|
MDC�s reasons for poll boycott puzzling So the MDC has decided to revert to their familiar
game of boycotts � and this time they have conveniently chosen elections! The
party is well known for boycotting, among other things, State occasions and
parliamentary sittings. The party is also notorious for encouraging another form
of boycott � stayaways.
This time the MDC has decided to boycott elections because it alleges that Zanu-PF is not acting in the spirit of the recent electoral guidelines set by Sadc in Mauritius. The timing and the reasons given by the MDC are puzzling. It�s hardly two weeks since Sadc members agreed to electoral standards designed to eradicate perennial disputes over election results. Among the most enthusiastic supporters of this decision was Zimbabwe. Even before the Mauritius meeting Zimbabwe had already announced its readiness to effect electoral reforms. But these changes can only be effected through an Act of Parliament. This is where Zanu-PF and MDC come in. For it is through Parliament that the MDC can make its views known and if there are sections where they want clarification or amendments, then they are at liberty to make their views known in the august House. To decide to boycott elections this time appears to be premature and misguided. Why put the cart before the horse? The MDC has been participating in general and by-elections all along. In fact, initially the party welcomed the proposed electoral reforms. What is puzzling is why all of a sudden, when their concerns are on the verge of being met, they revert to boycotting? We could be justified to believe that the party is convinced that it will lose the forthcoming elections, by-elections included. To avoid humiliation, the party would rather prefer to stick to the present electoral Act so that it can justify defeat by claiming that the electoral field was not even. After all, this has been their routine practice. The Sadc guidelines are meant to preempt such excuses. Indeed, events on the ground suggest that a crashing defeat awaits the MDC in the March polls. They have lost a series of by-elections to Zanu-PF, including in constituencies perceived to be their strongholds. Notable examples are Insiza in Matabeleland South and the recent urban constituency of Zengeza. Whoever might have advised the MDC of this likely defeat might have been correct. After riding on the negative protest vote in the last general election, the party won 57 seats in 2000. But popularity based on a negative protest vote is never known to last. The mood of the electorate has since changed. Unlike this time, before the 2000 general election, people are now more concerned with the economic turnaround strategy and the long-term results of the positive protests over land. The negative effects of the IMF-induced structural adjustment programme have since been accepted as a bad patch in the country�s economic history. But whoever the adviser might be does not understand the politics on the Zimba-bwean turf. We are tempted to believe that it might have been Tony Blair, who as recently as June admitted in the House of Commons that he was working closely with the MDC to effect regime change in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe has a vibrant electorate and this alone determines who governs and not the so-called ill-advised "final pushes", stay-aways or boycotts. Signs that the MDC might have shot themselves in the foot by deciding to opt for an election boycott without consulting their apparently shrinking indigenous base are already there for all to see. For example, a good number of Harare city councillors who are purported to have resigned en masse turned up for council meeting last week, defying an earlier directive by the MDC national executive council not to do so. All the signs are there for an internal rebellion that is likely to signal the final fall of the MDC. The MDC should seek home solutions and an option open to them since the last general election is Parliament. To imagine their leader might end up at State House through boycotts might prove to be a dream in a fool�s paradise. The Zimbabwean constitution allows for general elections after every five years with or without the MDC. Boycott threats will do the MDC cause no good. In the likely event that they will eventually contest elections, what message are they sending to their dwindling band of supporters when they tell them to forget about elections six months before a general election? After all, they are the first to point out that a general election is a process and not an event. We hope that they are aware that their latest bluff is part of the process they hope will gear up their supporters to go and vote in the March 2005 general election. The Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" |
