Opinion: Constitution amendments will rekindle instability

via Opinion: Constitution amendments will rekindle instability – NewsDay Zimbabwe March 18, 2015 by Vivid Gwede

THERE is no doubt that the writing of the new Constitution of Zimbabwe was the foundational stage in establishing a common national interest and consensual society away from a conflict-ridden past in Zimbabwe.

The new Constitution as an unfolding broad social contract was not only the first general instance of substantive dialogue, national healing, peace-building and reconciliation, but a harbinger of new hope for national political, cultural, economic and social stability.

For the first time since the national independence of Zimbabwe in 1980 and even before, there is a real opportunity for constructing a common welfare and shared statehood through one understanding resident in the new Constitution of what it means to be a Zimbabwean, among all societal groups.

As shown by the conflicts before and after independence, this communal oneness did not always exist, and remained a work in progress, which was, however, fast-tracked when it culminated into a national debate that led to a consultative, broad-based, people-driven and unifying national Constitution to which every one must responsibly abide.

The next step towards lasting peace, reconciliation and stability should be in implementing the charter, and safeguarding and breathing life into the text of the Constitution to change the lived realities of the various peoples, whereas disregarding the Constitution is bound to undo the developing social fabric, understanding and compactness through renewed instability.

We therefore should respect the Constitution not only in our actions, but in our talk.

While delays in implementing the new Constitution’s various provisions are bad enough, it is reckless to suggest amending the Constitution as some elements in government are doing as that will be like taking the country backwards by many decades.

While delicate interests in societies such as Zimbabwe are difficult to balance, it is true that any actions of the government in line with the new Constitution cannot be questionable.

It is true that no one will find all provisions of the Constitution palatable to their exact interests, but that is the nature of compromise, which the Constitution is to the various social and political forces that crafted it.

The writing of the new Constitution did not start at a roundtable, but was necessitated by recognisable social conflicts in the country that had been playing out, sometimes with grave results in the greater part of the independence years.

The pain of implementing the new Constitution as a bitter medicine for Zimbabwe’s societal ills is nothing compared to the recklessness of taking Zimbabwe back to the years before it was written through retrogressive amendments.

Before the adoption of the new Constitution, government attitude had been of amending the Lancaster House Constitution at will, and treating is as a useless riff-raff.

But there should be a conscious distinction between the ceasefire treaty in which people were alienated and had no part, and the homegrown constitution, where they actively deposited their considered thoughts about their communal existence.

It is logical to assume that no societal interests, values, or shade of thought that was included would accept to be edited out of the national charter through the unilateral action of the present government of amending the Constitution, especially where little effort has been made to implement its important provisions two years on.

Beside the issue of peace-building, reconciliation and stability, there is wisdom with regards to development, in keeping the Constitution unedited and intact.

Apart from the guesswork of what the citizens want which used to guide the policy actions of the government for many decades, the new Constitution is an empirical document and primary source of those desires of Zimbabweans diligently gathered through a careful consultative process in the form of the Constitutional Parliamentary Select Committee outreaches.

Thus in making policies for development, it would be unwise for any present, or future government to seek to disregard, subvert, or even edit out that evidence through amendments driven by private considerations as that will be a sure recipe for failure.
l Vivid Gwede is with Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition. He writes in his personal capacity.