Right from the start, I need to make it clear that I am NOT opposed to the current draft. Far from it. When compared with the much-patched Lancaster House charter, this draft is far more acceptable. It wouldn’t need as many as the 19 surgical visits that the current constitution has gone through, not in my life time.
There is talk that the referendum will be held sometime in March, but, for me, there is no sense in subjecting ourselves to the rigours of a process that we can surely spare ourselves from. It is an extravagance.
For a start, there is no evidence that the millions of people who are expected to either endorse or reject the draft know what it contains. Copac and the government are doing a shoddy job about educating the people on what the document says.
If university professors don’t know what the Copac draft says, I would not like to believe that a herd boy in remote Mahuhwe would be well-versed with the contents of the document. Chances that Copac will hold outreach programmes and adequately school the people on the contents of the draft are slim to zero, especially if we stick to the March deadline.
A referendum should be about making an informed decision. Where people don’t know what they are voting for or against, there is no point in conducting a poll, and since the majority is not well informed, where is the wisdom of holding the constitutional referendum?
I am not comfortable with our politicians using the people to rubber stamp a process they have all along dominated. Since the draft constitution is heavily a product of political negotiations, why not just go ahead and give it to Parliament?
Who doesn’t know that, from the time the constitution-making process began those donkey years ago, it was dominated by the two MDCs and Zanu (PF), with the outreach programme and stakeholders’ conference merely simulating popular participation? Recently, it was the principals to the Global Political Agreement—again comprising the three political parties plus Arthur Mutambara as an appendage—who took it upon themselves to amend and endorse the draft. If they could do so on their own, why should the people come in now?
Honestly, there would not be any harm in them proceeding with the bureaucracy to turn the draft into an actual constitution and get Zimbabwe moving forward.
In any case, there are no indications that the draft will be rejected considering that the three main parties want it and the smaller parties have hardly registered any contestations. With the results of the referendum being so predictable, there is no harm in breaching prior agreed arrangements.
In this sense, holding the plebiscite would be a sheer waste of resources and time. We need about $85m to prepare for and hold the referendum. The money is currently not there. But even if it was available, this kind of money can be put to better use.
There is hardly any money for the voter registration exercise, with Tendai Biti telling us he has only managed to save $2m for that purpose, out of a required $9m. It does not require any crystal ball-gazing to know that the registration exercise, and attending to a shambolic voters’ roll, is more essential than a rubber stamping exercise.
Spare the time that would be consumed by the referendum to deliberate on key reforms Zimbabwe severely needs. Democracy is not about creating appearances but requires a good measure of pragmatism.
Let’s just go ahead and turn the draft into a constitution and stop bothering the people. My granny out there needs her time in the fields and the cross-border trader needs to go to South Africa to buy her wares. After all, Zimbabwe has had its fair share of elections and two polls in a year are not what I wish for. – For feedback, please write to majonitt@gmail.com
Post published in: Analysis