News / National
Leaked letter from Mugabe's office to NewsDay
06 Jun 2012 at 08:26hrs | Views
President Robert Mugabe's spokesperson George Charamba has responded to Tuesday NewsDay story in which it said Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai outfoxed Mugabe at the weekend Sadc Summit in Luanda, Angola.
Dear Editor (NewsDay)
I refer to your story, Tsvangirai outfoxes Mugabe, in NewsDay June 4 paper. "I looked in vain for excerpts from President Mugabe's presentation so I could gauge just how the MDC-T leader "tore" through the former's plans for polls.
"I am also wondering how holding elections "in the next 12 month's" necessary puts paid to Mugabe's wish for polls this side of the year. Surely the countdown to the "next 12 months" starts this year? And my colander shows wed are in the middle of the year.
Both the SADC Troika and the Sadc summit never referred to "the completion of a new constitution".
They could never have, considering that they are not in the habit of interfering in sovereign processes of member states, a stance reinforced by their decision to throw the whole issue of Zimbabwe back to Global Political Agreement parties, albeit assisted by the facilitator.
Surely nothing is small or big except by comparison? How on this kind earth do you gauge how one politician prevails over the other except by placing those politicians views side by side for readers to judge for themselves?
For the record, all political parties have their positions in the troika meeting. Equally leaders of the troika gave their own views and understandings of events in Zimbabwe. This part of the meeting constitutes what in conference lingo is termed "proceedings".
From these proceedings, the troika then solidified recommendations to place before the summit for decisions.
Both the recommendations and decisions of troika and summit respectively are very clear. They do not suggest preponderance of any one view from parties. Quite the contrary, they exhort parties to get down work on their differences so Zimbabwe beats the electoral calendar which the summit reckons to be running out fast.
And because time is running out, summit asked the facilitator to visit Zimbabwe urgently for more rapid progress in resolving any differences that might exist within and between parties, so Zimbabwe goes for elections soonest. The summit was clear that the endgame for GPA is elections, something Mugabe has always emphasised, indeed something which all parties acknowledged after Mugabe's presentation.
The summit was also very clear that the constitution-making process had been unnecessarily drawn out, urging parties to conclude the process quickly to pave way for elections. Again, this has been Mugabe's cry.
Editor, concluding the constitution-making process is not the same as having a new constitution. The issue of a new constitution is another matter well beyond parties, well beyond the troika, well, beyond the Sadc summit.
It is an issue for the Zimbabwe voter, who reserves the right to endorse or reject the draft document through a referendum. But for Sadc, whatever outcome the referendum gives Zimbabwe necessarily concludes the constitution-making process for purposes of the GPA. The MDC-T leaders equating conclusion of the constitution-making process to "completion of a new constitution" is thus both presumptuous and mistaken.
I thank you.
George Charamba
Presidential Spokesperson and Secretary for Media, Information and Publicity
I refer to your story, Tsvangirai outfoxes Mugabe, in NewsDay June 4 paper. "I looked in vain for excerpts from President Mugabe's presentation so I could gauge just how the MDC-T leader "tore" through the former's plans for polls.
"I am also wondering how holding elections "in the next 12 month's" necessary puts paid to Mugabe's wish for polls this side of the year. Surely the countdown to the "next 12 months" starts this year? And my colander shows wed are in the middle of the year.
Both the SADC Troika and the Sadc summit never referred to "the completion of a new constitution".
They could never have, considering that they are not in the habit of interfering in sovereign processes of member states, a stance reinforced by their decision to throw the whole issue of Zimbabwe back to Global Political Agreement parties, albeit assisted by the facilitator.
Surely nothing is small or big except by comparison? How on this kind earth do you gauge how one politician prevails over the other except by placing those politicians views side by side for readers to judge for themselves?
For the record, all political parties have their positions in the troika meeting. Equally leaders of the troika gave their own views and understandings of events in Zimbabwe. This part of the meeting constitutes what in conference lingo is termed "proceedings".
From these proceedings, the troika then solidified recommendations to place before the summit for decisions.
Both the recommendations and decisions of troika and summit respectively are very clear. They do not suggest preponderance of any one view from parties. Quite the contrary, they exhort parties to get down work on their differences so Zimbabwe beats the electoral calendar which the summit reckons to be running out fast.
And because time is running out, summit asked the facilitator to visit Zimbabwe urgently for more rapid progress in resolving any differences that might exist within and between parties, so Zimbabwe goes for elections soonest. The summit was clear that the endgame for GPA is elections, something Mugabe has always emphasised, indeed something which all parties acknowledged after Mugabe's presentation.
The summit was also very clear that the constitution-making process had been unnecessarily drawn out, urging parties to conclude the process quickly to pave way for elections. Again, this has been Mugabe's cry.
Editor, concluding the constitution-making process is not the same as having a new constitution. The issue of a new constitution is another matter well beyond parties, well beyond the troika, well, beyond the Sadc summit.
It is an issue for the Zimbabwe voter, who reserves the right to endorse or reject the draft document through a referendum. But for Sadc, whatever outcome the referendum gives Zimbabwe necessarily concludes the constitution-making process for purposes of the GPA. The MDC-T leaders equating conclusion of the constitution-making process to "completion of a new constitution" is thus both presumptuous and mistaken.
I thank you.
George Charamba
Presidential Spokesperson and Secretary for Media, Information and Publicity
Source - Byo24News
