Stage managed investigations, fabricated criminal charges and incessant hate language; terms like ‘dissidents’, ‘sellouts’, ‘puppets of the west’, ‘racists’ and of late ‘western sponsored agents of regime change’, ‘threats to national security and sovereignty’ have given moral legitimacy to judicial and political persecution. In fact the hate speech has worked wonders for the dictatorship creating a siege mentality to justify and perpetuate a war agenda against citizens and groups who share different political views and opinions.
This way the dictatorship has avoided public scrutiny (or consent) and destroyed the nascent signs of a vibrant pluralist society with healthy political competition and cooperation. The first target was PF ZAPU and its supporters in Matabeleland and Midlands provinces which claimed over 20 000 lives, not counting those who lost limbs, raped women, infrastructure destroyed and a decade of development lost! The 1987 Unity Accord was an elite pact that gave an impression that a war and a peace settlement had been reached and “dissidents” (and their communities in midlands and Matabeleland) had been given amnesty!
With benefit of hindsight and having seen what happened to Zimbabwe Unity Movement and Patrick Kombayi, to the MDC, and now to the civic groups and human rights defenders (including lawyers and judges!), we now know that we are governed by a dictatorship that understands one party, one leader, one ideology, one narrative prominence and dominance in politics.
After 33 years of independence plus a third wave of democracy in Africa, ZANU PF has learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. In fact a ten year old antidemocratic narrative has been sustained with carefully crafted rhetoric of what is termed ‘Illegal regime change agenda’. And yet we know that the criminalization of a democratic outcome called regime change is meant for ZANU PF regime retention, even against the will and consent of its citizens! In fact, it does seem, judging by ZANU PF’s language to the citizens, that electoral legitimacy is not important, what is important are the liberation war credentials. After all, the “war” is still being prosecuted and we are now somewhere around its third phase.
The Third Chimurenga! There is obviously an element of denial as well. Denialism that opposition political parties exist, that there are human rights violations, that citizens need to freely make their choices, that regime change is legitimate and even deny the fact that Zimbabwe is more that ZANU PF and certainly, that the struggles millions are fighting today are different and require new nonviolent methods. Five years ago, with guided optimism, Zimbabweans voted for regime change and the result was a new historic realitythe inclusive government of the triumvirate.
As we approach the twilight zone of this government, we realize that ZANU PF has not changed, what has been changing is the language and behavior of its former victims and partners the two MDCs. Four years of constitution haggling shows that the legitimacy and independence of civic groups is not part of their agenda.
In fact, we have seen desperation for politics of consensus giving the triumvirate political parties the centre stage to join together in destroying vibrant clash of political positions by categorizing and paddocking civic groups into three political party affiliate groups. It started with the manner in which civic groups were invited to the outreach, the first and second all stakeholders’ conferences. The civics that chose not to take part but to take charge were treated as retrogressive elements and with very limited levels of tolerance and respect.
If this is not convincing, consider how COPAC cajoled civic groups to sign to the ‘yes’ campaign as a condition to access and distribute the draft constitution. There was no room for a ‘no vote’, not at any cost! Was this not a classic case of a manufactured consent? Ironically, the two MDCs had earlier on joined civic groups in complaining about how ZANU PF had manufactured ‘coached and bussed’ people in order to control constitutional debates and its content.
As we approach watershed elections, there is a disturbing antidemocratic crystallization of collective passions between and within political parties. You read stories about how the various political party hierarchies are plotting to ‘block’ new candidates, how factional candidates are being imposed and how rules of political competition change while the competition has already begun and the balance of scales has tilted one way.
Consider how certain political party leaders now fervently defend certain institutions that have been symbols and bastions of electoral manipulation, intimidation and violence to whip citizens into consenting. These are indeed disturbing levels of complicity and complacency that have emboldened the dictatorship to a point of even wanting early elections with measured and restrained violence and intimidation. My disappointment with the inclusive government and with the two MDCs is a function of expectations. I travel a lot around the country and hear a lot more people like me.
They look at how the two have been complicit in systematically suppressing political pluralism. They see how the fixation with “take part” positions (as opposed to other alternative positions) has weakened the “vibrant clash of political positions not a means to an end, but as continuity towards democratic solutions.” They observe the public silence you get when the inclusive government harass the Zimbabwe Peace Project, Zimbabwe Human Rights Association, Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission, against human rights lawyers, Judges, the Zuma led mediation team and the international community.
They begin to wonder if the violent resistance to an open, vibrant and democratic public and political space is still a monopoly of one party. In conclusion, I think we need to understand the meaning of concerted attacks and crackdown on civic groups, human rights lawyers, impartial judges and opposition politics. These institutions are part of a broad range of institutions that have advocated for accountability in terms of how far the government and politicians must exercise state power.
To achieve this, they have worked to expand, democratize and maintain a vibrant and legitimate public sphere. This is a legitimate democratic agenda meant to benefit long suffering ordinary citizens. As a member of civil society, we share their pain to a point that no amount of or form of persecution, be it bloody, brutal, violent, political or legal will make us apologize or give up this struggle.
Those violently opposed to this are bent on killing the life, meaning and sacredness of democratic processes, such as the consent of the citizens through credible free and fair elections.
Thabani Nyoni is the Executive Director of Bulawayo Agenda and Spokesperson of the Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition. He writes in his personal capacity.
Post published in: News