Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai at a party rally on Jul.
29, 2013, two days before Zimbabwe’s election. Economists say that it does not
matter who wins the country’s Jul. 31 election as none of the political parties
may be able to reverse the country’s economic meltdown. Courtesy: Jeffrey
Moyo
HARARE, Jul 30 2013
(IPS)- At a recent campaign rally in Zimbabwe’s
Midlands Province, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai pledged to establish
rural-based companies to create employment. It was a promise that appealed to
34-year-old sociologist Agnes Ngwenya who graduated from the University of
Zimbabwe 10 years ago, but has not yet found work.
She broke into song and
ecstatic ululation, as she jumped and gyrated with optimism, waving a red flag –
a distinctive trademark of the Movement for Democratic Change – Tsvangirai
(MDC–T).
MDC–T promises to create a
100-billion-dollar economy by 2018, anchored by foreign direct investment.
Meanwhile the splinter MDC–Ncube, led by Professor Welshman Ncube, pins its
campaign on devolution, or decentralising governance.
“Believing that the
Zimbabwe Africa National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu–PF) 2013 campaign manifesto
will one day transform the lives of many suffering Zimbabweans after the party’s
three decades in power is a definite impossibility and absolutely untrue,”
Ngwenya tells IPS.
“We strongly believe
that we no longer need a government of national unity, because it hampers our
economic growth." -- Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce president Davison
Norupiri
Zimbabweans go to the
polls on Wednesday Jul. 31, amid reports of intimidation, threats of violence
and abductions. But economists here say that it does not matter whether
Tsvangirai’s MDC–T or President Robert Mugabe’s Zanu–PF wins the election,
neither will be able to reverse Zimbabwe’s economic meltdown anytime
soon.
Economist Kingston
Nyakurukwa says that both parties have unrealistic plans for solving Zimbabwe’s
economic problems.
“While I agree that MDC–T
seems to have a better plan to rescue the country from a decade-long economic
crisis, generally manifestos pencilled by the parties set to lock horns at this
years’ elections are unrealistic, exaggerated and reflect the ambitiousness of
the parties racing to govern this country rather than the pragmatic means to
arrest the country’s economic woes,” Nyakurukwa tells IPS.
Between 2003 and
2009, this Southern African nation’s year on year inflation was reported as 231
percent. The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe was forced to issue a 100 trillionZimbabwean
dollarnote and eventually the central bank stopped
printing money in 2009, opting to adopt amulti-currency
regime. Not only that,
unemployment is ridiculously high. A 2009 report by the United Nations Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs stated that the country’s
unemployment rate was 94 percent. A great majority now work in theinformal
sector.
Much of the country’s
economic meltdown has been blamed on Mugabe’s policies, which include a
controversial land reform programme that began in 2000 and saw over 300,000
people forcefully occupy land previously owned by an estimated 4,000 white
commercial farmers.
Another controversial
policy area is foreign investment.
Though for 21-year-old
Evelyn Chatsi from Mwenezi district, about 144km southwest of Zimbabwe’s oldest
town of Masvingo, it is not controversial at all. She feels it is a solution for
her improved economic future.
“I know Zanu–PF will not
betray young people. The party crafted the indigenisation policy to empower
youths like us and come Jul. 31, our lives will be changed, with President
Robert Mugabe back at the helm of leadership,” Chatsi tells
IPS.
Movement for Democratic Change – Tsvangirai rally on Jul.
29, 2013, two days before Zimbabwe’s election. Credit: Jeffrey
Moyo/IPS
Under the Indigenisation
and Economic Empowerment Act of 2007, foreign-owned companies are required to
sell a 51 percent stake to locals to stimulate economic
growth.
But some financers fear
losing their investments through this policy. Independent economic analyst John
Robertson says it has scared away investors and led to several companies closing
down after being taken over by locals.
“With indigenisation, we
have attracted very little new investments here and caused closure of several
companies that offered employment to many people here,” Robertson tells
IPS.
According to the Consumer
Council of Zimbabwe, 85 companies closed down in Harare last year and over 100
shut down in Bulawayo between 2009 and 2013.
Araj Mouri, a
Zimbabwean-based Indian businessman, tells IPS: “We definitely can’t trust a
party whose aim is to have its hands on our investments without bringing its own
capital. We are therefore watching this election drama with
scepticism.”
Claris Madhuku, director
of Platform for Youth Development, a democracy lobby group, agrees that
Zanu–PF’s indigenisation and economic empowerment policy has failed and says
that is has caused “mayhem in the country, with many people linked to it
scrambling to grab foreign-owned companies.”
“While MDC-T’s manifesto
is reasonable, [it is] too ambitious, which may also be difficult to implement.
The political parties want power; they don’t mean what they say,” he tells
IPS.
Charles Msipa, president
of the Confederation of Zimbabwe Industry, says Zimbabwe really needs a
government with a consistent policy framework that addresses the country’s
economic opportunities and challenges.
“But whether that policy
environment is delivered by a coalition or single-party government, it’s for the
electorate to decide,” Msipa tells IPS.
However, the Zimbabwe
National Chamber of Commerce president Davison Norupiri says another coalition
government would stifle economic growth. After the violence that followed
Zimbabwe’s disputed 2008 election, Zanu–PF and MDC–T signed a pact to form a
government of national unity with elections this year.
“We strongly believe that
we no longer need a government of national unity, because it hampers our
economic growth. With our [unity government] here, we haven’t moved much in
terms of economic development,” Norupiri tells IPS.
Mike Milton, who runs a
plastics manufacturing company in Harare, is also not sure that either party has
a concrete solution to save the economy.
“Both MDC-T and Zanu-PF
election manifestos lack pragmatic means to arrest the country’s decade long
economic woes. They are not clear on how they aim to practically restore
investor confidence,” Milton tells IPS.
“But if we have another
disputed election, another coalition government may be unwelcome, which will
throw this country into a serious and irretrievable economic morass,” he
says.
But Prosper Chitambara, an
economist with the Labour and Economic Development Research Institute Zimbabwe,
an independent economic research think tank, says he doubts that Zanu–PF’s
manifesto would yield any positive changes if the party won the
elections.
“In its manifesto, Zanu-PF
carries the same old story and I don’t think they will change the way they have
been doing things for the past [three decades] even if they may win this
election. What they are saying in their campaign manifesto only helps to weaken
the value of the national assets and in this case, Zanu-PF’s manifesto is more
ambitious than the MDC-T one,” Chitambara tells IPS.
“But I think under an MDC
government, we shall see numerous positive transformations and developments
hence people have so much expectations,” says Chitambara.
An African Union election
observer speaking to IPS in Harare on condition of anonymity says political
uncertainty has been the biggest factor in crippling Zimbabwe’s bid to grow its
economy.
GWERU, WASHINGTON DC — Eleven villagers from
Chief Masala’s Dayataya Ward in the Zvishavane-Ngezi constituency, Midlands
province, have fled their homes and sought refuge in the asbestos-mining
town after allegedly being assaulted by suspected Zanu PF
supporters.
Lillian Timveos, the Midlands South provincial chairperson
for the Movement for Democratic Change led by Prime Minister Morgan
Tsvangirai, told VOA Studio 7 the villagers, who include a pregnant woman,
fled their homes Sunday night following the alleged assault and
harassment.
“It’s true that there are some MDC-T supporters from about
four homesteads in Ndindani village in Dayataya Ward who fled their homes
after they had been assaulted by Zanu PF supporters. This happened on Sunday
night,” said Mrs. Timveos.
She said the villagers were being punished
for leaving a meeting called by Chief Masala early Sunday when they realized
that it was a political meeting aimed at drumming up support for Zanu
PF.
“The villagers say Chief Masala called a public meeting insisting
that all villagers should attend. When villagers from across the political
divide arrived at the meeting, they realized later that it was a Zanu PF
meeting which had been called under the guise of a public meeting. So, some
MDC-T supporters decided to leave as they felt that it was improper for the
chief to call for a political meeting”
The incident was reported to
Zvishavane police who promised to investigate.
Mrs. Timveos said she is
concerned that three MDC-T youths, who were also assaulted, are in police
custody.
Provincial police spokesman Inspector Emmanuel Mahoko was not
available for comment. But an officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity
as he is not allowed to speak to the press, confirmed the
incident.
Elsewhere, a visit by Studio 7 to a number of polling stations
in Chirumhanzu and Shurugwi showed that all is in place in time for
Wednesday’s elections.
Provincial elections officer Dorcas Mpofu said
her office is ready for the polls.
Meanwhile, reports from some parts
of the country suggested there was relative peace on the eve of Wednesday’s
polls.
But cases of intimidation were said to be on the increase as some
chiefs and village heads in Muzarabani and Rushinga in Mashonaland Central
were said to be intimidating villagers.
Chiefs Dandawa and Matawu
together with headmen Kamutsamombe and Katemanyoka in Hurungwe Mashonaland
West, were also accused of ordering people to gather at their homesteads
Wednesday morning so they can go to polling stations in
groups.
Reporter Jonga Kandemiiri spoke with an MDC T member, Never
Nyamasvisva from Mashonaland Central who said these local leaders were also
ordering known MDC supporters to claim that they were illiterate and needed
assistance to cast their ballots.
Sources in Mashonaland East,
Manicaland and some parts of Masvingo also alleged the same was being
planned by village heads in their areas.
Robert Mugabe's government
owes almost £6bn to international lenders
Written by Jermaine
Haughton 30/07/2013 03:51 PM
A ZIMBABWEAN public policy
group has called for the country’s new government to hold an official public
audit into its crippling national debt.
The Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt
and Development (ZCDD) has also requested the UK government, International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and other lenders to take part in an audit and make
transparent all information on loans given to the African country in the
past.
It is estimated that the current Zimbabwean government owes £5.9bn
to foreign countries, international institutions and foreign private
creditors.
Zimbabwe is defaulting on its debt payments and therefore it
is currently required to pay back just £9.8m a year – representing 0.5 per
cent of government revenue.
The loans were issued from the 1980s and
1990s to counter Zimbabwe’s poor economic growth and rising unemployment,
with more than £490m coming from the IMF, World Bank and African Development
bank aimed at building the nation’s infrastructure.
However, since
the investments have been made, socio-economic progress has been stunted and
poverty is rife.
In a statement released earlier today, ZCDD said:
“Zimbabwe’s debt should be resolved, but not in a way that means higher
payments, more lending, and no increase in the accountability of lenders and
the government.
"Instead a public debt audit would be a first step
towards a just resolution of the debt, and greater democracy and
accountability.”
The UK government are owed money from loans issued
between 1998 and 2000 used to buy for police Land River vehicles - later to
be used in internal repression - while Spain lent the Zimbabwe government
funds to buy a Spanish military aircraft.
Tomorrow, Zimbabwean
citizens will go to the polls to vote in presidential, senate, national
assembly and local government elections.
The main focus will be the
battle for the presidency between the incumbent, Robert Mugabe, and the
prime minster, Morgan Tsvangirai.
Civil society coalition calls for democratic audit of $9 billion
debt
The Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development (ZIMCODD), in a
statement released today,[1] have called for a new government to hold an
official public audit into the country’s debt, and for lenders such as the
UK government and IMF to take part in an audit and release all information
on the loans they have given in the past.
The Zimbabwean government
owes $9 billion in ‘external debt’;[2] money that is owed to foreign
governments, international institutions and foreign private creditors. It is
in default on most of these debts, so debt payments are relatively low;
around $15 million a year, 0.5 per cent of government revenue.[3]
In
June 2013, Zimbabwe’s coalition government agreed a programme with the IMF
which could be a first step towards entering the IMF and World Bank debt
relief scheme. However, this would actually increase Zimbabwe’s debt
payments, require the country to take out more loans, and make a new
government follow IMF and World Bank economic policies (See
below).
The Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development say in a statement
released on 30 July 2013, that: “Zimbabwe’s debt should be resolved, but
not in a way that means higher payments, more lending, and no increase in
the accountability of lenders and the government. Instead a public debt
audit would be a first step towards a just resolution of the debt, and
greater democracy and accountability.”[1]
The loans were from the 1980s
and 1990s. At least $750 million of debt comes directly from structural
adjustment loans from the IMF, World Bank and African Development Bank which
bailed out reckless lenders, lowered economic growth and increased
unemployment. In 2004 the World Bank acknowledged that structural adjustment
in the 1990s in Zimbabwe “largely failed. Social progress slowed, per capita
incomes declined and poverty increased.”[4]
Other loans which continue to
make-up some of Zimbabwe’s debt include: • Loans from the UK government
between 1998 and 2000 for police Land Rover vehicles, which were later used
in internal repression • Loans from the World Bank for tree plantations to
create fuel supplies. However, the World Bank failed to realise there was
already plenty of wood available, and there was no economic return on the
plantations. • Loans from the Spanish government for the Zimbabwe
government to buy Spanish military aircraft. • UK unspecified ‘aid’
loans which were tied to buying exports from British companies.[5]
In
June 2013, the International Monetary Fund agreed a ‘Staff Monitored
Program’ with Zimbabwe’s coalition government. Under this programme, no
money changes hands, but Zimbabwe has to follow economic policy conditions
set by the IMF. If they complete the programme, it could be the first step
towards Zimbabwe entering the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative, in
late 2013 or early 2014.
HIPC offers the possibility of cancelling
some of the debts, but only on condition that Zimbabwe: • Start making
other debt payments again. It would therefore cost the Zimbabwean government
money to enter the HIPC scheme, as happening in the Democratic Republic of
Congo. • Follow IMF and World Bank economic policy conditions. In Tanzania
this meant privatising a water system which later collapsed, and the World
Bank has acknowledged “was unable to meet many of its targets and
obligations from the start”. In Malawi it meant selling off a grain reserve,
prior to a food crisis • Take out new loans from the IMF, World Bank
and African Development Bank.
Tim Jones, Policy Officer at Jubilee
Debt Campaign, says: “Rather than rushing into a debt relief process and IMF
conditions, Zimbabweans need a debt audit to examine where the debt came
from and how to prevent a debt crisis arising again. In the 1990s, the debt
crisis and IMF economic conditions forced on the country caused poverty and
unemployment to increase, and economic growth to collapse. The IMF has no
legitimacy to force economic policies on Zimbabwe.
“The main reason
for Zimbabwe to seek HIPC debt relief is to become eligible for new loans
again. There is a danger these loans will repeat the country’s history of
debt crisis. A debt audit can work out what loans are needed for, and how to
prevent them from once again increasing poverty and inequality.”
An
official public debt audit could be set-up by the Zimbabwean parliament. It
would publicly assess what loans were used for which resulted in the current
debt, who loans benefited and their legality and legitimacy.
In 2008,
following elections, the Ecuadorian government held an official public audit
into its debt, finding that many of the contracts had been signed illegally.
Following the revolution, the Tunisian government has announced it intends
to carry out an official debt audit. The Norwegian government is currently
auditing the debts owed to it.
For more information, and to arrange an
interview with either the Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development or
Jubilee Debt Campaign, contact Tim Jones on +44 20 7324 4725 or +44 7817
628196.
[3] Calculated from World Bank. Global Development Finance
database.
[4] World Bank Operations Evaluation Department. (2004).
Zimbabwe: Country Assistance Evaluation. 18/08/04.
[5] For more on
the origins of Zimbabwe’s debt, see Jubilee Debt Campaign’s report
‘Uncovering Zimbabwe’s debt: The case for a democratic solution to the
unjust debt burden’. http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/zimbabwe
One of President Robert Mugabe's closest allies
accepted $160,000 (£104,000) paid into the accounts of his children by a company
that sold fuel to Zimbabwe's regime, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Six separate payments were made to the bank
accounts of three children of Gideon Gono, the governor of the Reserve Bank,
while they were studying in Australia, at the same time as the company concerned
– which claimed to have an office in Britain – was helping to supply Zimbabwe with millions of litres of
fuel.
Mr Gono admitted that the payments had been made
to his twin daughters and a son, but denied ever taking a "bribe". He said the
funds had been reimbursed on his behalf.
Robert Mugabe, right, with Zimbabwe's Central Bank
Governor Gideon Gono in Harare in 2008 (AFP)
The disclosure comes on the eve of Zimbabwe's
election in which Mr Mugabe, 89, is attempting to win another term after three
decades in power and years of economic turmoil that the opposition blames on Mr
Gono, the architect of the regime's economic policies.
It provoked immediate calls for an investigation
into Mr Gono's finances. "The disclosure of these payments raises serious
questions about the behaviour of Gideon Gono, who has been Mugabe's right-hand
man for many years," said Kate Hoey, a Labour MP with a longstanding interest in
Zimbabwe. "The government of Zimbabwe should begin an immediate investigation to
settle the question of whether these transfers were bribes or, as Mr Gono says,
innocent transactions which the Reserve Bank reimbursed."
In March, Britain agreed to drop Mr Gono from
the European Union sanctions list, meaning that he is now theoretically free to
visit the UK and hold assets here. Ms Hoey said the Government had "acted too
hastily" in this, adding: "The UK should now ensure that he is put back on the
sanctions list."
Statements showing six payments from
Ravenscourt Corporation totalling $160,000 to three children of Gideon Gono,
governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.Global
Witness
During almost a decade as Zimbabwe's central
banker, Mr Gono has presided over hyperinflation, the demise of the national
currency and a desperate shortage of basic essentials, notably petrol.
Mr Gono, who blamed "illegal sanctions" imposed
by the West, became the crucial deal-maker charged with ensuring the survival of
Mr Mugabe's regime, negotiating with private companies to raise funds for vital
imports.
One such was Ravenscourt Corporation, which sold
49 million litres of fuel to the Reserve Bank as part of a joint venture in
2006-07.
At the same time that Ravenscourt and its
partners were supplying the Reserve Bank with almost five per cent of Zimbabwe's
annual fuel consumption, the company was paying money into the accounts of Mr
Gono's children, according to bank statements obtained by Global Witness, a
campaign group, following investigation by Africa
Confidential, the specialist
newsletter.
In particular, Ravenscourt paid $20,000 to Mr
Gono's twin daughters, Pride and Praise, and the same amount to his son,
Passion, on May 30, 2006. The money was transferred to their bank accounts in
Australia, where they were students at the time.
Later, on Aug 21, 2006, Ravenscourt sent another
$40,000 each to the accounts of Passion and Praise Gono, and $20,000 to Pride
Gono.
Asked why these payments were made, Mr Gono told
The Daily Telegraph that the funds had been used solely to move his
children to Singapore and Malaysia after they were forced to leave Australia.
In order to conceal their new locations in Asia,
it had been necessary to pay the funds from a "UK source", he added, and the
Reserve Bank had reimbursed the money on his behalf. "In my 36 years of working,
I am yet to ever receive a bribe from anybody and I'm not about to do so now or
in future. The same applies to my family," said Mr Gono.
The Reserve Bank had repaid Ravenscourt "via a
specific transfer", he added, and the relevant documents were available for
inspection at the bank's headquarters in the capital, Harare.
Asked to supply the documents, Mr Gono replied:
"Which bank on earth can ever part with documents unless there is a court order?
The Bank of England would never do that." He said that his terms of employment
encompassed such financial support for his children.
Mr Gono's daughters and his son lost their
Australian visas and were forced out of the country in August 2007. At the point
when Ravenscourt made the payments, Mr Gono's children were still in Australia.
Asked how the money could have funded their
relocation to Asia when this actually happened a year later, Mr Gono replied: "I
and my wife were put on illegal sanctions as way back as 2002 by the Americans
and 2004 by the British and the EU.
"So you cannot conclude and say that protection
of my children was only necessary and began in 2007."
The funds were transferred from Ravenscourt's UK
account at a London branch of Habib Bank AG Zurich. The Bank did not respond to
questions.
"These payments should have rung alarm bells at
Habib Bank AG Zurich, especially as they involved Zimbabwe," said Robert Palmer
of Global Witness.
"We can't be totally sure what checks were done
at Habib. Unless bank senior executives are held to account for any failings
within their institutions, bank behaviour isn't going to change."
Asked by The Daily Telegraph why
Ravenscourt had sent money to Mr Gono's children, Mohamed Iqbal Mahmed, the
director and part-owner of Ravenscourt, did not say. Nor did he say that the
Reserve Bank had reimbursed the payments.
Last year the UK Financial Services Authority
(FSA) fined Habib £525,000 after finding that the bank had taken insufficient
care to guard against money-laundering. Mr Mahmed said the FSA had examined
Ravenscourt's account without imposing a freeze.
"I categorically and unequivocally state that
they [the payments] were not bribes or inducements to obtain favours from
anyone," he added. "Had there been any irregularity relating to these payments,
there can be no question that the Ravenscourt account would have been frozen."
Saviour Kasukuwere, Zimbabwe's minister of indigenisation,
is confident his Zanu-PF party will win the elections on Wednesday and
intensify plans to take over controlling stakes in banks and other key
institutions.
Kasukuwere, an ally of President Robert Mugabe, has become
the face and driving force behind the controversial indigenisation programme
which has been scaring off investors, causing direct foreign investment to
plummet by about three-quarters in 2013.
Sitting in his office in
Harare a day before elections, Kasukuwere believes that capital inflow will
soon pick up.
"The capital will flow to Zimbabwe, because capital needs a
home," he told dpa in an interview.
"We have lots of new transactions
coming in," he said, giving no details.
While Mugabe has adopted a "look
east" strategy, it remains unclear if Chinese companies are keen on
investing in Zimbabwe or see it as a place to sell cheap goods.
"It's
no longer about targeting investors. It is about transforming our society so
that the people of Zimbabwe can benefit from their resources," he insists,
while talking about "democratising the economic space."
Zimbabwe has
fallen from one of the most stable and wealthy African nations to one of the
poorest, haemorrhaging its skilled labour force to neighbouring South Africa
and other countries.
The decline was provoked partially by a land reform
policy introduced in the late 1990s which was followed in 2000 by forced
take-overs of white-owned farms, ostensibly to help blacks gain access to
land.
Kasukuwere says tobacco farms are finally now reaching the same
level of production of 13 years ago, but admits food production is only at
about 50 percent of capacity.
The cost of basic foods in Zimbabwe,
once a self-sufficient country, remains high and unemployment affects most
adults.
In 2007, Mugabe's government went a step further and passed an
"indigenisation" law, which would require foreign companies to hand over a
51 per cent stake to black Zimbabweans - a measure intended to make up for
decades of white-minority rule and colonialism.
Earlier this year,
Kasukuwere brokered a deal which saw platinum producer Zimplats agree to
hand over a 51 per cent stake in its company, though the exact terms of the
agreement are still being worked out.
Shortly afterwards, plans were
announced to start a take-over of Standard Chartered bank. However, Gideon
Gono, the governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, denounced the idea,
warning that destabilising a large financial institution would have "serious
systemic consequences".
The criticism came from an unexpected source, as
Gono has been seen at times as Mugabe's sergeant-at-arms and is widely
blamed for being one of the principle players behind Zimbabwe's runaway
hyper inflation, which devastated the economy until the local currency was
scrapped in 2009 in favour of the US dollar and the South African
rand.
Kasukuwere, who is convinced he will retain his office after the
elections, is unflinching and says he will move ahead and demand stakes in
banks this year.
"Progress is underway and we will intensify this
programme after the election."
The minister says the July 31 vote is
fundamentally a question about indigenisation.
"It is a choice of
allowing for white domination or black control and moving forward."
CHENGETAI ZVAUYA, PARLIAMENTARY EDITOR • 30 JULY 2013
8:11AM
HARARE - Mbare residents besieged the Rowan Martin office last
weekend demanding that the Harare City Council implement a ministerial
directive to write-off water bills.
Hundreds besieged the offices
demanding to know when their bills will be slashed after noting that they
have not yet been written off as directed by Ignatius Chombo, the minister
of Local Government and Urban Council.
Police had to be called in to
maintain peace and order.
Harare City Council is owed over $400 million
in unpaid dues by the residents.
Muchadeyi Masunda, Harare mayor said
Chombo’s directive was illegal.
He said council was yet to receive the
directive to write-off the debt, warning the decree had disastrous
consequences to the operations of the council.
“I gather there are
some misguided and overzealous loose cannons who were picketing at the
Harare City Council revenue collection centres at Rowan Martin Building, Old
Mutual House and district offices of certain high density areas dissuading
bonafide ratepayers from paying their dues,” Masunda said.
“The
police should arrest the individuals concerned and let the law take its
course against them.” He said Chombo’s directive was irrational.
“The
long and short of it all is that the livelihoods of a hub of 4,5 million
within greater Harare will be put at grave risk if Chombo’s directive is not
swiftly nipped in the bud,” said Masunda.
“The concerned residents should
be told not waste their time and breath as Chombo’s directive does not have
locus standi to issue the purported directive as Section 303 of the Urban
Councils Act does not empower him to do so.
“The prerogative to do
so solely belongs to a duly constituted city council and no one else,
including president Robert Mugabe, Prime Morgan Tsvangirai or Chombo. The
purported directive is not only unlawful but also grossly unreasonable and
irrational.”
During the presidential campaign rally, Mugabe has been
using Chombo’s directive as one of the key talking points in his address to
the electorate in a move widely viewed as vote buying.
By Tererai
Karimakwenda SW Radio Africa 30 July 2013
With less than a day
before Zimbabwe’s crucial elections, the country’s two major mobile service
providers have still not resolved a standoff over licensing. that has left
their customers unable to connect to each other.
Last week the largest
mobile phone provider, Econet Wireless, which has more than 8 million
subscribers, severed its mobile interconnection with the second largest
operator Telecel. The company said Telecel had not yet renewed its operating
license and they were obligated by law to sever ties with
them.
“Telecel is not a holder of a valid telecommunications license
issued in terms of section 37 of the act. Econet Wireless does not have any
legal or moral obligation to interconnect with an unlicensed operator. In
fact, we have a duty to disconnect such an operator,” Econet reportedly
said.
The standoff means that millions of Zimbabweans using these
different services cannot connect to each other until the situation is
resolved. Many have questioned the timing of this move by Econet, given that
a crucial election was just days away when connections were
severed.
The country’s regulating authority, POTRAZ, has simply said they
referred the matter to the Ministry of Transport, Communications, which has
also not made any attempt to resolve the situation.
Observers have
strongly criticized both service providers for allowing voters to be
deprived of an important communication service ahead of the Wednesday
poll.
In addition, the standoff comes on the heels of a recent block to
bulk email service by POTRAZ, adding to concerns that the Mugabe regime may
be sabotaging communications as part of a plot to rig the election and
tamper with results.
Zim Election - One day to go Regional reports from HZ
Buhera West
Ward
14
On the
27th of July 2013, Deputy Police Commissioner Oliver Mandipaka who is
also the ZANU-PF aspiring Member of Parliament candidate for Buhera West, forced
villagers to attend his rally which was held at Marume Primary School. ZANU-PF
youths were moving around the area singing revolutionary songs and forced all
shops to close at Murambinda growth point. During his address, Mandipaka told
the gathering that MDC-T won the 2008 elections but ZANU-PF managed to take
over. He also went on to say that the outcome of the 2013 election will be no
different. He further highlighted that there is a current recruitment and
training process of police and soldiers who will beat up people if MDC- T wins
the election.
Buhera South
Ward
19
On the
26th of July 2013, a group of ZANU-PF supporters led by headsman
Edmore Kowanai, a soldier, Peter Nendanga and a war veteran, Samido Dominic
forced villagers to attend their party meeting. The meeting was addressed by war
veteran Joseph Chinotimba who stated that on the 31st of July, all
well known MDC- T supporters should have their hands bandaged so that they are
assisted to vote by ZANU-PF supporters.
Harare
South
On the
27th of July, a pro ZANU- PF soldier identified as Brian who resides
at Hopley Farm assaulted Roddie Jumbo for wearing MDC- T regalia. The incident
occurred at Anthony’s bar where Jumbo is employed as a bar
tender.
Harare
South
On the
25th of July 2013, a group of ZANU-PF supporters led by Webster Shamu
abducted William Kapuya the MDC- T affiliated Chairperson for Southlea Park.
Kapuya was then rescued at Mbudzi roundabout by other MDC- T activists. The
matter was reported at Waterfalls Police Station and action is yet to be
taken.
Bindura
South
Ward
10
On the
18th of July 2013, an MDC-T supporter identified as Bonde Mapondera
was threatened by a ZANU-PF activist identified as Finias Chimbwishu. Chimbwishu
told Mapondera that if MDC-T wins the coming election, ZANU-PF supporters will
kill Bonde Mapondera and his family then destroy his property. The case was
reported to the police and nothing has been done yet.
Ward
10
On the
21st of July 2013, a ZANU PF supporter identified as Chirenda
threatened an MDC-T supporter Collin Mhondiwa. He stated that ZANU- PF
supporters will evict Mhondiwa from his Salvation Army residence if he does not
join ZANU- PF before the 31st of July.
Ward
13
On the
18th of July 2013, a ZANU-PF supporter identified as Pozit Muchenje
threatened teachers at Murembe Secondary School. He told them that they will
lose their jobs if ZANU-PF loses the coming election.
Ward
13
On the
26th of July 2013, a ZANU PF supporter identified as Shingi Masawi
was seen tearing down MDC T posters in the area.
Mudzi North
Ward
9
On the
28th of July 2013, a group of ZANU-PF activists led by John Karonga
forced people to attend a meeting at villagehead Chatima's homestead. At the
meeting, 48 MDC-T activists were each assigned a ZANU-PF supporter who is
supposed to assist them to vote on 31 July. This is despite the fact that they
are not physically challenged. The matter was reported to Nyamapanda police
station and nothing has been done yet.
Mutoko South
Ward 27, 28
and 29
On the
28th of July 2013, a group of ZANU-PF supporters led by war veterans
identified as Mwale, Matamba, Patrick Kanovheti and the district chairperson
Smart Kazingizi forced people to attend meetings held at Chitangazuva Business
Centre, Nyamuvhivhi Primary School and Janhi Business Centre. At the meeting,
people's names were taken down in the order that they are expected to go and
vote on 31July. Each person was told the specific polling station
that they are expected to vote.
Hurungwe
North
Ward
7
On the
28th of July 2013, a group of soldiers threatened to kill an MDC-T
activist identified as Passmore Mugera. This was after they had seen him putting
up MDC-T posters. The victim later fled from his home due to increasing threats.
The matter was reported at Hurungwe police station and nothing has been done
yet.
Gokwe
Centre
Ward
1
A group of
ZANU-PF activists are carrying out door to door campaigns where they are
demanding national IDs from MDC-T activists. They are also threatening people
that all those who attempt to vote for MDC-T will be monitored by cameras which
will be installed in the voting booths.
Gokwe
Ward
12
A ZEC election
official identified as Auxilia Nyamusoko was threatened by a group of ZANU-PF
youth yesterday 28 July. They said that if she allows MDC-T activists to vote,
they will beat her after the election.
Murehwa
West
Ward
11
On the
28th of July 2013, a ZANU-PF activist identified as Leonard Mandaza
waved a gun and threatened to kill Owen Songore. Songore is the driver of
aspiring MDC-T candidate, Lardy Ndoro. The threat came after Songore ferried
MDC-T activists who were campaigning in the ward.
Ward
13
3 ZANU-PF
activists identified as Richard Chirenda, Edward Karonga and Edmore Mhaka
threatened Border Mudengezi who is an MDC-T activist yesterday 28 July with
death if ZANU-PF loses the election.
Ward
14
At Chikwati
Business Centre, a ZANU-PF candidate identified as Israel Mariki threatened
Sharon Mushore. Mariki gave Ms Mushore 2 hours to pull down the MDC-T posters
that were in her shop or else he would beat her.
Guruve
South
Ward 10, 11
and 12
On the
28th of July 2013, five Headmen identified as Hozo Pointer, Charles
Mukodzani, John Mupinyuri, Edward Mutombo and Mangiton Chigariwa forced
villagers to attend political meetings in ward 10, 11 and 12. At the meetings,
people were told the order in which they will go and vote so that they can trace
those who would have voted for MDC-T. They claimed that the tracing would be
done using the serial numbers on the ballot papers.
Buhera South
Ward
33
On the
28th of July 2013, a Headman identified as Christopher Chinyati was
carrying out door to door campaigns threatening people. He said that there will
be war in Zimbabwe if ZANU-PF loses the coming election.
Ward
33
On the
28th of July 2013, two ZANU-PF youths identified as Jefta Masikati
and Tafi Mudirire of Chinyamatikiti village were intimidating people. They said
that the new polling station in the ward will be used for tracing the number of
people who support MDC-T. The identified MDC-T activists will then be beaten up
after elections.
Mutare
West
Ward
20
An MDC-T
aspiring Member of Parliament candidate, Shoshiwa Mudiwa was arrested on
Saturday 27 July for holding a rally at Mafararikwa Primary School. Police
officers from Bambazonke Police Station alleged that they had not been given
prior notification of the rally but Mr Mudiwa argues that he had notified the
police prior to the meeting. The victim was later transferred to Mutare Police
station after being detained from 11am to 5pm.
Bindura South
Ward
12
On the
28th of July 2013, Headman Abraham Mhembere assaulted 3 women,
Tamburayi Jimu and her two friends. They were assaulted for wearing MDC-T
regalia. The matter was reported to Bindura Police station but no arrests have
been made yet.
Zaka
West
Ward
24
A group of
Headmen led by a war veteran identified as Lovemore Mutandwa held a public
meeting in ward 24 where people were told the order in which they would vote.
Mutandwa said this will ensure that they can trace those who will vote for
MDC-T.
Zvishavane
Bayakaya
Ward
On the
28th of July 2013, Chief Mafala called for a public meeting where he
introduced John Honder an aspiring ZANU-PF Member of Parliament candidate for
Zvishavane Ngezi constituency. After the introductions, the MDC-T activists left
the meeting citing that they cannot attend a ZANU-PF meeting. ZANU-PF youths
followed them to Ndimaneni Business Centre where they clashed and started
fighting each other. Later that evening, 8 ZANU-PF youths including Mafios
Dhlamini, Josephat Dhlamini, Bernard Dhlamini, George Dhlamini and two
unidentified men who claimed to be policemen went to houses of Charumbira,
Dhlamini, Matse, Mpofu and Dlodlo (who are MDC supporters) in Ndimaneni village
and assaulted everyone present. The victims fled to a nearby forest where they
spent the night. The matter was reported to Zvishavane police station and
investigations are still underway. The victims have since sought alternative
shelter somewhere in Zvishavane.
Mberengwa
East
Ward 5 On the evening of the 27th of July 2013, MDC-T ward
organising secretary Godfrey Mudzivakwi had his home burnt by unknown
assailants. His family lost property which includes important documents such as
national IDs, birth certificates and academic certificates. The matter was
reported to the police who swiftly responded and are carrying out
investigations. Heal Zimbabwe Trust has also deployed people to assist the
victim.
There is,
perhaps, only one question that really matters in Zimbabwe this week, as the
country finally tries to move beyond the violent, disrupted elections of 2008,
and the five years' worth of tortuous negotiations and snarling political
stalemate that followed.
Will the loser accept
the result?
The answer - despite
years of international mediation, an economy no longer in free-fall, a new
constitution and an overwhelming public appetite for political change - appears
to be veering dangerously towards a resounding "no".
In one corner, the
Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, has already publically condemned this
Wednesday's vote as "a sham", citing numerous irregularities, from an alarmingly
flawed electoral roll to the enduring political bias in the security services
and state media.
In the other corner,
President Robert Mugabe, who calls this a "do-or-die" election and has recently
threatened to have his main challenger arrested, is surrounded by hardliners who
have publically stated that they would "not accept" a victory by the "Western
puppet" Mr Tsvangirai under any circumstances.
The African Union
election monitors are being led by former Nigerian President Olusegun
Obasanjo
So where do we go from
here?
The optimists note the
relative lack of violence in the run up to this election.
They point to the
provisions of the new constitution and the large body of local observers
determined to monitor the polling stations closely.
And they conclude that,
for all the widely acknowledged irregularities, it remains possible for
Zimbabwe's elections to be - if not exactly free and fair - then at least
broadly representative of the public's will.
The pessimists point to
an enduring climate of fear in a country where none of those responsible for the
violence of 2008 have been brought to justice.
They worry about
Zanu-PF's formidable reputation for getting its own way at any
cost.
And they share a
growing suspicion that Zimbabwe's African neighbours - taking primary
international responsibility for monitoring these elections after Western
observers were barred - are more interested in avoiding another political
deadlock than in blowing the whistle on Mr Mugabe and his supporters for trying
to steal another election.
Whichever way you look
at it, though, these next few days - and if it goes to a second round, these
next few weeks - are likely to be rather tense in
Zimbabwe.
Campaign achievements
There are many powerful
figures on both sides of the steep political divide who have a great deal more
than their jobs to lose.
But while the future
may be uncertain, it is worth taking a little time to stand back and acknowledge
President Mugabe's present achievements on the campaign trail.
Zanu-PF's platform of
indigenisation has broad appeal among his supporters
You might have thought
that an 89-year-old, at the head of a divided party, in a nation that is only
slowly emerging from one of the most spectacular economic collapses of modern
history, would have hung up his coat and quietly slipped into
retirement.
Instead, Mr Mugabe has
not only stayed in the race, but - in as much as one can tell from various
frustratingly inconclusive opinion polls - in the running.
His liberation-struggle
credentials remain crucial, but they have been carefully woven into a clear,
forcefully propagated manifesto - of indigenisation, nationalisation, and the
lifting of Western sanctions - that depends heavily on the notion of a country
still at war against "Western colonialism" 33 years after
independence.
That notion - and the
economic claims that underline it - may strike many as a little jaded, to put it
mildly. But it is a message that Zanu-PF has campaigned on with conviction and
energy.
Besides, Mr Mugabe has
other advantages - from the furiously loyal state media and security services,
to the erratic behaviour of his main rival, Mr
Tsvangirai.
Scandals
The last few years have
not been easy ones for the former union leader.
He was brutally beaten
during the 2008 campaign, and lost his wife in a road accident shortly after
joining Mr Mugabe in a tense power-sharing government.
But, as Zanu-PF must
surely have anticipated, the years in power have taken their toll on Mr
Tsvangirai's image as a heroic outsider.
The MDC may benefit from
Zimbabweans' desire for change
Mr Tsvangirai's
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has been tainted by allegations of
corruption, and his haphazard search for a new wife has produced one damaging
sex scandal after another.
Just as importantly, Mr
Tsvangirai's grand talk of reconciliation and nation building has been
undermined by his party's failure to secure alliances and to extract meaningful
reforms in parliament.
And yet, if the MDC has
not been as resolute or successful as some had hoped, they have real
achievements to point to - particularly in the economy and in education - within
an almost unworkably obstructive unity government; and they may yet benefit from
the overwhelming desire for change that now grips an increasingly urbanised,
young population in Zimbabwe.
A big turnout could
swamp the perceived pro-Zanu-PF bias in the controversial electoral
roll.
Ultimately, for all the
genuine concern about rigging and intimidation, this election could yet hinge on
the unknown questions that Zimbabweans ask themselves in the privacy of the
voting booth.
Frustratingly, I will
not be there to cover the election. Although some of my BBC colleagues have been
accredited, Zanu-PF officials have rejected my application, at least for now,
citing my past reporting.
Derek Matyszak of theResearch and Advocacy Unit (RAU)has
written this article exploring the electoral law relating to the tabulation and
delcaration of results. He argues that rather than clrifying things, the changes
in the law are 'are ill-conceived in part and contains numerous omissions and
contradictions' . Download the paper in PDF format from
this link.
After the poll in the elections of the
29thMarch, 2008, the
populace eagerly awaited the result of the crucial presidential election.
Although the Electoral Act[1]then did not stipulate
any period within which the results had to be released, the Act did require that
each step of the tabulation process was to be completed expeditiously, deploying
phrases and words such as “immediately thereafter”, “without delay” and
“forthwith”.[2]Advancing various excuses believed by few,
these provisions were ignored by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, which took a
full 33 days to release the result. Many believed that the intervening period
was used to doctor the results, to bring the total votes of MDC-T President,
Morgan Tsvangirai, below the 50% plus one vote threshold required to avoid a
run-off poll. Ignoring the time limits set in the Electoral Act (21 days), ZEC
set the poll for a further two months hence. The 28thJune 2008 poll date allowed sufficient time
for the electorate to be cowed in a wave of endemic violence of such brutality
that Tsvangirai was compelled to withdraw from the poll. There was no
possibility of the result being credible, and it was
not.
With the wisdom gleaned from this experience, there was
an attempt to reconsider, streamline, refine and tighten the law relating to the
tabulation and declaration of results. However, the precipitous proclamation of
the election dates[3]left the attempts half baked. The amendments
to Electoral Act and Electoral Regulations were drawn in haste without proper
consideration and care. As a result, the very area of the legislation it was
sought to improve, in fact became further confused due to the incomplete
drafting process. The legislation thus is ill-conceived in part and contains
numerous omissions and contradictions pertaining to process of tabulation and
the declaration of the result of the all important presidential
election.
In the category of the ill-conceived falls an amendment
to the Electoral Act which requires that the result of the presidential
election[4]must be released within
five days.[5]The provision is
meaningless, if not worse than useless[6]- though it may provide
a false sense of security for some. If ZEC claims to encounter logistical
difficulties and the result is not announced within five days as required,
recourse to the courts will inevitably simply result in a ruling that the
Commission declare the results “as soon as possible” – which is what the law
more sensibly required before the amendment anyway. And ZEC itself may apply to
the Electoral Court for the five day period to be extended,[7]a request which is unlikely to be denied
unless it can be clearly shown that the delay is mala
fides.
The validity of these amendments to electoral law is open to
question. Section 157(1) of the Constitution provides that:
An Act of Parliament must provide for the conduct of elections and
referendums to which this Constitution applies
The purported amendments to the Electoral Regulations
were made by the ZEC, claiming the power under Section 192[8]of the Electoral Act to
do so, and not by an Act of Parliament. Similarly, the purported amendments to
the Electoral Act were made, not by an Act of Parliament, but by Presidential
Regulations. Furthermore, the Regulations state that they are made under the
Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act.[9]Yet that Act itself stipulates that
Regulations made in terms of the Act may not provide:
for any other matter or thing which the Constitution
requires to be provided for by, rather than terms of, an Act[10]
Section 157(5) of the Constitution also provides
that:
After an election has been called, no change to the Electoral Law
or to any other law relating to elections has effect for the purpose of that
election
The apparent changes to the Electoral Act were made in
terms of S.I. 85 of 2013, numerically ahead of the proclamation of the election
date under S.I. 86 of 2013. The apparent changes to the Electoral Regulations
were made under S.I. 87 of 2013. However, they were all gazetted on the same
day, the 13thJune, 2013 and
thus, under the Interpretation Act,[11]are all deemed to have come into operation
simultaneously.
The amendments to the Electoral Regulations seek to
clarify the collation of returns and the aggregation of the results, and amends
the forms used for the entries in this regard so as to more closely reflect the
process. Unfortunately the procedure to be adopted is spread between the
Electoral Regulations and the Electoral Act and several provisions detailing the
process are incoherent and obscure.[12]
The count at polling station level is entered on a
“V.11” form, (the polling station return) which is then forwarded to the ward
tabulation centre. The ward elections officer completes the ward V.11 form
aggregating the results from each polling station return (there will be an
average of about five per ward), adding in any postal and special votes, and
forwards the ward return with the aggregated figures to the constituency
election officer. The constituency election officer aggregates the ward returns
(there will be an average of about 9 per constituency) and declares the winner
of the National Assembly seat.[13]He or she then forwards
the constituency returns to the provincial command centre. The provincial
elections officer aggregates the constituency returns (the constituencies per
province vary widely in number from 29 in Harare to 12 in Bulawayo), declares
candidates elected as a result of the poll in accordance with the system of
proportional representation and party lists. The provincial returns are then
forwarded to the National Command Centre. At each step in the process the
candidates, their election agents and observers are given copies of the returns
and the returns are posted outside the polling station or relevant
centre.[14]A separate return must be compiled for each election, - Local
Authority, National Assembly and Presidential.[15]
Section 37C(4), in addition, provides that copies of polling
station returns in relation to the Presidential and National Assembly gathered
at the ward centres, and copies of the presidential constituency returns
gathered at provincial command centres, must also be sentdirectly to the
National Command Centre.
If this were all the legislation provided in this regard it would
be reasonably clear. Unfortunately it is not. The provisions outlined imply that
the Presidential result will be determined at the national command centre by
aggregating the totals on the ten provincial returns, one from each province,
for each of the five candidates. This conclusion is, however, gainsaid by both
section 110(3) and section 37C(4)(f)(ii), which set out entirely different
procedures for the tabulation of the presidential result.
In terms of section 110(3) the constituency elections officer is
to prepare the presidential return immediately:
after the number of votes received by each candidate as shown
ineach
polling-stationreturn has
been added together in terms of section 65(3)(i) and the resulting figure added
to the number of postal votes received by each
candidate.
This process of tabulation is thus founded upon “section 65(3)(i).
There is no such section in the Act, and it is difficult to determine what is
intended as the correct cross reference. More importantly, this tabulation
process contradicts the process outlined previously, as set out in section
37C(4)(c)(i) that the constituency elections officer aggregates the ward returns
and not the polling station results.
Then after aggregating the polling station returns, rather than
transmitting the presidential constituency return to the Provincial Command
Centre for aggregation with others and onward transmission, as the Act earlier
stipulates in section 37C(4), section 110(3)(ii) requires the return to be
transmitted to the Chief Elections Officer. The Chief Elections Officers is then
to add the totals of the 210 constituency returns to determine the result of the
presidential poll. The act thus contains two contradictory and incompatible
processes for tabulating and determining the presidential
result.
Further complicating matters is that is also uncertain as to when
and how the result is to be declared. There are two kinds of difficulty
here.
Firstly, it is unclear whether a candidate must have a
majority of 50% plus one vote of thetotalvotes cast, or 50% plus one vote of the
totalvalidvotes cast. In March 2008, 1.58% of the
presidential poll, or 39 975 votes, consisted of spoiled ballots. In an
extremely tight contest whether the percentage is calculated as a percentage of
the total votes cast or only total valid votes cast, could be
determining.[16]In 2008 only valid
votes were counted to determine the result, but that is because section 110(3)
specifically required an outright winner to receive “a majority of the total
number ofvalidvotes cast”.[17]The equivalent provision (section
110(3(f)(iii)) in the “amended” Act stipulates that an outright winner must
simply receive “more than half the number of votes”. Matters are not
helped in that the very next paragraph, section 110(3)(g), provides that, where
no candidate has received more than half the votes and a run-off election is
required, the run-off shall be contested by“only the two candidates who received
the highest and next highest numbers ofvalidvotes”. It is arguable that since this
section, and section 110(3) under the old Act, specifically refer to “valid
votes cast”, the omission to state that the 50% plus one vote must be fromvalidvotes cast in the current
provision is deliberate and that the calculation must thus be based upon total
votes cast. It is equally probable that in the haste to pass the amendment,
which sought to clarify the wording to make it clear that an absolute majority
is required, the word “valid” was inadvertently omitted. It would be wise for
ZEC to let the electorate know in advance of the poll how it intends to approach
this issue.
Secondly, section 110(3)(f)(i) provides that after the
Chief Elections officer has aggregated the 210 presidential constituency
returns, the Chair of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission must “forthwith” declare
the result.[18]This requirement does not sit well with
section 37C(4)(f)(ii) which provides that:
provincial returns
for the presidential election gathered from every provincial command centre
shall be transmitted to the National Command Centre, where the provincial
returns shall be collated to obtain theinitial
resultsof the presidential election and thefinal result[19]of the presidential election shall, after
reconciling the provincial returns with the polling station returns and
presidential constituency returns ...be reflected in a return that distinctly
reflects number of votes cast for each presidential candidate at everpolling station, ward
centre,[20]presidential
constituency centre and provincial command centre.
This provision thus requires that the
National Command centre must audit the provincial returns to ensure that the
numbers thereon reconcile with the numbers on the polling station returns and
returns at all other levels sent directly to the National Command Centre, as
indicated above, and that it prepares a spread sheet reflecting the reconciled
results at all levels. While this “return” will be very useful in ensuring that
no manipulation or change of results has occurs in the transmission process
between the various centres or to expose it if it has, it unfortunately blurs
the question of when the result is to be declared.
This provision may be interpreted[21]to imply that the
presidential result cannot be declared until the reconciliation has been done.
Such an interpretation directly contradicts the requirement of section
110(3)(f)(i) that the result is to be declared “forthwith” after the
constituency returns have been aggregated. So when is the result of the
presidential election to be declared? After the presidential constituency
returns have been aggregated by the Chief Elections Officer?[22]; or after the aggregation of the
presidential provincial returns reveal the “initial” results? Or after the
“final result” has been audited and reflected in the required spread sheet
return?
The lack of clarity in regard to this crucial stage in
the procedure of the presidential election is unwise. By the time the results in
the presidential election have been aggregated at a constituency level, a small
amount of arithmetic will make it apparent which candidate has garnered the most
votes. While the winning candidate may demand that his[23]victory is declared “forthwith”, as
section 110(3)(f)(i) requires, the disappointed candidate or candidates may
insist that the declaration is not made until the “final” result is known after
reconciling the polling station and other returns at the National Command
Centre.
One needs to bear in mind that the election officer at
each polling station and centre will have to make multiple copies of the returns
in each election for distribution, all of which, certainly in the rural areas,
in the absence of photocopiers, will need to be done by hand or using carbon
paper with frequently indistinct results. There will be about 9 670 polling
stations. With five candidates there will be 48 350 polling station entries on
the spread sheet return, to match the data on 1 958 ward returns (9 790
entries), 210 constituency returns (1050 entries) and 10 provincial returns (50
entries). There is some doubt as to whether ZEC has had sufficient time to train
its staff and to acquire the necessary physical
infrastructure.[24]In sum, there is ample room for error and
disputes which ZEC may final intractable and impossible to resolve, and
certainly not within the stipulated five days. The National Command Centre may
become a black hole into which the results from the Provincial Command Centre
are absorbed never again to emerge - although the electorate will have a very
good idea as to who won the poll from the running tallies. The resultant
acrimony could cause the unpleasant events following of the March 2008 poll to
be repeated.
It is thus suggested that ZEC urgently issue a clarifying
statement stating exactly the procedure to be followed to determine the result
of the presidential election, which figures will be used in this regard, whether
the calculation will be based upon valid or total votes cast, and most
importantly, when and at what stage of the tabulation, the declaration of the
result will be made.
[8]Section 192 (1) of the Act provides:The Commission may by regulation prescribe all matters
which by this Act are required or permitted to be prescribed or which, in its
opinion, are necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving
effect to this Act
[11]Section 20 of the Interpretation Act Chapter
01:01as read with the proviso, and see Section 192(6) of the Electoral Act
providing that Regulations made by ZEC come into effect after approval by the
Minister of Justice and gazetting.
[12]Section 10 of the Regulations and sections
37C, 64 , 65, 65A and 65B of the Act.
[14]It is also unhelpful that section 64
detailing this process refers to the polling station return (singular),when
there are clearly to be three returns, one for each election at polling station
level, and other sections dealing with the procedure thus refers
“returns”.
[16]It would have reduced Tsvangirai’s
percentage by 0.75%.
[17]It was clear from the section which followed
that majority here meant an absolute majority, that is more than half the votes,
and not, where there are more than two candidates, merely the most
votes.
[19]It is unclear why at first results (plural)
is referred to and then “result” singular immediately thereafter. “Results”
might be held to refer to the final tallies of the five candidates and result
may mean whether and who a person is declared elected as president, or whether a
run-off must take place on account of no person having received an absolute
majority.
[20]There does not appear to a requirement,
unlike the polling station and other returns, that the presidential ward returns
are copied to the National Command Centre.
[21]On asking several lawyers for their
interpretation of this section, this is the one I have been given by
each.
[22]Recall that it is not even clear if this
aggregation should be done, as the process is contradicted by the process set
out in section 37C(4) of the Act.
A few days ago I was readingZimbabwe Situationand came across an article which suggested
that one the big battles in Zimbabwe was the battle between the simple truth and
the aggressive lie.
I can't find the article now again, but those words struck me as a
very clear summary of the origins of my stress levels and exhaustion. I've lost
track of the many things have driven my blood pressure up through these
elections. It has been incredible, and we haven't even proceeded to voting and -
god forbid - the release of results yet.
If I had to say what has galled me the most, it would probably be
the total disregard for the laws enshrined in our new constitution. Its not just
about the principle that the law should be sacrosanct: it is also total waste of
an unbelievable amount of money that went into the so-called 'people-driven
process', and the irritation of watching the 'people-driven process' descend
into yet another negotiated compromise. Followed by us all voting in a
referendum for a law that all three parties apparently supported. All that for
what? Just to bring us back full circle to the rule of law being totally
ignored. What a waste of time and money, and what a lie to peddle to the
people.
So the words 'simple truth' and 'aggressive lie' hit home. As
Zimbabweans, we live and breathe the 'simple truth'. What's going on in Zimbabwe
is as clear and as obvious as the noses on our own faces. The aggressive lie
still never fails to take my breath away. The lie that the voters' roll is
credible and valid when it manifestly is not. The lie that due processes are
being followed properly when, for example, political parties are not given
copies of the voters' roll. The inherent double-standards and lies when some are
arrested for taking down posters, but Zanu PF can do the same with impunity. Or
the partisan utterances by army and police chiefs, who are legally bound to be
non-partisan, but do and say what they want anyway.
How, when the truth is simple and blindingly publically obvious,
can anyone with any sense of integrity even begin to say these things are
OK?
I've come to see the Mugabe as 'The Emperor' and the
new constitution as his 'new clothes'. There he is, parading before the world
wrapped in his fabricated new clothes, with words like justice, and democracy
hanging off his arms like jewels. But Zimbabweans, just like the people inHans Christian Andersen's short
story, can quite plainly see he is stark
naked. But we will most likely be expected - if the AU and SADC go the way they
did in 2005 - to applaud and celebrate his finery. In Andersen's story, the
people who did not go along with the myth of the emperor's new clothes were told
they could not see the clothes because they were stupid. So they pretended. With
Zimbabweans, we are told we are enemies and traitors if we do not
cooperate.
But the lie that brings the most pressure on the Zimbabwean
psyche, for me, is the one when outside observers - for reasons I fail to
understand - go along with the lie and declare it the truth and so entrench the
insanity of our existences. How can Zimbabweans forge a future in a land where a
select powerful few say our existence is one thing, when every fibre of our
being says the opposite?
This constant never-ending battle between the simple truth and the
aggressive lie is a special kind of madness. What is real, is rendered surreal
constantly. And having to live within surreality makes us all a little bit mad.
Maybe that's why, last night, when the voters' roll had still not been released
to parties, I felt as if I wanted to let it all out and run screaming down the
street in frustration. I wanted to roll in the grass, tear at my hair and howl
at the moon to release the pressure that comes with the incredible, outrageous,
infuriating, obnoxious lie of it all.
That man, his party and all their lies is making me
crazy!
Zimbabwe should ignore David Smith and Miles Tendi
By Clifford Chitupa
Mashiri 30th July 2013
As the country finds itself forced into elections
without reforms by a tyrant who is desperate for legitimacy to visit London,
Zimbabweans should vote for change tomorrow and ignore David Smith’s
sanitisation of Mugabe’s dictatorship.
In an opinion piece
regurgitated by state-owned The Herald newspaper today from the Guardian ,
David Smith draws on Miles Tendi to project a false picture of a Mugabe who
is rebounding despite him relying on SUV trucks where he used to walk at
rallies greeting his supporters.
It is sad that some western journalists
risk their credibility like some election observers who have already chosen
to become praise singers of a human rights abuser who only won one free and
fair election in 33 years.
It is unfortunate that despite being on the
spot in Harare, David Smith still cannot see what independent bodies like
International Crisis Group are seeing as lack of credibility of the poll
with a voters roll in a shambles; with an unreformed security sector; and an
unreformed media sector to say only a few.
Whereas , David Smith says
‘running for election for the seventh time, he is widely tipped to beat his
rival Morgan Tsvangirai in Wednesday’s poll – and to be ushered back into
respectability by a pragmatic west, ” he fails to recognise that the playing
field is far from even despite being closer to where all this is happening
in Zimbabwe. Somehow, David Smith has forgotten about what free and fair
elections mean.
If the pragmatic west is so keen on ushering Mugabe the
so-called respectability, why should it wait for the harmonised rigging
phase to get under way as if it’s not convinced by the cosmetic voter
registration coupled with the Special Vote debacle when ZEC failed to
deliver a credible service beyond a ballot on a prayer?
Why should
the west await election results when David Smith has already given a thumbs
-up to an 89 year old candidate something that has never happened in the
west itself?
Why wait for poll results when ZEC has printed 8 million
ballot papers for 6 million voters; minus 2 million unregistered young
voters; plus 40,000 special voters granted special leave to cast their votes
despite The Electoral Act not providing for double voting?
Why should
the west wait for long queues to form around Zimbabwe for elections that
were ordered by Mugabe like Singapore noodles allegedly using proceeds from
Marange diamonds for a budget of US$3 billion while the country’s Treasury
is penniless?
David Smith writes that Blessing Miles Tendi said a rally
with members of an apostolic sect “astounded” him the most. “He humbled
himself to be one of them. He tried to sit on the earth with them but they
gave him a chair’.
While a sign of respect for visitors, but Grace Mugabe
sat on the earth albeit it looks like they breached church protocol since
Mugabe has been criticised for wearing the Apostolic garb until he converts
to the sect’s faith. Should have read an incisive opinion piece by the son
of Apostolic Marange in The Zimbabwean.
Further, did Mugabe fear
losing votes by not speaking out against child marriages at the service
attended by political analyst Blessing Miles Tendi?
Furthermore, why
should the west wait for sham elections to invite Mugabe to London when it’s
only Zanu-pf that has the voters roll less than 24 hours to polling contrary
to the provisions of the Electoral Act?
And for what ever ZEC has
supplied at the last minute as a voters’ roll, it is in hard copy format
making it impossible for independent verification and analysis unlike if it
were electronic as provided for by the Electoral Act amid reports of double
if not 4 duplicate rolls set for rigging polls tomorrow.
Bill Watch 33/2013 of 29th July [Possible Implications ofConstitutional Court Giving Special Voters a SecondOpportunity to Vote]
BILL
WATCH 33/2013
[29th July 2013]
Possible
Implications of Constitutional Court Giving Special Voters a Second Opportunity
to Vote
Bill
Watch 31/2013 of 25th July covered the special voting debacle and Bill Watch
32/2013 of 26th July covered the Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission’s
attempt to redress this by applying to the Constitutional Court for an order to
permit special voters another opportunity to vote with other voters on the
General Elections polling day of 31st July.This Bill Watch will cover the Constitutional Court response to ZEC’s
urgent application.
The
Hearing
The
hearing took place on Friday 26th July.Only the applicants [ZEC and its chairperson Justice Makarau] and
MDC-T, one of the 20 respondents cited by
the applicants [see Bill Watch 32/2013 for full list], were legally represented in court on
Friday.The hearing was
brief.
[Note:
some of the smaller political parties listed as respondents had not been served
with copies of ZEC’s application as they should have been. The court condoned
ZEC’s failure to serve copies of its application on these respondents on the
basis that this had been impossible in the time available because physical
addresses were not readily available!]
ZEC’s
lawyer presented the applicants’ case, stressing that the officers concerned
were constitutionally entitled to vote and that to apply the Electoral Act
provision preventing them from voting on 31st July would disenfranchise them
because of delays they did not cause.In
these circumstances they should not be denied their constitutional right to vote
by the application of a provision in an Act which they submtted must give way to
the provision in the Constitution giving all citizens over 18 the right to
vote.
MDC-T’s
lawyer opposed the application.He
argued that the entire special voting procedure had been flawed and should be
nullified, and he questioned ZEC’s capacity to implement the logistics of what
ZEC was proposing – i.e. a second chance for failed special voters – without the
risk of double voting and further chaos come 31st July.He referred to evidence, in an affidavit by
MDC-T deputy chairperson Morgan Komichi, of the discovery of special ballot
papers in a dustbin near the ZEC National Command Centre by persons unknown [see Postscript
at the end of this bulletin].
The
Constitutional Court’s Decision
The
court’s decision came after a brief adjournment following the conclusion of the
lawyers’ arguments.It granted ZEC’s
application and issued an order which is an amended version of the draft order
originally submitted by ZEC [see Bill Watch 32/2013].
The
court order is as follows: [Note:
explanations in brackets inserted by Veritas]:
“It
is hereby ordered that the first applicant [i.e.,
ZEC] takes all necessary steps to ensure that its officers [this refers to
ZEC electoral officials, temporary or permanent] and officers under
the command of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents [i.e. police,
prisons and defence forces personnel] authorised to cast ballots in
terms of section 81 of the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:13] who failed to cast their
ballots on 14th and 15th of July 2013, because of the unavailability of ballot
papers be allowed to cast their ballots on 31st July 2013.”
Comment:It must also be said that the order, even
with the amendment, is sufficiently loosely worded for different interpretations
to be put on it.The significance of the
words “because of the unavailability of the ballot papers” is not very
clear – do they mean that those for whom there were special ballot papers
available, but because of the queues [there were a limited number of special
voting centres] could not vote by the time the centre closed [although some,
contrary to the law, stayed open the following morning] should not have another
chance to vote this coming Wednesday.And how is ZEC going to distinguish them, as all it will have are its
lists of authorised special voters and ballot papers issued, and lists of ballot
papers not used?This is not the only
ambiguity in the court’s order [see below].
Where
will the reprieved voters vote?
Although
the order does not say where its beneficiaries may exercise their right to vote,
ZEC’s lawyer told the Constitutional Court that ZEC will only allow them to
vote in the ordinary way at polling stations in the wards in which they are
registered as voters.If their duties
take them elsewhere on the polling day, they will not be able to vote.
Comment:Presumably ZEC will stick to this assurance
because if, despite the obvious administrative difficulties, these votersare allowed to vote anywhere they could swing
the vote in critical close run constituencies where they are not
registered.Also, it would be
impossible, if they vote out of their own wards, to ensure that those not
entitled to a second chance do not vote – it is only in their own wards that the
necessary information will be available, because the voters rolls used in that
ward’s polling stations on 31st July must have the names of those who have been
given a special vote crossed out and marked “SV”.So ZEC will have had to ensure, before the voters rolls were delivered to the polling
stations, that those who actually did vote
remain crossed out and those that did not are restored.The question raised by MDC-T’s lawyer
remains: will ZEC really be able to prevent confusion and double voting at the
polling stations on polling day
How
many voters will benefit from the decision?
Does
this Constitutional Court decision mean that all or most of the claimed 26 160
disappointed special voters, mainly from the police force [Note the large number of police given the
special vote was queried by the MDC-T in a High Court application that was
dismissed by Judge-President Chiweshe] – butalso some from other uniformed force
members and ZEC officials –will in fact be able to cast their votes on 31st
July?This would only be possible if
their employers, the police and other uniformed force authorities and ZEC, were
to make special arrangements to allow them to do so, such as redeployment to
home constituencies or time off duty.This would cast into doubt the validity of their original applications
for special voting, which were granted on the basis that every one of them would
be out of his or her constituency on 31st July – every application to ZEC for a
special vote by a police officer or other uniformed force member had to be
accompanied by a certificate issued by or on behalf of his or her commanding
officer stating that on 31st July “the
applicant will be deployed to carry out security duties ... elsewhere than in
the constituency in which the applicant is registered to vote”
[Electoral Act, section 81C].
MDC-T
court application to nullify the special voting.The
MDC-T filed a Constitutional Court application on Friday 26th July to nullify
the whole of the special voting exercise conducted on July 14th and 15th.Their case is based on the concessions made
by ZEC, in the case seeking extension of the voting, that the special voting was
marred by technical and administrative flaws.The case will be heard at 2 pm on Tuesday 30th
July.
A
Contrast: Journalists’ Application for Early Vote Dismissed
Following
its decision on the ZEC application the Constitutional Court went on to consider
the application by two journalists and the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists [ZUJ]
asking that the journalists and all members of ZUJ be allowed to vote a day
early, on 30th July, if their assignments would take them out of constituency on
the 31st July.Again the constitutional
right to vote and the State’s duty to ensure an opportunity to vote for every
eligible citizen were invoked. ZEC opposed the application.
A
quick dismissalImmediately after hearing submissions from
the applicants’ lawyer, the court dismissed the application without calling on
ZEC’s lawyer to respond – a course only followed when a court considers a case
completely hopeless.It was literally “laughed out of court”, with the bench
pointing out that the court had recently dismissed applications for special
treatment from other groups not being catered for.
Reasons
for decision not givenAnnouncing the court’s unanimous decision,
the Chief Justice said that reasons for judgment would, if requested, be given
later.
Question
Arising
ZEC
and the Constitutional Court have promptly come up with a way to assist members
of the security forces to have a second chance to exercise their constitutional
right to vote on the basis that their inability to do so at the correct time was
not their fault, but was rather attributable to ZEC’s and therefore the State’s
failure to live up to their constitutional obligation to ensure they could vote
as laid down by the Electoral Act.
But,
what about all the others with cause for complaint?There are much larger numbers of other
Zimbabweans who can also justly claim that their right to vote in next
Wednesday’s election has been frustrated, not by any fault on their part, but by
the State’s failure – some would say, refusal – to give effect to its
constitutional obligation to ensurethatalleligiblecitizens
are registered as
voters and that everycitizenwhoiseligibletovotehasan opportunity to casta vote [new Constitution, section 155(2)].To reiterate the concern expressed in the
last Bill Watch this court order could be opening the flood gate for court cases
after the elections by:
·the
many individuals who were not given a realistic opportunity to register as
voters because of seriously inadequate coverage of the mobile voter registration
exercise that ended on 9th July.
·the
large numbers of so-called aliens, whose Zimbabwean citizenship by birth was
confirmed by the new Constitution, but who were subjected to even greater
difficulties when attempting, usually in vain, to get their citizenship status
recognised as a prelude to registering as voters.
·voters
who are in prison – the new Constitution gives voting rights to all
prisoners, but ZEC does not cater for them at all.
·many
others – workers in essential services, bed-ridden patients in hospital, etc
–also unable to vote because they simply cannot get to a polling station.Yet other countries manage to cater for such
people with postal voting, mobile polling stations and other
facilities.
·those
resident outside the country – who have a constitutional right to vote and to
the provision of facilities to do so – but have been told that postal vote
arrangements cannot be made for them to do so.
People
in all these categories may consider the scramble to accommodate the special
voters has favoured the privileged few while denying the vote to far larger
numbers of people at least as deserving of consideration.This may lead, not only to a flood of
litigation after the elections, but also to a denial of the legal and moral
legitimacy of the elections.
Credibility
of Elections at Stake
Many
Zimbabweans will believe that the special vote story shows that the
Constitutional Court’s decision in the Mawarire case, in which the court said
the elections must be completed by 31st July, was bound to be followed by a
rushed electoral process flawed by an insufficiently prepared ZEC and
infringements of constitutional rights and of the Electoral Act – a process, in
other words, running the risk of not producing results sufficiently credible to
enjoy general acceptance in Zimbabwe, the region and the international
community.And they will not have been
reassured by the AU Commission chairperson Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma’s statement on
Friday that the AU “is confident that ZEC
will be able to run a credible election”.
Postscript:
Fall-out from the Special Voting
Police
arrested MDC-T deputy chairperson Komichi early on Sunday 28th July.This followed his handing to ZEC’s Chief
Elections Officer on 25th July of special voter ballot papers, marked in favour
of MDC-T candidates and ZEC special voter envelopes, which he said had been
brought to him after being found in a dustbin at the ZEC National Command Centre
in Harare.In the Sunday newspapers ZEC
published a press statement headed “Complaint against Mr Morgan Komichi of
MDC-T”, registering its concerns about Mr Komichi’s handling of the matter,
including his opening of a tamper-proof ZEC special voter envelope and the
two-day delay in his going to ZEC.The
statement said ZEC, having investigated, was “clear that the ballots were not marked by
the voter” and ended: “The story
given to us by Mr Komichi is not credible and accordingly we have severe
reservations regarding the details be provided to the Commission.We have therefore handed over the matter to
the Police for investigation”.The
ZRP chief spokesperson said that as long as Mr Komichi continued refusing to
identify the person who gave MDC-T this material, he would be held accountable
and regarded as “the prime
suspect”.
Mr
Komichi, is now in remand prison as bail was opposed by the State, although he
is a Deputy Minister in the present government and was a Senator in the last
Parliament and as MDT Director of Election is hardly likely to skip the
country.The magistrate’s decision on
his bail application will be given in the magistrate’s ciourt 6 on Tuesday at 10 am.
Comment:
It is against the principle of natural justice
·that
ZEC can publish their interpretation in the press while the accused
cannot
·to
detain an accused person pending investigations – not after
investigations, and, if press
sources are correct, to detain him until he reveals the name of his source of
information
·to
arrest a complainant without investigating whether his complaint is valid.
Questions?
1.Will the ZEC reaction to Mr Komichi’s
complaint be a deterrent to others, who may have evidence of malpractice or be
told about it from another source, from coming forward to ZEC for fear of being
arrested or getting someone else arrested rather than the truth of the story
being investigated?
2.As Mr Komichi is
the Director of Elections for MDC-T would it be surprising if his party sees
this as a deliberate act of sabotage by its political opponents?
Veritas
makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal
responsibility for information supplied
Bill Watch 34/2013 of 30th July [Problems with the Electoral Act]
BILL
WATCH 34/2013
[30th July 2013]
Problems
with the Electoral Act
Introduction
Because
the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:13] has
been amended so often, and because the latest amendments were made barely six
weeks ago, there is some uncertainty amongst candidates and political parties as
to what precisely the Act’s provisions are.The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission [ZEC] has done little to dispel the
uncertainty.It has not answered many
questions that have been put to it, even written questions by letter and email
and their phones are too few and impossible to get through to.Unfortunately this can give the impression of
a defensive, secretive organisation which is conducting the election on an ad
hoc basis rather than according to the law.
To be
fair, this is not entirely ZEC’s fault:the commission did not formulate the amendments to the Electoral Act,
which are not always easy to understand or, apparently, to implement.Nonetheless, ZEC’s failure to communicate has
left parties and the public in the dark about how important steps in the
electoral process are to be conducted.
This Bill Watch will explain sections of
the Electoral Act and raise some of the points on which ZEC needs to give the
public information.
1. Provision of copies of
the voters’ rolls
A day
before polling, candidates and parties have not yet been able to obtain copies
of the voters’ rolls which will be used in the election.At a press conference held by ZEC, the
Registrar-General said they will be given only hard [i.e. printed] copies, not
electronic ones.
This
is a serious breach of the law.
According to section 21(4) of the
Electoral Act, within a reasonable time after an election is called ZEC must
provide every party that intends to contest the election, and any election
observer who requests it, with one copy of the voters’ rolls to be used in the
election.The copies must be in printed
or electronic form as the party or observer may request.ZEC can charge a fee for the rolls, but the
fee must not exceed the reasonable cost of providing them.
Section 21(6) of the Act further
provides that within a reasonable time after nomination day, ZEC must provide
every nominated candidate, free of charge, with one electronic copy of the
voters’ roll to be used in the election which the candidate is contesting;and if the candidate so requests, ZEC must
provide him or her with a printed copy of the roll for a reasonable
fee.
Electronic copies of rolls provided
in terms of section 21 must be formatted so that their contents can be searched
and analysed [section 21(7)].
Political parties and candidates need
copies of voters’ rolls in order to muster their supporters and conduct their
campaigns — that is why section 21 was inserted in the Act.ZEC’s failure to supply the copies must have
seriously hampered the parties in their campaigns for the now-imminent
election.If ZEC was unable to obtain
the necessary copies or data from the Registrar-General then it should have
approached a court for an order compelling him to hand them
over.
All the political parties and
candidates involved in the election, and the public as a whole, are entitled to
a full and truthful explanation from ZEC for its failure to comply with section
21 of the Act.
2. Committees to combat
intimidation and prevent conflict
Under
section 133H of the Electoral Act, the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission must
establish a special investigation committee for each province, to assist special
police units investigate cases of political violence and intimidation.Each of these committees is supposed to
consist of an employee of the Commission, a police liaison officer and two
representatives of every party contesting the election [rather oddly, by virtue
of section 133H(3) as read with section 11(3) of the Act, these party
representatives must not be office-bearers in their
parties].
Under
section 160B of the Electoral Act ZEC must set up a national multi-party liaison
committee and further such committees for all the constituencies and local
authority areas in which the election is being contested.Each of these committees is supposed to
consist of a representative of ZEC and representatives of every party contesting
the election.The committees are
supposed to try to resolve electoral disputes and grievances and to report such
disputes and grievances to the Commission. [Again rather oddly, the national
committee has the additional function of establishing sub-committees in each
province — an unnecessary exercise if committees have already been established
in all constituencies.]
ZEC should have informed the public
about these committees – whether they have in fact been established according to
the Electoral Act or not; if they have, where are their offices are situated and
how they can be contacted.ZEC must
publish this information immediately, because the public must be able to lodge
complaints of violence, intimidation and electoral irregularities with the
committees if the committees are to perform their functions effectively;and unless members of the public know where
the committees are they won’t be able to lodge any complaints.Which would be nice for the perpetrators of
violence and intimidation but not so good for the integrity of the electoral
process.
Addendum:In fact the Committees under section 133H have not been established.Veritas has just been in contact with the
Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission.He has said his Commission has decided to maintain its independence and
should not form joint committees with police, ZEC and political parties.He said that although the Commission does not
have the capacity to set up independent country wide centres, complaints can be
lodged at their Harare office at First Floor, Pearl House, Corner of Samora
Machel Avenue and First Street.Their
phones have not yet been installed yet but complaints can be made in person or
by email to zhrc2012@gmail.com.
Nevertheless the point remains that
it was ZEC’s responsibility to inform us of this deviation from the Electoral
Act.
3. Election agents
(formerly polling agents)
Under
section 95 of the Electoral Act, a candidate’s chief election agent can appoint
election agents for the candidate, and must notify the appointments to the
electoral officer for the constituency concerned not later than three days
before polling day.In the case of a
general election where presidential, parliamentary and local authority elections
are being run concurrently in the same polling stations, the election agents are
nominated by political parties.The
function of these election agents, who used to be called “polling agents”, is to
be present at polling stations to ensure that voting is properly conducted and
generally to watch for electoral malpractices.
One
election agent for each candidate or party is entitled to be present inside
every polling station, and two more are allowed to be “in the immediate
vicinity” of the polling station;the
agent inside the station can be relieved from time to time by one of the other
two [sections 55(2a) and 95(1a) of the Act].
In
addition to these election agents, every party which is contesting an election
and which has given the Commission early notification of the names of
responsible national and provincial office-bearers can appoint a roving election
agent in terms of section 93A of the Act for each ward in which the election is
being contested.These roving election
agents must be appointed no later than 12 days before polling day and are
entitled to enter all polling stations within the wards for which they have been
appointed.
One
election agent for each candidate or party is “probably” entitled to be present
in a polling station when the ballot box is sealed before the commencement of
polling.[The word “probably” has to be used because
section 54 of the Act, which confers this right, contains an incorrect and
confusing cross-reference to another provision which has been repealed.In the interests of transparency ZEC should
interpret this as their being entitled to be present].The election
agents are entitled to be present when the ballot box is sealed in terms of
section 61 of the Act after polling has ended, and during the counting of votes
at the polling station in terms of section 62.At the counting of votes, indeed, section 62 seems to allow all the
election agents for each candidate or party to be present — five in all,
including the three who attended during polling, the chief election agent and
the party’s roving agent.The Second
Schedule to the Electoral Regulations, 2005, however, allows only one agent to
be present — a reasonable restriction.
When voting returns are verified and
collated at ward, constituency, provincial and national level in terms of
sections 65, 65A, 65B and 110, candidates and their agents are entitled to be
present.The Act does not lay down any
limit on the number of agents who may attend, but again the Second Schedule to
the Electoral Regulations limits the number to one for each
candidate.
4. Police officers in polling
stations
Can police officers be
stationed inside polling stations when voting is in progress?Probably not, though the law is by no means
clear.
Under section 55(7) of
the Electoral Act, there must be enough police officers “available in the
immediate vicinity of each polling station” to provide immediate assistance if
called upon by the presiding electoral officer to help keep order at the
station.Under section 55(7a), the
police officers have the “sole functions” of maintaining order and preventing
contraventions of the law, and must not “interface with the electoral processes”
[whatever that means – perhaps interface
was a misprint for interfere].When
inside a polling station, according to section 55(7a)(c), they must “exercise
their duties under the direction and instruction of the presiding officer”.This suggests that police officers may enter
polling stations only to “exercise their duties”, i.e. to maintain order and
prevent contraventions of the law;they
cannot sit around in the stations waiting for disorder to break out or
contraventions of the law to occur.
Under Section 59 of the
Act, the police are no longer entitled to assist disabled voters.
5. The “extra-special”
votes
ZEC
applied for and obtained an order from the Constitutional Court to the effect
that members of the security forces who were unable to cast special votes in
advance of polling day would be “allowed to cast their votes on July 31” [i.e.
on polling day].
Quite
how they will do this is unclear, to say the least.
Will they be allowed to cast their
votes like other voters at whichever polling station they happen to be on
polling day? If so:
·unless
they are registered on the ward voters’ roll concerned, they will be
contravening section 56 of the Act, which prohibits voters from voting in a ward
if they are not registered on the ward voters’ roll;
·if they
are registered on the ward voters’ roll, the question arises:why were they authorised to cast a special
vote, since such authorisation is supposed to be given only to people who on
polling day will be on duty outside the wards in which they are
registered?
Alternatively, will their votes be
put into special ballot boxes, to be sent to the wards in which they are
registered as voters?If
so:
·there is
no such procedure laid down in the Electoral Act;
·the
delay entailed in sending such votes round the country before they can be
counted is likely to delay the final announcement of results in the
elections.
The
Commission must clarify and publicise how it intends to comply with the court
order which it sought and obtained.
6. Recording of
ballot-paper numbers
It has been reported that traditional
leaders instructed their people to record the numbers of the ballot-papers which
are issued to them.The implication is
that the voters will hand over the recorded numbers to office-bearers of the
political party to which the traditional leaders concerned belong, so that if
the voters have voted for any other party they can be identified and
punished.This amounts to intimidation
and a contravention of section 86(5) of the Electoral Act, which prohibits
anyone from trying to ascertain which candidate a voter has voted for.
7. Counting of
votes
There
have been rumours that votes will be counted at constituency centres.This would be illegal.Votes that are cast in a polling station must
be counted in that polling station in accordance with section 63 of the
Act.Postal votes and special votes
[i.e. votes cast in advance of polling day by electoral officers and members of
the security forces who will be on duty on that day] are sent to the wards in
which the voters are registered and are counted at ward
level.
Once
votes have been counted at polling stations, the polling station returns,
showing the results, are sent to ward centres where they are verified and
collated, and then to constituency and provincial centres for further
verification and collation and the announcement of the final results.
8. Displaying and
Relaying of results
After
the counting of votes the result of the count has to be displayed outside the
polling station and copies of the result must be given to the political party
agents and candidates concerned.The
polling station returns are then sent to ward centres forcollation, and the collation results have to
be displayed outside the ward centres and again given to political party agents
and candidates concerned and the same procedure followed at every level up the
National Command Centre
9. Announcement of
results
Section 66A(1) of the Electoral Act,
as recently amended, makes it a criminal offence for anyone, before the official
announcement of the result:
·to
purport to announce the result of an election as the true or official
result, or
·to
purport to declare a candidate to have been duly
elected.
If
such an announcement is made falsely with intent to deceive or discredit the
electoral process, the penalty is increased.
Subsection (3) of the section adds a
rider to the effect that it is not an offence to report the number ofvotes received by a candidate or political
party in an election, “where the report is based on polling-station returns
and constituency returns from the electionconcerned”.In other words, there
is nothing wrong in a journalist or anyone else reporting how many votes a
candidate or party has received, according to the official returns, and allowing
his or her readers to draw conclusions from the figures;indeed, it is probably lawful to state the
conclusion — that candidate X has received more votes than candidate Y, or has
won the election — so long as the conclusion does not purport to be the official
result.
A final point
Most of the issues raised
in this Bill Watch are basic to the electoral process and should be easily
answered, but it has taken a great deal of time and effort wading through the
oft-amended, sometimes contradictory provisions of the Electoral Act to find out
what the law really is.
If one wants to understand the provisions of the law,
one has to look at:
·the Electoral Act, which has
been amended five times, the last amendment being published only the day before
the electoral proclamation, which was 44 days before polling
day;
·the general regulations of
2005, which have also been extensively amended --- no fewer than 19
times;
·specific sets of regulations
published in 2013 and regulating such matters as the nomination of candidates
and the accreditation of observers.
On the ZEC official
website there are two documents purporting to be the consolidated version of the
Electoral Act.The first onedoes not show the latest amendments.The second, which does, is not entirely
accurate, e.g. it leaves out a whole sentence in Section 38(1).The website
also purports to have a consolidated version of the Electoral Regulations.It is impossible to download it or even view
it.
This Bill Watch would
have been much easier to prepare — indeed, it might not have been necessary to
prepare it — if the amendments to the Electoral Act had been more clearly
drafted, and if ZEC had done its duty under sections 5(d) and 191 of the Act and
kept the public informed about all matters relating to the electoral process and
ensured that copies of the Act and regulations were available to members of the
public at all times.
The
Constitutional Court ruling that the elections had to be held by 31 of July led
to a headlong rush into elections.This
undoubtedly caused ZEC considerable problems.But ZEC should have opposed the application and pointed out its
difficulties if the election was held so soon.It is no use ZEC assuring the public that the logistics are in place for
the election when there is a lack of communication and transparency and the very
obvious fact that in the special voting there was chaos.
A complete set of
electoralstatutes – the Act updated
with amendments, the old regulations
and the new
regulationscovering specific aspects of this election – is available on the
website: veritaszim.net or from veritas@mango.zw .
Veritas
makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal
responsibility for information supplied
Bill Watch 35/2013 of 30th July [Response to Requests for MoreInformation - Elections Tomorrow]
BILL
WATCH 35/2013
[30th July 2013]
The
Elections are Tomorrow, Wednesday 31st July
Response
to Requests for More Information
Presidential
Candidate Mukwazhe Withdraws
Kisinot
Mukwazhe of the Zimbabwe Development Party has withdrawn from the Presidential
election.This leaves four Presidential
candidates: Dr Dabengwa of ZAPU, Mr Mugabe of ZANU-PF, Professor Ncube of MDC
and Mr Tsvangirai of MDC-T.
Mr
Mukwazhe told journalists on 27th July that he had withdrawn because the
electoral playing field was skewed in favour of ZANU-PF and MDC-T.He said he and his supporters would now
support President Mugabe in the Presidential election.The Zimbabwe Development Party’s application
for an allocation of over $1 million of public funding was dismissed by the
Constitutional Court on 28th June; the Political Parties (Finance) Act limits
public funding of political parties to parties gaining at least $5 of the vote
in the previous general election.
Date
of Presidential Run-off Election [If one is
Needed]
Should
no candidate get an absolute majority of the vote in the Presidential election
[i.e., 50% plus one vote], there will have to be run-off election between the
two candidates with the most votes.The
run-off election, if one becomes necessary, will be on the 11th September, the
precise date specified in the election proclamation in accordance with the
Electoral Act.
Final
List of Polling Stations Published
The
Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission
[ZEC] published supplements in most newspapers on Sunday 28th July containing
its final lists of the polling stations that will be serving voters on polling
day.There are 9 735 polling stations
altogether, 65 more than the 9 670 in the provisional lists published on 10th
July.
ZEC
had previously said, when it published its provisional lists in the daily
newspapers on 10th July, that if there were representations made to it that more
polling stations were needed, it was prepared to make additions to the
provisional lists to meet requirements and would publish final lists on polling
day.Parties, civil society and observer
organisations requested that the final list be published earlier than this in
order to deploy their agents.ZEC’s
response to a reasonable demand is commendable and will help voters, political
parties and observers to finalise arrangements for polling day.
ZEC
is legally obliged by the Electoral Act to publish the lists at least once more,
on polling day itself.[Section 51(3)
of the Electoral Act requires publication of lists of polling stations in the
press at least three weeks before polling day – which explains the notices on
10th July – and again on polling day.There is no legal requirement for the lists to be published in the
Government Gazette.]
Reminder:
31st July a Public Holiday
Polling
day, 31st July, will be a public holiday with all the consequences that normally
entails.
The Electoral Act, section 38(2) provides that
“polling day shall be deemed to be a
public holiday for the purposes of the Public Holidays and Prohibition of
Business Act”.And for good measure
the President has by SI 107A/2013 formally declared 31st July to be a public
holiday, in terms of his power to do so under the Public Holidays and
Prohibition of Business Act.
Workers
Entitled to Time Off to Vote
In
addition, employers must allow employees who do work on polling day to have the
whole morning or afternoon off “to afford
them an opportunity to vote in the election”, without loss of pay
The
Electoral Act, section 92(2), states that: “An employee shall not be required to
suffer any deduction from his wages or salary by reason of any leave of absence”
granted to allow him or her to vote.
Voting
for Senator Chiefs
President
and Deputy President of the Council of Chiefs
Under
the new Constitution the President and Deputy President of the National Council
of Chiefs are ex officio members of
the Senate [the former Constitution made the same provision].At a Council of Chiefs meeting in Harare on
19th July Chief Fortune Charumbira and Chief Mtshane Khumalo were re-elected
President and Deputy President, respectively, of the Council of Chiefs, in terms
of Part X of the Electoral Act.As
required by the Act a ZEC official presided over the election proceedings.Both Chief Charumbira and Chief Mtshane were
declared elected unopposed.
Election
of other 16 Senator Chiefs to be on 2nd August
Sixteen
more Senator Chiefs must be elected, two for each of the non-metropolitan
provinces.The provincial assemblies of
chiefs will meet in provincial centres to constitute electoral colleges for this
purpose on Friday 2nd August, the date fixed in the election proclamation [SI
86/2013].ZEC officers appointed for the
purpose will preside over proceedings in the eight electoral colleges.
Preparations
for Election of Two Senators Representing Disabled
Persons
The
new Senate will include two Senators to represent disabled persons.They must be elected in accordance with the
Seventh Schedule to the Electoral Act.This Schedule was introduced into the Act by President Mugabe’s
Presidential Powers regulations [SI 85/2013] on 12th June.
The
Schedule provides for the formation by ZEC and the National Disability Board of
an “Electoral College for the Election of
Persons with a Disability”, from disabled persons nominated by disabled
persons associations and institutions caring for disabled persons, as specified
by the Minister of Justice
and Legal Affairs, in consultation with the Minister of Labour and Social
Welfare.The names of 18
associations and 18 institutions were specified in SI
107/2013 on 19th July, with five further
associations added by SI 107B/2013 and SI 111/2013 a few days later.
Each
specified association or institution had to nominate four disabled persons, two
women and two men, for membership of the Electoral College.The Disability Board then had to draw up a
provisional list of Electoral College members, subject to the final approval of
ZEC, and ZEC and the Disability Board had to meet on the 29th July to agree on
the time, venue and programme for, the quorum for, and the procedure and method
of voting at, the meeting of the Electoral College.
Note:
There has been dissatisfaction expressed in letters to the newspaper about this
process saying some organisations had been left out and also that the process of
both selecting the organisations and how the voting will take place has not been
made clear and transparent.
Official
Announcement of Election Results
The
official announcement of results has to be made by ZEC, although as pointed out
in Bill Watch 34/2013 there is nothing in election law to prohibit the
compilation of results by party, organisations and individuals as long as they
do not claim the results to be the official ones.
Presidential
election
The
official announcement of the Presidential election result has to be made by the
ZEC chairperson, or in her absence the deputy chairperson or one of the other
commissioners.The announcement must be
made not later than 5th August, five days after polling, if there is an outright
winnerThe person elected President must
be sworn in within 48 hours.If there
has to be a run off – see above for date - the procedure for the announcement of
results – within 5 days – and the swearing in – within 48 hours is the
same.
National
Assembly Constituency elections
The
results of National Assembly constituency elections are legally effective
immediately they are announced by the ZEC constituency elections officer at
constituency level.
Party
Lists results
·60
party-list Senators, six from each of the ten provinces
·60
party-list women members of the National Assembly, six from each of the ten
provinces
·80
party-list provincial councillors, ten for each of the eight non-metropolitan
provinces.
The
allocation of party-list representatives is determined according to the
provincial totals of votes for the parties who submitted party lists on
nomination day.The determination is
made by the provincial elections officer at provincial level.The results are legally effective immediately
they are announced by the ZEC provincial elections officers.
Senator
Chiefs
The
election results for the sixteen Senate seats for Senator Chiefs will be legally
effective when announced by the ZEC presiding officers at the conclusion of each
of the electoral college proceedings in the eight non-metropolitan provinces on
2nd August.
Senators
representing disabled persons
These
results will be legally effective when announced by the presiding officer at the
conclusion of the Electoral College proceedings.[These proceedings have to be still to be
made public]
Election
Documents Available on Website:veritaszim.net
·GN
363/2013*** [Addresses of Constituency Elections
Officers]
·GN
364/2013***[Party Lists for National
Assembly, Senate and Provincial Councils]
***
available on the Veritas website veritaszim.net but are not available by
email.
·SI
85/2013*
[regulations amending the Electoral Act]
·Consolidated
Electoral Act*
[including amendments by SI 85/2013]
·SI
86/2013*
and SI 96/2013 [Election proclamation and correction]
·SI
88/2013*
[Electoral Electoral
(Nomination of Candidates) Regulations
·SI
89/2013*
[Electoral (Accreditation
of Observers) Regulations
·SI 107,
107B and 111/2013* – prescribed associations and
institutions for purposes of constituting electoral college for election of
Senators representing persons with disabilities.
·SI
107A/2013*
– 31st July a public holiday
·GN
376/2013*
– ZEC and National Disability Board meeting, 29th July.
*available
on website and still available by email if requested from veritas@mango.zw
Veritas
makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal
responsibility for information supplied