r future. They point to the shambles in Zanu (PF) where the fight to succeed Robert Mugabe in the Presidency has taken on a life of its own and threatens to tear Zanu (PF) apart. They point to the divided opposition and argue that it no longer has the capacity to force change and claim that the Security Services show little sign that they think change is desirable.
The question that faces all of us who live in Zimbabwe is can this state of indecision carry on for much longer? How much more punishment can the country and its people take? What next?
The answer to all of the above is not much more and something has to break soon. The danger of simply sitting back and waiting for the inevitable will invite chaos and further damage – both inside Zimbabwe and within the wider SADC region. The threat of collateral damage may in fact be the final catalyst that triggers some sort of regional and international intervention.
The question remains as to what form this intervention might take. Nobody wants South African tanks rolling over Beitbridge and there is a real reluctance to dictate a solution. The argument that the future should be left to the people of Zimbabwe has some validity although this is clearly not enough to get the process going.
The answer may be found in the fact that Zanu (PF) and Mugabe both claim to be democrats and to hold democratic credentials. In fact the main line of defence of the regime in Harare by the region has been just that – the argument that Zanu (PF) has “won” the three elections since 2000.
Zanu (PF) also allows a continued modicum of respect and adherence to the present National Constitution – flawed as it is by numerous amendments and its birth in 1980 out of the strange alliances at Lancaster House.
Perhaps because of these set positions, the answer is to see if we can find a consensus around the view that the Presidential elections planned for March 2008, as laid down in the present Constitution should proceed and that no deferments should be permitted as has been suggested by elements in Zanu (PF) over the past few months.
If this can be agreed then all that remains is to ensure that the subsequent election is free and fair. The only question remaining being what conditions might allow the election to be adjudicated by the international community as meeting the laid down criteria for such events. Why the international community – simply because they hold the purse strings to the funds needs to begin Zimbabwe’s recovery and because it is a generally agreed principle that they are the best judge or referee for such contests between local rivals with different regional supporters clubs.
The qualifying criteria are not onerous and there is ample time to comply if action is taken now. They are: –
>Either a system of universal voting rights based on residence and citizenship or a voter’s roll that is inclusive and allows all eligible persons to vote where they live.
>The appointment of an independent Electoral Commission that is broadly representative and neutral and has complete control over the whole electoral process, including voter registration and the conduct of the poll itself
>A campaign period during which all political parties can campaign without restriction and have equal access to the media.
>The absence of all forms of coercion – violent or other, during the campaign and the voting period.
>Conducting the poll itself under conditions where all eligible or registered voters can vote conveniently within a set period – on one day preferably.
>Allowing international monitors complete access to the process and to all polling stations and to the count and the subsequent tallying.
>Providing for all participating political parties to appoint polling agents and to allow them access to the polling stations and to the subsequent count and delivery of results to the national Electoral Commission.
Should the State agree to these conditions the international community, either directly or via the United Nations should state now that they will recognise the outcome and will work with the incoming administration to create the conditions for economic recovery and humanitarian support.
The SADC clearly has a responsibility to take up this sort of agenda and to see that it happens. Zanu (PF), despite its protests about being “democratic” will fiercely appose the conduct of a poll under these conditions. However, they have surely run out of space from which they can defend the status quo. Such a free and fair electoral process would produce a new government that would have all the power it required to sort things out and plot a new course for the country.
It would also allow Zimbabweans to choose their new leadership without external intervention. The SADC Protocols on free and fair elections provide a laid down foundation for such an exercise. SADC leaders also have the power and the influence to make it happen. Such an exercise would redeem our leadership in the eyes of the watching world and demonstrate the capacity of African leadership to sort out African problems.
Leaving things as they are and simply standing back and watching this tragedy unfold is no longer an option for any of us.
Post published in: News