Head to Head ZAPU vs ZANU devolution of power

The new constitutional obligation on devolution under the new constitution of Zimbabwe 2013 has not taken off ground. There are no visible steps taken or are being taken by the government to enact the enabling law to provide relevant government and political instruments towards implementing the programme of devolution of power. The constitutional development leading to the new constitution 2013, that involved the entire country with huge financial and material resources pulled in now appear to have been a public relations exercise with no benefits accruing to the ordinary people of Zimbabwe following their expressed wishes for devolution of power across the country.

The recently adopted Zimbabwe constitution 2013 with specific reference to chapter 14, part 1, Sections 264 to 279, on devolution of power to provincial and local government refers to  ' whenever appropriate governmental powers and responsibilities must be devolved  to  provincial and metropolitan and local authorities which are competent to carry out those responsibilities efficiently  and effectively.'
The new Zimbabwe constitution 2013 is simply devolution by name. It is not devolution at all. It does not explain how government will assess the competence of provinces before certain powers are devolved to them. It further does not explain when it is appropriate for   central government to give devolved powers to individual provinces. The time line is open ended meaning that the process of devolution may take as long as possible before it is implemented.

When the 'appropriate' time comes in terms of the new constitution suggests that powers and responsibilities will be delegated to a province or local authority, if individual province can evidence that they have the necessary requisite skills and ability to carry out the delegated responsibilities by the state. If on the other hand the provinces do not prove to central government their readiness for devolution such devolution will not be accorded to them.

The underlining fact is that people voted for genuine devolution of power across the country, a concept put forward by ZAPU. Devolution is a new concept and therefore will need the government to provide the provincial legislatures with the necessary resources and skills to ensure that the concept is successfully implemented.

 The provision for devolution in the new Zimbabwe constitution 2013 entails that the provinces   are answerable to the central government not to the people of Zimbabwe. The concept of sovereignty has for long time eluded Zimbabweans who think that sovereignty comes from the government when in fact sovereignty directly comes from the people. Therefore the devolution of power concept as championed by ZAPU seeks to respect that sovereign power of the masses, the true owners of the state by enabling them to self-determine.

 Under the current constitutional provision, the general population is viewed with suspicion and regarded as being incapable of making valid decisions.  They are treated as recipients of decisions from a central command manager. The social and economic development at provinces is managed and directed from the peripheral rather than people championing their own development programmes.  

On the contrary ZAPU devolution of power to the provinces means the following: 'Provinces to have their own government elected by the people in those provinces; provincial government to have control over natural resources and environmental issues within its geographical jurisdiction; provinces to have provincial Parliamentary Assembly; provinces to have provincial Judiciary system; provinces to have their own provincial revenue raising systems; people in the provinces to be responsible for their economic, social, cultural and political development.'

In ZAPU-devolution, provinces are granted full constitutional autonomy and proportionate political and administrative power on devolved responsibilities. ZAPU's approach to devolution is therefore symmetrical. No province is discriminated. All provinces are treated and supported in the same way on proportionate basis.

The provinces or local authorities are called legislative assemblies. These regional assemblies are run by elected premiers through proportionate representation. Political rights and political obligations are devolved equally to all the regional assemblies' regardless of their economic and social standing.  The authority of the assemblies is derived from the electorate that votes those representatives to those positions. Therefore the regional assemblies exist to serve the interests of the people not the 'high-god' who art in Harare.

 The ZANU PF preferred devolution under the new Zimbabwe  constitution  2013 has ten provincial authorities namely  Bulawayo Metropolitan province, Harare Metropolitan province, Manicaland province, Mashonaland  East province, Mashonaland West Province, Mashonaland Central Province, Masvingo Province, Matabeleland North Province, Matabeleland South Province  and Midlands Province.

 Each of these provinces is headed by a chairman from the winning party in that province. The winning party puts forward two prospective chairmen from which the provincial chamber choses from. The numbers of provinces that existed before the new Zimbabwe constitution have remained the same. The culture of resistance to change by the government appears to be a major influence in returning the same provinces.

 ZAPU has five legislative assemblies that include Matabeleland, Masvingo, Midlands, Manicaland and Mashonaland.  These are headed by a Premiers elected by the people on a proportionate representation meaning that the candidate with most votes  from people in that province from which ever political party becomes the premier

The ten provincial authorities under the new Zimbabwe constitution 2013 are certainly too small in size and population to be economically viable to stand on their own. The view is that the ten smaller provinces under the new Zimbabwe constitution 2013 will struggle to generate revenue for themselves because of the narrow resource base which they have.

The five ZAPU devolved legislative provinces are fairly large and economically viable to prosper under devolution. ZAPU believes that all provinces have enough natural resources, human and intellectual capacity to manage their affairs with minimal interference from the Centre.  In ZAPU-devolution funding of provinces is mandatory by law and on a proportionate basis. ZAPU will provide relevant support to any province where deficiency in management and financial capacity is identified.  

The provinces under the new Zimbabwe constitution 2013 are headed by a chairperson elected by the sitting councilors from two candidates submitted by the winning party in the province. Having the highest number of seats does not necessarily mean having the highest number of votes and therefore this system could result in a party which is less popular in the province in terms of number of votes being able to head the provincial government.

Devolution under the new Zimbabwe constitution, the responsibilities of province and its chairperson are at the discretion of the state. In this instance province with the new Zimbabwe constitution enjoy delegated power where different small chunks of responsibilities are given to different provinces on behalf of the government. The concept of delegation means that power, authority and responsibility will continue to reside in central government or minister of local government. Provincial decisions will need approval of the minister before they can be implemented and as such certain powers and responsibilities come to an end once such responsibilities are fulfilled.

The current Zimbabwe constitution 2013 on devolution of power gives the minister of local government powers to dissolve local government authorities if the minister felt that those councils are incompetent. This devolution is not bringing change or anything new from the general culture of command governance. This kind of power vested in the minister is prone to abuse and patronage.

The provinces are treated and looked at differently and this will promote unequal development and also perpetuates marginalization. The minister of local government can give or take away the responsibilities from any province at any time if the minister in his wisdom feels that a particular province does not have the requisite skills to carry out those responsibilities. This means that growth is not even. Poorer provinces are not supported and given opportunities for economic and social growth. They have to strive on their own to prove to the minister and attract the minister to devolve further powers and responsibilities to them.  
The decision to devolve powers under the new Zimbabwe constitution appears to depend on the economic performance of those provinces. Poor performing provinces will be deprived of certain important powers and responsibilities as they may be viewed incompetent to fulfill those responsibilities. The current Zimbabwe constitution 2103 is silent about what and how much to devolve because it serves as mechanism for manipulating the wishes of people.  

The current Zimbabwean constitution implies that the government can pick and choose which authorities would have devolved powers and what to devolve.  That means that there would be variations of the kind of devolution from one province to the other.  It appears some provinces may never see the light of devolution and the benefits of local politics and governance. This has the effect of perpetuating marginalisation of other provinces that would be by default viewed to be incompetent by the central government. This might even mean that those very regions which were vociferous about devolution may lose out.

The current Zimbabwe constitution 2013 devolution of power fails to provide people with real political power and greater political participation. ZAPU devolution of power is genuine and representative of people's wishes and aspirations. ZAPU devolution is what people want down and across the country. ZAPU devolution shows political maturity, inclusiveness and fairness.