Writing the book on credible elections

The rulers of Namibia’s neighbours reportedly took two-thirds of the parliamentary seats and Mugabe won 61% of the presidential vote, with Morgan Tsvangirai picking up only 34%.

The former prime minister has called the elections “a sham”, “a farce”, “null and void”. Former education minister, David Coltart, argued that “Zimbabwe has been subjected to electoral fraud on a massive scale”.

Former finance minister Tendai Biti called it all a “loquacious tragedy”.

Tsvangirai is now challenging the result as a fraud.

This is what Mugabe and his cronies did with the last strain of credibility they had left: They slit its throat, ran it over with a 1985 Toyota Corolla taxi, tied it behind a donkey cart and dragged it through the sewer before burying it in a shallow grave so that the dogs could find it and devour it.

Zimbabwe’s voters roll is a list of 6,4 million names and addresses printed on A3 paper and compiled in no fewer than 1 958 binders weighing well over two tons.

Did they take a page from the Namibia Electoral Commission handbook on credible elections?

Zim’s election law is quite clear, saying that all political parties should have access to the crucial list of registered voters in good time before an election, and in both electronic and hard copy. The idea is that parties can check the list in advance for oddities, such as 116 000 people over the age of 100. This voluminous document was made publicly available (to some) a whole two days before the election.

Attempts by political parties and the media to get hold of the elusive voters roll ensued in a comedy Rowan Atkinson would have been proud of.

Reuters reported that the registrar general of voters, Tobaiwa Mudede, failed to disclose the name of the Movement for Democratic Change official who is purported to have collected the voters’ roll from his office on July 31 and the reasons why his office did not avail the electronic list to interested parties before elections. Instead he turned hardegat and referred to the MDC as ‘those people’.

He also referred to official letters requesting the roll as pieces of paper. Luckily they didn’t bother to add an ‘independent’ to the name of their electoral commission. Now I’m convinced Zim studied Namibia’s last election closely.

But the thing that knocked me huistoe was SADC’s preliminary statement on Zimbabwe’s elections: It declared; that a joint monitoring and implementation committee applied for 30 000 observers but only 1 500 observers were accredited (for 1 900 polling stations); that the ZEC had challenges that included logistical constraints; that registration of voters took until 9 July (for the election on 31 July); that 26 000 out of 65 000 “disciplined forces” and electoral officials couldn’t cast their votes when they were supposed to; that printing and delivery of ballots were late and “unforeseen complexities affecting the special vote”; that state and private media is highly polarised; that there was sufficient time for voters to verify the voters roll; that written and verbal requests to the registrar general to provide printed and electronic copies of the voters roll were not responded to; that 35% of additional ballot papers were printed; that there were instances where ballot books had missing ballot papers; that voters not appearing on the roll were allowed to vote in some instances and not in others; … and the clincher that SADC wishes to congratulate the people of Zimbabwe for turning up in large numbers.

The AU observer mission noted similar challenges plus the high number of assisted voters in certain areas. Yet, the representatives of these two useless organs appeared on TV saying the elections were credible.

If you struggle to shut your mouth or are too distraught to even cry I guess you call your friendly local psychologist. I’ve not seen such shit in all my life. I’m back to drinking Monis Granada and Zorba under a tree. The shock was just too much. Will Chipo Zindoga please fund my next stint in Nova Vita as soon as she stops dancing?

SADC and the AU are as potent as Zimbabwe’s one day international cricket team who just got walloped 5 – 0 in a series against India.

But there is a flicker of light... Botswana called on Monday for an independent audit of Zimbabwe’s disputed vote, saying the elections could not be considered acceptably free and fair in the regional community.

The statement contrasted sharply with the blanket endorsement given by South Africa’s president, Jacob Zuma and Namibia’s Lukas Pohamba.

Botswana said that although the election day had been “free of overt intimidation and violence”, there was evidence that the process was undermined by a number of irregularities. These Batswana just won’t learn. Asking SADC to do anything critical on Zimbabwe is as nonsensical as asking Bob to retire or speak without the British twang. SADC’s leaders, aka Bob’s boys, are just too scared that they’ll be shouted at again.

But I guess, because the elections were so free, fair and credible, Zimbabwe will not have any qualms complying with an audit. Non?

Chuck Norris has nothing on our Bob in the credibility stakes.
Join The Rambler for a dop of kaalgat on Facebook or tell me where I must take my coconut arse to, on rambler@namibian.com.na