Level political field vital for Zimbabwe elections

HARARE - It appears there is a two-pronged, sinister and covert strategy pointing to rushed elections in the absence of a level political field.

The idea behind the plot is to have Zimbabweans vote under conditions similar to those of 2008 where there was widespread violence in order to guarantee "victory" for those who control the instruments of violence.

The fallacy of the strategy is that it will not resolve the central question of state legitimacy.

The first (and more obvious) pillar of the strategy is the push for early elections in the absence of fundamental reforms while unleashing violence.

The notorious Chipangano is also used to frustrate efforts by the MDC leadership to hold rallies where they can articulate their policies to the electorate.

So far the strategy is working as shown by the successful disruption of the recent Chitungwiza rally organised by the MDC.

In the past it used to be that political violence was largely restricted to rural areas which often became no-go areas for the MDC formations. Currently the violence is worse and has spread to urban areas with the police seemingly unable to do anything about it.

It is utter nonsense for anyone to suggest that Chipangano is so formidable that it is beyond police control.
Of course the police have the capacity, but are unwilling and constrained on account of a partisan police leadership.

The Zimbabwe Republic Police is a captured institution that must be reformed for it to properly carry out its constitutional mandate of maintaining law and order in a non-partisan fashion.

With the police unwilling to act decisively to stop the violence, the physical terrain remains tilted in favour of those who control the numerous vigilante groups.

But it appears that Zanu PF may be unable to take full advantage presented by the inability of other political parties to campaign across the country because its own presidential candidate may not be able to subject himself to the punishing schedule of traversing the length and breadth of Zimbabwe campaigning.

Indeed, despite declaring that elections should be held by March 2012, Zanu PF has not formally launched its election campaign and president Mugabe has not been out in rural areas yet. This means the closing out of political space needs to be reinforced by a second pillar of the strategy to reach out to the electorate without necessarily physically going out to campaign.

This brings us to the second pillar of the strategy that Ceasar Zvayi, a Herald columnist articulated in his article published yesterday in the state-owned paper under the title: To debate or not to debate is the question.

Zvayi suggests that next election should be decided on the basis of debates pitting presidential and other candidates against each other, presumably televised.

While this would be sensible in countries where there are independent public broadcasters, it is certainly unworkable in Zimbabwe where the state-controlled media is blatantly partisan towards Zanu PF.

Such debates are likely to be manipulated and twisted in ways that reflect the existing uneven political field.

The outcome of Zimbabwe elections will depend, not on policy debates and articulation of a vision for the country, but on the ability to control and manipulate key state institutions responsible for information.

The ZBC (television and radio) is a captured institution notorious for churning out Zanu PF propaganda and jingles without affording other political parties an opportunity to present their views.

It is difficult to imagine Tafataona Mahoso or Vimbai Chivaura impartially moderating over a debate pitting Robert Mugabe against Morgan Tsvangirai or Welshman Ncube.

In fact, that will not happen with the current ZBC.  Only a revamped and transformed ZBC can deliver impartial political debates.

State-controlled media, such as The Herald, The Sunday Mail, and ZBC must be reformed to become genuine independent public media that is professional and non-partisan.

I warn political parties that they must not agree to early elections in the absence of critical reforms.

And certainly not to accept debates that are controlled by partisan, captured institutions like ZBC. In the absence of reforms elections are a waste of precious resources.

To bring the question of state legitimacy to closure, it is necessary that we properly prepare for elections that take place under a level political field, or failing that, in the presence of external (Sadc) players to help ensure peace.

Unless all political and government leaders categorically acknowledge that all citizens have a fundamental right to fully participate in their government, which includes making a choice as to who should, or should not govern them, we should not exercise in a futile exercise of elections.

We must embrace the reality that we are all Zimbabweans with common aspirations for ourselves and our children.

----------------
Dewa Mavhinga, Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition Regional Coordinator