amendments, the Electoral Supervisory Commission (whose members include former military personnel appointed by the President) will have sole control over voter education, exposing the process to possible manipulation by the ruling party.

For voter education to fulfil its role as an essential exercise in strengthening participatory democracy, it is essential that civil society has sufficient capacity to conduct effective nationwide voter education. This should be one of the core responsibilities of the Independent Electoral Commission.

5.    Restore Secrecy of the Ballot (Polling Day)

5.1         Voting Procedures

5.1.1        Regional and International Standards

The African Union Declaration on Principles governing Democratic Elections in Africa states that African governments will commit themselves to “take all necessary measures and precautions to prevent the perpetration of fraud, rigging or any other illegal practices.”

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “the right of eligible individuals to vote unimpeded and the right to vote in secrecy in a ballot box should be protected and enshrined in the constitutions of the SADC countries” and that “those SADC countries that still use opaque wooden ballot boxes are urged to discard them in favour of transparent ballot boxes.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections … held by secret vote.”

The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “citizens shall have the right and opportunity … to vote … by secret ballot.”

5.1.2        SADC Experiences

Across the SADC region the secrecy of the ballot goes unquestioned.  While concerns may be raised about vote buying or the manipulation of the results, all over southern Africa “your vote is your secret.”  Procedures common in the past that undermined the secrecy of the vote were largely eradicated during the 1990s.

5.1.3        Zimbabwean Realities

Recent elections in Zimbabwe have eroded people’s confidence in the secrecy of the ballot to such an extent that many voters, especially in rural areas, no longer believe that their vote is secret. Increasing incidents of headmen loyal to Zanu PF camping outside polling stations and writing down peoples names as they arrive to vote, combined with regular incidents of targeted retribution against accused MDC voters in the aftermath of an election, has served to strengthen the perception that voting in accordance with your own wishes is a risky business. This pervasive obstacle to a genuine election was again in evidence during the recently held Lupane by-election (15-16 May)

Events in Lupane will have convinced many voters that the secrecy of their ballot is pure wishful thinking.

 

 

In Zimbabwe there are deep concerns that protection measures in place to ensure the integrity of voting procedures are inadequate. These concerns stem from existing electoral practices. For instance, election officials use small dabs of invisible ultraviolet ink to mark individuals who have already voted. This ink is not visible to the naked eye and can only be viewed with the use of specialised equipment which is often inaccessible to political parties’ agents.  In practice therefore it is impossible for polling agents and observers to verify if a potential voter has ultraviolet ink on his or her finger, therefore making it impossible to determine whether or not someone has already voted. The use of visible, indelible ink, as is the practice in Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia and in the recently conducted South African election, would solve this problem.

5.2         Counting Procedures

5.2.1        Regional and International Standards

The SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards states that “counting of votes should be done at the polling station … [and] there should be immediate release of official election results on completion of counting.”

The Electoral Commissioners Forum of SADC Countries Principles states that “the counting process should take place in the polling station immediately following the close of the hours of voting.”

5.2.2        SADC Experiences

Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia all count ballot papers at polling stations immediately after the conclusion of the poll rather than first moving the boxes and then counting the ballots papers at a centralised counting centre. 

5.2.3        Zimbabwean Realities

The procedures in place for the counting of ballots is open to serious abuse and the procedures in no way comply with regional and international standards. Under the current system, ballot boxes are taken from polling stations to central locations and held overnight before they are opened and counted. In recent elections the army has been deployed to facilitate this process whilst on occasions, and in certain areas, observers and opposition officials are banned from accompanying ballot boxes from the polling stations to the counting centres. This accountability deficit increases the likelihood of fraud and manipulation.

Conclusion

The minimum conditions set out in this document are fundamental to the restoration of genuine democratic elections in Zimbabwe. In the case of Zimbabwe, opening up the political space and creating an environment within which people are free to elect a government of their choice is essential if we are to prescribe long-lasting solutions to the chronic political and socio-economic crisis with which Zimbabwe is currently confronted; a crisis which, if allowed to fester, will pose serious challenges to the SADC region, in terms of collective stability and economic growth.

It is only through the restoration of democratic government, based on the authority of the people, that Zimbabwe can make real progress towards completing the unfinished business of the liberation agenda and building a national consensus around a progressive political culture (based on the core democratic values of solidarity, social justice, freedom and equality); a political culture capable of replacing, and eradicating, the violent dimension that has plagued and scarred Zimbabwe since the arrival of the British in 1890.

In the absence of a new progressive political culture Zimbabwe will remain stuck in a cycle of bad governance and violence that prevents the country from developing into a stable, pluralist, multi-party democracy that up-holds the rule of law and protects and promotes citizens’ basic democratic and human rights.

 

END