admin
With the referendum drawing closer and closer, the a country should not have a blinkered view of this major event, but rather try and reflect on the lessons learnt on the previous constitution and/or even its drawbacks.
It is a fact that Zimbabwe does not have the luxury of prolonging this transitional phase. As it stands the Government of National Unity, made up of the three main parties, Zanu-PF and the two MDC formations is failing to agree on most pertinent issues that can take this country ahead.
For instance the very constitution-making process is proving itself as a site of struggle and as recent as this week, a cabinet committee tasked to break the standoff on the draft constitution resolved to throw the outstanding issues further up the ladder to the principals.
The committee could find common ground on only two of the 30 outstanding issues, and surely at this rate one can see that the GNU is not the best set p for this country.
According to reports, Zimbabwe’s draft constitution is only expected to be ready for a referendum by September and not in June as originally scheduled.
The new charter is meant to clear the way for fresh polls following the country’s bloody 2008 elections, but the drafting process is running months behind schedule after public outreach meetings were repeatedly postponed over outbreaks of violence.
But, now since the draft has been relayed to the principals for fresh negotiations, how soon can Zimbabwe have a fresh draft and probably a referendum?
University of Zimbabwe political science lecturer Mr Joseph Kurebwa said the draft constitution was proving to be a long process and only elections could be the way forward.
“The issue here is not the referendum because the Government pledged that it will make provisions to fund the referendum, but the draft constitution that is taking too long to come out and as such for any thing to go ahead, the parties should go ahead with the elections with the old constitution,” said Mr Kurebwa.
He said the issue of the draft could take longer to be resolved as the parties were in disagreement from the onset.
“Whichever party assumes power should then make a new constitution,” said Mr Kurebwa.
He said the impasse by the three parties on the constitution was a cause for concern.
A political analyst, Mr Godwine Mureriwa said it was a known fact that the two MDC formations wanted to delay the proposed polls and stiffling the constitution-making process was one way of achieving that.
“They have been delaying the constitution-making process by seeking the Southern African Development Committee (Sadc)’s intervention on most issues arising with the Global Political Agreement as a way of delaying the constitutional process and ultimately the polls and this is unacceptable,” said Mr Mureriwa.
He said the life of the GPA had lapsed and as such the mandate of Sadc’s mediation by the South African President Jacob Zuma was over.
“I think President Mugabe should exercise his power under the current constitution and call for elections because this constitution will never be complete,” said Mr Mureriwa.
He said if the elections were called, people would vote for the best party.
“The principles behind the struggle for this country’s independence were one man one vote and parties should respect that,” said Mr Mureriwa.
He said constitution-making processes took up to more than 10 years in some countries and people needed not to wait any longer.
“If a new government is elected into power that is when a new constitition will be made,” said Mr Mureriwa.
A constitutional law expert Professor Lovemore Madhuku said in the event that the draft constitution was rejected by the people in the referendum, the principals would decide the way forward.
He said it is clear that all the parties will back the constitution and it was for the electorate to vote yes or no.
The contentious issues from the Second All Stakeholders Conference include devolution, dual citizenship, legislature, executive powers, land commission, security sector and judiciary.
Delegates at the Second All Stakeholders’ Conference rejected devolution and dual citizenship while the MDC formations are pushing for the inclusion of the two issues.
The parties have not agreed on the executive powers — whether the executive authority should be vested in the President only or in the President and Cabinet.
There is also no agreement on whether or not the President should seek approval of Parliament when declaring war.
There is also no agreement on the security sector especially on whether the new supreme law should provide for the appointment of the minister responsible for the police service.
Another area of dispute is the judiciary with the parties not disagreeing on whether or not Zimbabwe should have a separate Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court should transfer itself into a Constitutional Court when there are constitutional issues to deal with.
There are differences on the legislature as to whether or not the Clerk of Parliament should preside over election of the Speaker of Parliament or the President of the Senate.
Other areas of contention were the land commission and the Attorney General’s Office.
There are also disagreements on whether provincial councils should be devolved or decentralised and how a successor would be chosen in case of incapacitation of the President.
The constitution-making process that was expected to take about 18 months has taken over three years because of bickering among political parties.
The MDC formations endorsed the draft in its entirety, but Zanu-PF proposed amendments that were taken to the Second All Stakeholders Conference.
The party argued that the draft had deviated from people’s views.
Zanu-PF has openly declared that it would not support a draft constitution that does not defend, protect and preserve the values of the liberation struggle.
MDC formations have mainly been basing their preferences on “international best practices”, while Zanu-PF used the outreach national statistical report that outlines the numbers.
Bongani Ndlovu
Online Reporter