Should Corpses Litter The Street?

In its place we now have a standoff that tragically prolongs the long ‘winter of discontent’, which has its roots in the failed referendum of 2000. To be sure, this feud draws in civic and political parties on both sides and has deeply divided the nation. The results of last week’s elections have all but entrenched the national divide, which remains massive as parties engage in a game of brinkmanship.

But the present climax is a case of déjà vu as the process ending up in a seeming cul-de-sac, and the results again being contested as we have seen in 2008.

It may be useful to point out that only ZANU-PF and the government of China have, at this point, declared the results of last week’s vote as credible. The observers – being the African Union and SADC PF – are uncharacteristically coy or perhaps even tainted to entertain any questions about the credibility of the vote. Instead they have told us that the elections were ‘peaceful’ and ‘non-violent’. SADC on Friday last week promised us their final report within 30 days, which may or may not address issues other than the fact that the elections were ‘peaceful’.

But significantly, about 14 observers (they are in the minority) refused to put their signatures the interim statement and one of the commissioners of ZEC [Zimbabwe Electoral Commission] resigned in disgust.

As some have already pointed out, if we accept ‘peaceful’ as the litmus test for giving a clean bill of health to the outcome of elections, then our continental organisations are not only significantly lowering the bar but may become a hostage to fortune in future declarations and pronouncements following election observation missions. What basis, what moral authority, would they have left to proffer an opinion or to sanction miscreants, cheats and wily governments after the Zimbabwean precedent, so long as these governments pass the ‘peaceful’ test?

Isn’t the business of election observation to interrogate the conduct of elections against objective measures, which constitute the country’s own laws and the international instruments (SADC’s and AU’s in this case) to form an opinion accordingly? Or is the test of whether or not elections are credible, determined (solely) by corpses littering the streets?

By way of a pointer, it is common cause that the voters roll was not available in the legally prescribed period. This would remove any credibility of elections anywhere as this is the single most important document during elections. And it is precisely because of the late delivery of the voters roll that most of the irregularities or even fraud may be germane.

The allegations are that anything between one and two million voters cast their votes beyond the grave; another 700 000 or so names of eligible voters disappeared from the voters’ roll; 900 000 duplicate names with identical addresses and dates of birth but different ID numbers appeared on the voters roll; up to a million voters feel disenfranchised as insufficient registration points were allocated in their areas. They cite the example of Harare, Chitungwiza and Epworth combined, which were allocated five mobile centres as opposed to 38 in Mash Central with less than half of the size of Harare population. They further point to the incredulity of the voters’ roll containing 116 000 voters over the age of 100, ad nauseam.

The party with the second largest share of the vote is now threatening court action and boycotting of elected offices while the Roman Catholic Church pleads for restraint and dialogue in a pastoral letter on Sunday. The national mood, however, remains foul with very few in any mood of dialogue and compromise at least for now.

The issues of these elections do not affect Zimbabwe alone as they relate to the broader questions of governance. They also speak to the revolutionary concept of the peer review mechanism pioneered by Nepad in order to build African architecture to frankly address issues of governance and democratic deficit. And it is for this reason that many are disappointed in what appears to be an abortion of values, which we ourselves hold dear, in the case of Zimbabwe. These missteps continue to retard development on our continent.

The conduct of elections last week and the resultant bickering cannot serve as a promotion for millions of Zimbabweans who have fled their country to return anytime soon and be part of the important process of national re-building.

In the absence of a credible and honourable outside broker, a home-grown solution as promoted by the Roman Catholic Church may be the way for Zimbabweans to go. And in so doing, Zimbabweans may be well advised to proceed on the basis of ‘do no harm’. In the meantime, it appears that Lindiwe Zulu’s prospects of frolicking at Victoria Falls may be sealed.