The Times
By Senator David Coltart
21st August 2018
Zimbabwe’s president needs to allow judges to tell the truth about how the election was stolen
Since coming to power in Zimbabwe last November following the coup that removed Robert Mugabe, Emmerson Mnangagwa has sought to portray himself as a changed man. His rhetoric speaks of respecting democracy; he committed himself to “free, fair and credible electionsâ€; he has described himself as “cuddly†to the international press and adopted a trademark scarf to project himself as a warm, approachable person.
In the recent election Mnangagwa scraped home, if the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission’s (ZEC) figures are taken at face value, by a margin of 0.6 per cent or some 30,000 votes. This tiny margin of victory was remarkable given the uneven playing field in favour of Mnangagwa against his principal opponent, the 40-year-old leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), Nelson Chamisa.
Mnangagwa chose the chairman of ZEC, a partisan judge, who bent over backwards to assist him, including placing his name at the top of the ballot when the law stipulated that Mnangagwa’s name be alphabetically placed in the middle of the pack. Every TV and radio station became a propaganda mouthpiece for Mnangagwa (there are no stations independent of his party’s control). The state-owned broadsheets read like his manifesto, despite constitutional provisions requiring them to be impartial.
Vast resources were employed: hundreds of new vehicles were imported using scarce foreign currency to promote Mnangagwa’s brand; slick billboards were erected countrywide; items of clothing including his trademark scarves were dished out in their millions. In rural areas a carrot-and-stick approach was employed: seed and fertiliser, paid for by taxpayers’ money, were distributed months before the growing season and soldiers were deployed to remind people of what happened the last time a Zanu PF candidate lost in 2008. In contrast Chamisa’s campaign was run on the smell of an oil rag.
Before the results were even announced Mnangagwa’s regime displayed how nervous it was. Civilians were shot in the back in Harare by soldiers using live ammunition, an action designed to send a chilling message to the MDC that demonstrations about the unjust result would not be tolerated. Since the results were announced there has been a massive crackdown. A press conference called by Chamisa to dispute the results was disrupted by riot police and several of his co-leaders were arrested, including Tendai Biti, the former finance minister, on spurious charges.
Chamisa has challenged the results through Zimbabwe’s constitutional court. His petition reveals serial breaches of the constitution and electoral laws by ZEC. But most damning are allegations of manipulation of the figures by ZEC and outright fraud. Were it not so serious it would be comical — polling stations that “disappearedâ€, others where over 100 per cent of those registered voted, numbers inflated in favour of Mnangagwa and deflated for Chamisa. The common denominator in the “mistakes†is that they all benefit one candidate: Mnangagwa.
Although I am obviously partisan, my view is that this is the strongest case we have placed before the courts since the MDC was formed almost 19 years ago. If this was before an independent, professional court, I have no doubt that the election would be invalidated.
The constitutional court is obliged to rule on the petition this week. It has the power to declare one person the winner, invalidate the entire election, or order a run-off between Mnangagwa and Chamisa. Zimbabwe’s courts do not have a good record in deciding electoral disputes. When Morgan Tsvangirai challenged Mugabe’s victory in the 2002 election the courts sat on the matter until the president’s term of office expired. In a recent judgment the chief justice held that Mugabe had resigned voluntarily last year. No matter what one thinks of Mugabe, the coercion in his departure was clear for all to see and the judgment further legitimised a patently unconstitutional coup.
In another recent judgment the chief justice effectively allowed Mnangagwa to continue forcing schoolchildren to attend his rallies by dismissing, on a technical point, a case brought against Zanu PF by a teachers’ trade union. So despite the strength of Chamisa’s petition the odds are stacked against him.
It is in this context that Mnangagwa has an opportunity to demonstrate he is indeed a reformed man. As a lawyer he knows that judges should be permitted to rule solely on the law and the facts, without political interference. A simple statement reaffirming this would go a long way. It should emphasise that he will accept the court’s decision come what may. He should persuade the generals who brought him to power to state that they too will respect the decision. If he does not and the court hands down a judgment as unfair as the results announced by ZEC, then Mnangagwa may win the court battle but lose the war of restoring his legitimacy and credibility in the eyes of Zimbabweans and the international community.
Senator David Coltart was minister of education in Zimbabwe’s coalition government, 2009-2013