By Blessing Vava
(This article was first published on the 25th of May 2011)
Zimbabwe’s
crisis of governance has basically been believed to emanate from a
constitutional crisis that has plunged the country into a serious socio,
economic, political quagmire. This was exacerbated by the partisan inspired
amendments to the "cease-fire" Lancaster House constitution by the
then ruling ZANUPF making the document itself an insult to the democratic
values shared and aspired for by many Zimbabweans. The fundamental basis
of the Lancaster House document has been destroyed by the claw –back clauses
which characterises the bill of rights and the whole fabric for the safeguard
of fundamental human rights and their sanctity. This created a scenario under
which the constitution became an instrument of oppression gradually to outright dictatorship and
authoritarianism. ZANUPF is continuously turning a deaf ear to this 21st
century reality (by driving the political environment into a vampire, chaotic
lot) a wind of change blew in the land between the Zambezi and Limpopo.
The zeal
for a democratic home grown people driven constitution that would ensure a
peaceful and prosperous democratic Zimbabwe, saw the progressive civil forces
conglomerated into a powerful political alliance that would wrestle power from
ZANUPF with the hope that it will seek among other things, to transform these
aspirations into practical realities. It is therefore the purpose of this
article to attempt to unravel the relationship between constitution making and
democracy highlighting challenges facing
the current generation of democracy activists in Zimbabwe as the flout
parliamentary inter party constitution making process unfolds under article 6
of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) with particular reference to the youth
in Zimbabwe .
When the government of Zimbabwe is criticised
as undemocratic and dictatorial, its quick response is that it is a
constitutional regime that respects the constitution of Zimbabwe. However the question that has been asked by
many is that does the current constitution of Zimbabwe guarantees the respect
of the rule of law and fundamental human rights to the Zimbabweans and the
youth of this nation in particular so that it deserves any respect? For the
majority of the young people, the answer is totally NO! As if to give a brief
historical analogue, the seeds for democracy were sown in 1980 when the country
realised its independence which was not in itself, the advent of democracy and
the respect of the rule of law. However the regime of President Mugabe did not
water the seed so that it germinates and grow into a mature democracy from
which all generations across the political, ethnical and racial divide would
enjoy. Rather, the country degenerated into unprecedented levels of pandemonium
in early 1980s as ZANUPF embarked on an on slaughter of the rule of law in the
Midlands and Matabeleland regions under an operation code named ‘Gukurahundi’
(clearing the chuff) resulting in a genocide against the Ndebele tribe. This was
meant to crack down the Zimbabwe African People Union (ZAPU) which had its roots
in the province. This was the earliest indicator on what will become the order
of the day, as ZANUPF intensified its campaign for a one party state a few
years later.
There
is little doubt the people of Zimbabwe now understand democracy to the deepest
of its meaning to the extent that to leave them from effective and meaningfully
participating in the constitutional reform process is tantamount to making a
grievous mistake. Having endured the perilous struggle for the past decade,
these masses understand what they have been engaged for and where they want to
go. In this light the inclusive government’s exclusive constitutional making
process falls far short from meeting the minimum standards that are relatively
common in most constitutional reform initiatives. This has almost shattered the
whole fabric of what seemed a vibrant and promising civil society, with most of
the vibrant youthful movements like the students movement and workers unions
joining hands with the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) to try to push
the parties to meaningfully involve the people. Others have, for reasons
unknown, decided to ally themselves to the process probably for their political
expedience. Evidently what has happened so far shows that the COPAC process
will not yield the desired results.
The
position taken by the broader alliance that is the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade
Unions (ZCTU), ZINASU and the NCA, therefore is commendable and progressive as
they seek to fight for their space in the process of democratic nation building.
There is overwhelming consensus amongst these organisations that despite the
fact that the MDC played a critical role in efforts to build a strong democracy
in Zimbabwe, it has no mandate to exercise it on behalf of the thirteen million
Zimbabweans. Clearly this shows the direct correlation between constitutional
reform and people participation in building a sustainable democracy. The
behaviour of the MDC in the debate and process unfolding in Zimbabwe depicts
the culture of African opposition politics, that they are not necessarily and
fundamentally a democratic alternative to the incumbent. Rather they may be
worst abusers of power who only lacks it.
The
essence of popular participation in constitution making is critical on four
main matrixes which are;
a) It allows people to enjoy democracy while building it.
b) It makes people feel proud of themselves and that they
own their constitution hence respect it.
c) There is respect of diversity of culture, ideas, race,
religion, sex, political affiliations
d) Builds a sustainable democracy
In
Zimbabwe the concept of people participation has been taken to be more of an
academic opinion and dismissed by the three political parties who are
custodians to the 15 September 2008 agreement, who have instead resorted to the
infamous Article 6 of the GPA which enshrines an exclusive process under the so
called Kariba draft document. Realistically, it may be difficult to achieve
especially with regard to most developing worlds like Zimbabwe who may not have
enough resources to fund a grassroots based process. However this is not to
justify hijacking of the process by politicians who have compromised the
importance of people participation in constitution making.
The
current process is a fast track process that does not even reflect the effort
to get the views of the ordinary man and woman, youth and the elderly who the
constitution, if achieved, is meant to protect. Principally it is grossly
erroneous for Zanu (PF) to use the constitution reform agenda as a yardstick to
destroy the opposition MDC and buttress its hold on power. It is equally
erroneous and wrong for the MDC to attempt to manipulate the new constitution
making agenda as a shortcut to removing Mugabe. It should be taken into
cognizant that writing a new constitution is one thing and political endeavours
are other things. The argument by the MDC that after the constitution making
process the nation will go to polls which will remove Mugabe and herald the
advent of democracy should be dismissed as nonsensical and unrealistic. This is
because the writing of a constitution is one process and getting rid of Mugabe
is another separate process to the extent that a fusion of these two unrelated
endeavours should be rejected with the contempt they deserve. Therefore there is a need to contrast what the
people of Zimbabwe want to achieve and what the political parties want to
achieve. The point here is that a constitution should be written procedurally
and duly, with no political attachments to it, otherwise a constitution has
more to offer beyond political aspirations. It is therefore wrong for the MDC
to attempt to use the constitution reform as a yardstick of removing Mugabe and
therefore put 90% of its energies to addressing the technical issues of getting
rid of Mugabe in which case his departure should not be confused as the
beginning of democracy in Zimbabwe.
By
participating in a proper people driven constitution making process,
Zimbabweans will have a lifetime opportunity to nurture their own democracy and
contribute meaningfully in the democratisation process that’s needed in the
country. The conviction in the majority of youth from the progressive
pro-democracy organisations that have been and are still engaged in the
struggle for democracy is that the first fruits of victory in our struggle for
democratic transformation is our
uninterrupted participation in a process where the youth have faith that their
views will be considered. In this way the youth will therefore enjoy among
other citizens, democracy at its infancy. There are certain benchmarks which
the youth in their various groupings have set and those should be given utmost
consideration in the constitution making process. For those in school and
universities who continue to play a
critical role in the struggle as the umbilical cord between and among
communities, a democratic constitution should enshrines the right to education
at all levels as a fundamental human right and ensure an enabling environment
that ensures the respect of academic rights with outlined remedies in case of
breach of these rights. Other youth from the non academic world demand the
reform of the Ministry of Youth development and economic empowerment so that it
can be demilitarised and de-patronised putting an end in the training of youth militias
and hit squads in the name of the national youth service. With the levels of
awareness in the youth thanks to the efforts of the civil society, a process
that seeks to exclude the youth shall be an exercise in futility.
‘The
process of making a constitution is as important as the content of the
constitution itself to the extent that a defective constitution making process
leads to a defective outcome. If people participate fully and effectively in a
proper people driven constitution reform process there is assurance that the
outcome will be a document that enshrines fundamental liberties and lays the
foundation of a free and democratic nation. It should be pointed out that the
constitutional debate in Zimbabwe is happening in a nation which does not have
a constitutional vacuum but one which has a constitution that lacks both the
philosophy of constitutionalism and legitimacy. In this regard the legitimacy
of a constitution is in the people in their diverse existence, who are the
authors of their own constitution in which case this fundamental reality
defeated a flout and stage managed undemocratic constitutional reform attempted
by the ZANUPF government in 2000 drawn by politicians exclusively. If
politicians were up to something good for the nation as a whole, they should
have learnt a lesson from that experience that the road towards constitutional
democracy should be democratic itself, and not a ‘burden’ of Global Political
Agreement (GPA) principals.
A
genuine people driven process must synergise diverse views from the diverse
society so that a new constitution will reflect different aspirations as
clearly explained in the Zimbabwe People’s Charter adopted at the People’s
Convention, Harare on the 9th February 2008. It clearly states that
the people shall have a constitutional reform process whose outcome will ensure
a society characterised by tolerance of plurality on divergent views, cultures,
religion inter-alia other aspects of plural society. This will give result to a
constitution that is free from any manipulation by the political party that has
majority number of representatives in the August house. What is needed is an
independent commission to lead the process and with no attachments to political
parties.
As
such the constitution making process should be viewed with the future
generation in mind, not to seek to sacrifice the basic needs of the future
Zimbabweans for unsustainable expediencies of a rapacious clique of power
hungry politicians. The youth believes that a constitution which they actively
input will safeguard fundamental liberties and freedoms that every citizen will
be proud of, just as the youth in the USA feel indebted to their constitution.
There is little doubt that this will inaugurate a lasting democracy that
ensures a bright future and bring an end to polarisation and marginalisation
among the youth. Hence the only thing left is to reject the COPAC constitution
come referendum because it was not written by the people.
Blessing
‘Vuvuzela’ Vava is a blogger from Chipinge, He Can be contacted on
blessingvava@gmail.com
