 |
|
|
|
|
| author/source:ZWNEWS |
| published:Fri 28-Jan-2005 |
| posted on this site:Fri 28-Jan-2005 |
|
| Article Type : News |
|
| Boxed into a technical question |
 |
|
Comment
In all the confusion over what is at issue in the current Zimbabwe crisis, a few points seem to have been entirely missed. Firstly, a number of public opinion surveys have shown that land is not a concern for the ordinary Zimbabwean. In the two surveys conducted by Afrobarometer - in 1999 and 2004 - less than 1% (1999) and only 4% (2004) of those surveyed considered land to be an important political issue.. Secondly, whilst land was an issue during the liberation struggles, it was not the primary issue. The major issue was enfranchisement, for it was by denying the majority of Zimbabweans the vote that the various white governments maintained their control of political power. The calls for majority rule and one man, one vote were at the core of the struggles between black and white through the sixties and seventies. Thirdly, the resolution of the Rhodesian crisis came through a poll in which universal franchise occurred for the very first time. It was exactly a one man, one vote election that brought Zanu PF to power, where they have remained ever since.
This is all very relevant to the forthcoming elections, where Zanu PF is trumpeting land and anti-imperialism as its election slogans. Everyone else is taken up with the technical question of whether the elections will conform to the much-vaunted SADC Principles and Guidelines. By concentrating on this technical issue is to behave like the man who has lost his car keys in the dark and insists on searching under the street light because he can see there. Focussing on the SADC Principles and Guidelines is to forget that the biggest issue in this election is disenfranchisement. Here lies the similarity with the pre-independence era. Notwithstanding the Smith government’s dependence on military power, it was most concerned to prevent the black population from voting, for it was clear to all that universal franchise would end white supremacy in one fell swoop. And when finally the country and the region were in near-chaos, the one man, one vote demand finally prevailed and Zimbabwe came into being. It seems little different now.
The country is in near-chaos in almost every way imaginable, and the region too is suffering. Millions of Zimbabweans are refugees, whether because of economics or political threat or fear. The country is hopelessly polarized, with the government determined to hold onto power by all means. And the major means by which this is achieved is by subverting the process of the ballot, which is why there is this over-weaning preoccupation with the SADC Principles and Guidelines. The question that needs to be considered by all is quite simple. Will strict observance of the SADC Principles and Guidelines resolve the crisis, or will it be better solved by one man, one vote, as it was in 1980. Establishing the consensus about what kind of future Zimbabweans want is not a technical matter, resolved by whether there is an independent electoral commission or all political parties having equal access to the media: the consensus will emerge through a poll in which all Zimbabweans have their say. This is the real crisis over these elections. As has become obvious in past elections, there is a systematic campaign to disenfranchise the electorate. This is done by making it near impossible to register as a voter. It is done by stealing identity documents, and by reducing the number of polling stations so that people can queue for three days and still not vote. It is done by denying all those outside the country a postal vote. In all these myriad ways, millions of Zimbabweans are unable to vote and express their view of the direction the country should take.
But we have become boxed into the technical question of whether the elections conform to the standards of SADC, not whether they will represent the legitimate expression of the peoples’ will, as the ANC would have it. Surely the legitimate expression of the peoples’ will means that the majority of the people voted, and their votes decide who governs. In the recent South African election, the ANC were given a huge mandate by a very large proportion of the vote, and a very large proportion of the electorate voted. Those who did not vote did not do so because there were barriers in their way, but because they simply chose not to vote. There is a simple solution to this problem, and it lies squarely in the hands of Mugabe. He has changed the electoral regulations before, and he could do so again. The solution is this: allow everyone to vote. Count all the votes at every polling station, and, for every constituency, the winner will emerge. As in 1980, there is no need for a voters roll, merely a roll of every registered identity document in the country available at every polling station. We can all vote near our homes, and the solution to Zimbabwe’s governmental crisis will be decided by the population. Or we can carry on looking for our keys under the street light.
back to top |
|
|
|
|
