Saturday, March 3, 2018
President Mnangagwa’s visit to DRC deplorable
This past week, President Emmerson Mnangagwa visited his “brother”, Joseph Kabila, the current illegitimate President of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The visit by Mnangagwa was part of his regional adventure to brief his Democratic Republic of Congo counterpart Joseph Kabila on the transition that led to the end of former president Robert Mugabe's rule last year. According to the state-owned Herald newspaper, Mnangagwa held a closed-door meeting in Kinshasa with Kabila.
Mnangagwa visit to the DRC comes after weeks of engagement with other regional countries such as Angola, South Africa, Mozambique, Namibia and Zambia. In understanding the intended purpose of Mnangagwa “closed door” meeting with Kabila, it will also be good to look at the deep-seated problems currently devilling the DRC. According to the country’s constitution, Kabila’s mandated term ended back in December 2016. However, his administration simply failed to organize elections and has embarked on various attempts to keep the president in power. His refusal to respect the constitution prompted widespread non-violent urban protests, which were met with harsh repression and deadly force. To date the DRC, remains engulfed in a crisis owing to the failure by Kabila to respect the constitution.
AU, SADC silence on the DRC shocking
Botswana became the first country to explicitly call Kabila, to step down. As most African leaders maintained a stony silence in response to Congolese leader Joseph Kabila’s determination to postpone elections and extend his stay in office, Botswana President Ian Khama’s government shot straight from the hip.
“Some political leaders refuse to relinquish power when their term of office expires,” he said on Twitter. “It is clear that such leaders are driven by self-interest, instead of those of the people they govern. The Democratic Republic of Congo is a case in point”. In my view, President Khama must at least be commended for being vocal on countries that disrespect the constitution. During the Mugabe era, Khama crossed swords with fellow African leaders many times after they remained mum on the lack of democratic culture in Zimbabwe. And today, Khama has once again voiced his frustration over the blatant disregard of the constitution by Kabila.
For 17 years, DRC has lurched from one crisis to another. In all this, Kabila has been assisted by an array of actors – including donors, multinationals and international institutions – who have tolerated and enabled his abuses. These actors have unfortunately prioritized stability over democracy which unfortunately the Congolese people do not have at the moment.
Following the violent and heavy repression on protesters who expressed disapproval of Kabila’s continued grip on power, the reaction from much of the international community contrasted sharply with opinion in Congo. There was a deafening silence from some international quarters, while others urged all parties to refrain from violence. Such calls however neglect the deep seated problems of the lack of constitutionalism in the DRC that continue to dog the DRC till this day. To date, Kabila has reneged on two deals to get him to leave office and the silence from regional bodies such as the African Union (AU) and Southern African Development Community (SADC) has been sickening to say the least.
Why ED visited DRC
Both Kabila and Mnangagwa have some similarities. They all face the heavy burden of legitimacy. They all came to power via the use of the military and they continue to serve as “illegitimate” leaders at the mercy of the military. While Mnangagwa’s visit was meant to drum up regional support and issues of legitimacy on his Presidency, they are both aware of the onerous task that lies ahead. On one hand, Kabila is reluctant to call for elections and step down. If he goes this route, that will signal the end of his 17-year tenure as President of the DRC.On one hand, Mnangagwa presidency has somewhat been quite controversial. His desire to rebrand ZANU PF has seen the 75-year-old president creating false hope and expectation. His 100 days in office has not yielded any tangible reforms. Added to this, in his 100 days in office, he has managed to “charm” the international community by promising to undertake serious reforms around elections and the economy. Any reasonable observer will conclude that Zimbabwe needs an all hands on deck approach to build a truly prosperous political and economic environment, one predicated on a foundation of justice and accountability. It is difficult to deny the negative impact that the military coup in Zimbabwe has had on the country’s social and political stability. ED has a lot of work ahead of him including the holding of a genuinely free and fair election this year, and if not much of the country will remain shackled, unable to break the hammerlock of an increasingly retrograde regime. Both “illegitimate” presidents know that indeed 2018 is judgement day for them and this even explains why they even conducted closed door meetings possibly to strategize.
Soon after the closed door meeting with Kabila, ED remarked, "I feel home away from home. President Kabila is a brother to me, I am his elder brother, he is younger, but of course he is my elder colleague. “He has been president for some time, but we are actually family and I am very happy to be here in the DRC and I was briefing my brother about this transition that has taken place in Zimbabwe and committing the new administration to consolidate our already excellent relationship."
What is saddening is the fact that our own media back home has failed to unpack the improperness of ED’S visit to the DRC.Whether it was done in the spirit of briefing Kabila about “transition” in Zimbabwe, visiting an individual who has failed to respect his own people’s constitution is deplorable and more or less exposes ED as an individual who embraces the blatant violation of constitutions. If anything, if ED is serious about issues of constitutionalism and democracy he must join hands with the lonely voice of Khama in calling for the stepping down of Kabila.
In the final analysis, Kabila is not the President of the DRC, regional bodies and the International community must appreciate this. The crisis in the DRC is desperate and neglected by regional groupings such as SADC and the AU. With several African set to hold election this year, will SADC and AU ensure that elections in African are peaceful, free and fair given that they have failed to act decisively on the current crisis in the DRC? I don’t think so!
Rawlings Magede is a Pan Africanist and writes here in his personal capacity. He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
.
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Devolution is constitutional, not tribal
Cameroon today is engulfed in a crisis owing to the unresolved issues of devolution between Francophone and Anglophone states. The root of this problem may be traced back when political elites of two territories with different colonial legacies-one French and the other British-agreed on the transformation of a federal state.Unfortunately,such arrangement failed to provide for equal partnership of both parties and failed to appreciate the cultural heritage and identity of each but turned out to be a transitory phase to the total integration of the Anglophone region into a strongly centralized, unitary state.Eventually,this created an Anglophone consciousness: the feeling of being marginalized, exploited and assimilated by the francophone dominated state, and even by the whole francophone population as a whole. The ongoing protests in Cameroon over this have been met with violence and arbitrary arrests by the government but unfortunately this has failed to address the issues raised by protestors (need to devolve). Save a thought for Cameroon.
Wither devolution?
Section 264 of the new Constitution of Zimbabwe provides for the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities. It is the same clause from the Constitution which has courted controversy over the need to speed up the implementation of devolution in the country. One of the objectives of devolution as enunciated in Section 264 is to give powers of local governance to the people and enhance their participation in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them. There is a general feeling among the people domiciled in Harare that they are marginalized and neglected even when it comes to framing of their own provincial or institutional budgets. The example of Cameroon saves as an example of the degree of damage and fissures created by the lack of devolution. The serious one being marginalization.
One unavoidable debate within Matabeleland is the issue of marginalization and unfortunately the government of the day has chosen to ignore or address fissures created by marginalization. Most of the issues raised by people there at least in my view are valid. For example, having grown up in Bulawayo myself for the better part of my childhood, I remember how the issue of the Zambezi-Bulawayo project was very topical during primary education day. Today, water remains a problem because the project is still to be completed. So I think at times when engaging in such debates, there is need for a soberer approach.
Unfortunately, the debate on this key and yet pertinent issue has been met with widespread criticism by people who have argued that devolution will divide the country. In my view, the fact that its provided for in the constitution means that there is some form of consensus among the populace that devolution must be implemented. Arguing that the government must devolve is actually a positive step that can helps address issues of marginalization, underdevelopment and poverty. It is also positive to note that government has always seen the need to devolve right from independence. After independence the government was somewhat committed to the need to decentralize. The Prime Minister’s Directive of 1984 underscored the need for decentralization by ensuring that the country has dual structures socially, economically and politically, relicts of the colonial past. It then became necessary to restructure local government through: Creation of new Ministries and deconcentrating of other e.g. The Ministry of Local Government and Rural and Urban Development (MLGRUD), Legislative changes and directives to democratize and strengthen local government and Participatory organizational structures to permit local participation in development planning. The Prime Minister stated how villages through the Village Development Committees (VIDCOs) and headed by the village head are supposed to define local needs, wards through the Ward Development Committees (WADCOs) headed by a district Councillor and covering six villages. Given developments that unfolded over the years, particularly related to the Traditional leadership institution by ZANU PF, decentralization was shelved in pursuit of narrow political goals. The Traditional leaders who are supposed to play key developmental roles are now active members of political parties or in some way furthering the interest of certain political parties in direct violation of section 281 of the constitution.
Besides this, government introduced the growth point strategy soon after independence in 1980 with the aim of transforming rural services and business centers into vibrant economic hubs for rural development. The growth pole strategy aimed to decongest urban centers by elevating some business centers to growth point status in order to curb rural and urban migration with work opportunities and the provision of basic essential services available at growth points. While government can be lauded for such an initiative, over the past years we have not seen growth points becoming economic hubs or facilitating adequate services. This owes to the neglect by government to provide adequate budget allocations.
Of course it must be noted that while growth points have enjoyed relative success by creating employment, infrastructure development, better health facilities, they have not done enough to complement government’s efforts to decentralize. To date, people who live close to growth point still have to bear high costs to access social services such as better health facilities etc. Most of these growth points resemble ghost towns where basic offices such as the Registrar General’s office operate under capacity owing to budget constraints. Such challenges have hampered any prospects for devolution.
Controversies around Devolution
The most peddled debate on devolution has been the serious issue of marginalization. The question is how can government then ensure the active participation and contribution by all citizens at every level in society? This can be addressed by decentralizing its activities and ensuring that people are not relegated to just being mere observers only but participants.Zimbabwe is littered with examples were citizens or locals in a specific community have been sidelined either in developmental projects or initiatives. Projects like road and dam construction have been tendered to private players since the successful completion of projects, for example, the construction of Tokwe Mukosi Dam in Masvingo Province. Some of the decentralization efforts by government are half -hearted and piecemeal, for example in Zimbabwe forest management remains a preserve of the RDCs and the Forest Company whilst local communities are restricted to the use of non-timber products for revenue generation.
In some seemingly devolved institutions such as VIDCOs and WADCOs meaningful participation has remained theoretical since the institutions only serve to shape policy of the top-down approach emphasized by the government in power. To even exacerbate the situation, most VIDCOs and WADCOs are only existing in theory and the few that remain operational are now captured by political elites.
Way forward
Government must comply with the constitution and devolve. However, this must be done in a sector-specific pattern and this will involve detailed investigations into how each sector should be organized and identify appropriate fiscal and institutional frameworks necessary. Decentralization without thoroughly understanding the local, social, economic, physical and institutional conditions often generate opposition among local groups – distant administrators (in Harare) cannot know the complex variety of factors that affect the success of project in local communities throughout the country.
Added to this, government must swiftly move in to resolve conflicts between institutions, such as WADCOs and VIDCOs and traditional institutions which have dealt rural development a severe blow. The two have conflicting mandates and jurisdictions resulting in power wrangles at the expense of developmental targets. Central government must also be downwardly accountable to local level authorities and it has the responsibility of clarifying laws, mediating major disputes and providing guidelines and means to assure the inclusion of marginal groups.
In the final analysis, devolution is inescapable from whichever lenses you view it from. The voices of those who voted for it during the constitution making process must be respected. Choosing to do otherwise will be a gross violation and a disregard of the people’s voice.
Rawlings Magede writes here in his personal capacity, his views are his own. He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
Wither devolution?
Section 264 of the new Constitution of Zimbabwe provides for the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities. It is the same clause from the Constitution which has courted controversy over the need to speed up the implementation of devolution in the country. One of the objectives of devolution as enunciated in Section 264 is to give powers of local governance to the people and enhance their participation in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them. There is a general feeling among the people domiciled in Harare that they are marginalized and neglected even when it comes to framing of their own provincial or institutional budgets. The example of Cameroon saves as an example of the degree of damage and fissures created by the lack of devolution. The serious one being marginalization.
One unavoidable debate within Matabeleland is the issue of marginalization and unfortunately the government of the day has chosen to ignore or address fissures created by marginalization. Most of the issues raised by people there at least in my view are valid. For example, having grown up in Bulawayo myself for the better part of my childhood, I remember how the issue of the Zambezi-Bulawayo project was very topical during primary education day. Today, water remains a problem because the project is still to be completed. So I think at times when engaging in such debates, there is need for a soberer approach.
Unfortunately, the debate on this key and yet pertinent issue has been met with widespread criticism by people who have argued that devolution will divide the country. In my view, the fact that its provided for in the constitution means that there is some form of consensus among the populace that devolution must be implemented. Arguing that the government must devolve is actually a positive step that can helps address issues of marginalization, underdevelopment and poverty. It is also positive to note that government has always seen the need to devolve right from independence. After independence the government was somewhat committed to the need to decentralize. The Prime Minister’s Directive of 1984 underscored the need for decentralization by ensuring that the country has dual structures socially, economically and politically, relicts of the colonial past. It then became necessary to restructure local government through: Creation of new Ministries and deconcentrating of other e.g. The Ministry of Local Government and Rural and Urban Development (MLGRUD), Legislative changes and directives to democratize and strengthen local government and Participatory organizational structures to permit local participation in development planning. The Prime Minister stated how villages through the Village Development Committees (VIDCOs) and headed by the village head are supposed to define local needs, wards through the Ward Development Committees (WADCOs) headed by a district Councillor and covering six villages. Given developments that unfolded over the years, particularly related to the Traditional leadership institution by ZANU PF, decentralization was shelved in pursuit of narrow political goals. The Traditional leaders who are supposed to play key developmental roles are now active members of political parties or in some way furthering the interest of certain political parties in direct violation of section 281 of the constitution.
Besides this, government introduced the growth point strategy soon after independence in 1980 with the aim of transforming rural services and business centers into vibrant economic hubs for rural development. The growth pole strategy aimed to decongest urban centers by elevating some business centers to growth point status in order to curb rural and urban migration with work opportunities and the provision of basic essential services available at growth points. While government can be lauded for such an initiative, over the past years we have not seen growth points becoming economic hubs or facilitating adequate services. This owes to the neglect by government to provide adequate budget allocations.
Of course it must be noted that while growth points have enjoyed relative success by creating employment, infrastructure development, better health facilities, they have not done enough to complement government’s efforts to decentralize. To date, people who live close to growth point still have to bear high costs to access social services such as better health facilities etc. Most of these growth points resemble ghost towns where basic offices such as the Registrar General’s office operate under capacity owing to budget constraints. Such challenges have hampered any prospects for devolution.
Controversies around Devolution
The most peddled debate on devolution has been the serious issue of marginalization. The question is how can government then ensure the active participation and contribution by all citizens at every level in society? This can be addressed by decentralizing its activities and ensuring that people are not relegated to just being mere observers only but participants.Zimbabwe is littered with examples were citizens or locals in a specific community have been sidelined either in developmental projects or initiatives. Projects like road and dam construction have been tendered to private players since the successful completion of projects, for example, the construction of Tokwe Mukosi Dam in Masvingo Province. Some of the decentralization efforts by government are half -hearted and piecemeal, for example in Zimbabwe forest management remains a preserve of the RDCs and the Forest Company whilst local communities are restricted to the use of non-timber products for revenue generation.
In some seemingly devolved institutions such as VIDCOs and WADCOs meaningful participation has remained theoretical since the institutions only serve to shape policy of the top-down approach emphasized by the government in power. To even exacerbate the situation, most VIDCOs and WADCOs are only existing in theory and the few that remain operational are now captured by political elites.
Way forward
Government must comply with the constitution and devolve. However, this must be done in a sector-specific pattern and this will involve detailed investigations into how each sector should be organized and identify appropriate fiscal and institutional frameworks necessary. Decentralization without thoroughly understanding the local, social, economic, physical and institutional conditions often generate opposition among local groups – distant administrators (in Harare) cannot know the complex variety of factors that affect the success of project in local communities throughout the country.
Added to this, government must swiftly move in to resolve conflicts between institutions, such as WADCOs and VIDCOs and traditional institutions which have dealt rural development a severe blow. The two have conflicting mandates and jurisdictions resulting in power wrangles at the expense of developmental targets. Central government must also be downwardly accountable to local level authorities and it has the responsibility of clarifying laws, mediating major disputes and providing guidelines and means to assure the inclusion of marginal groups.
In the final analysis, devolution is inescapable from whichever lenses you view it from. The voices of those who voted for it during the constitution making process must be respected. Choosing to do otherwise will be a gross violation and a disregard of the people’s voice.
Rawlings Magede writes here in his personal capacity, his views are his own. He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
Monday, January 8, 2018
Corruption and the politics of patronage in Zimbabwe
While we were coming to terms with the reality of a military takeover in Zimbabwe on 15 November 2017, the new President of Angola, President João Lourenço was deviating from his predecessors’ stance on corruption and cronyism. He first fired the entire board of Angola’s state oil company Sonangol, including its chair Isabel dos Santos, daughter of former President Dos Santos.
The adage of not biting the hand that feeds you rings true in Africa. The one who appoints might never disappoint as long as one plays cleverly to the whims and directives of the appointing authority. When Lourenco was appointed as successor by the former President, critics of the Dos Santos administration predicted that the new elect was going to continue where Dos Santos left and protect his interests. But alas, the new President has deviated from the set norm and has gone on to try and cleanse and usher in a new dispensation. Of interest the firing of 60 government officials and heads of the state diamond firms (Endiama and Sodiam) highlight how the new President is willing to get rid of cronyism that had crippled the country. His swiftness in dealing with the Sonangol rot also shows his ambition for the nation given that oil accounts for 45% of the country’s GDP, 75% of government revenues, and 98% of foreign exchange income. Enough about Angola.
Although President Mnangagwa meteoritic rise to the highest office in the land was unconstitutional (at least in my view) his stance on corruption has been welcomed by citizens. It is true that corruption had crippled prospects for economic revival and the countless roadblocks mounted by the police demonstrated how corruption has become institutionalized even by authorities who are supposed to enforce the law. President Mnangagwa approach to corruption has somewhat been different from Lourenço’s in the sense that there appears to be a selection application of arrest by the corruption body, Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC).
In November 2017, the President Mnangagwa called on people who illegally externalized money to return the money within three months. He also highlighted that there will be a three-month period in which people can return the funds without any fear of prosecution. However, after the three-month period elapses, the authorities will start making arrests. This in my view was progressive. In the subsequent months’ senior politicians such as Ignatius Chombo, Kudzai Chipanga among other high profile officials were arraigned before the courts facing numerous counts of corruption. At the time of writing this piece, former Foreign Affairs Minister Walter Mzembi and erstwhile Energy and Power Development Minister Samuel Undenge are the latest high profile politicians to be arrested by the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) on charges of abuse of office. Though the fight against corruption is laudable, but when it appears to target only politicians linked to the G40 cabal while seemingly protecting others, then it becomes worrisome.
In my last installment I noted that the President’s cabinet was uninspiring as it appeared to be a rewarding exercise for his loyalists and cronies who had facilitated his ascendancy to the throne. A lot of Ministers in the mold of Obert Mpofu and Supa Mandiwanzira were named is his cabinet. This again generated a lot of debate since some of the ministers have been implicated in cases of corruption.
Will the President Act on his cronies?
The recent scandal involving Supa Mandiwanzira, the Minister of Information Communication Technology and Cyber Security who stands accused of criminal abuse of office or corruption is a litmus test for the President. Mandiwanzira allegations were leveled against him by former Netone CEO, Reward Kangai who allege that Mandiwanzira engaged a South African firm for consultation services without going to tender as is standard procedure. Kangai as Netone CEO at the time was then shocked to receive an invoice for $4m which he claims that neither he as CEO or the other board members knew about. It is this scandal that pushed Kangai out of Netone after he refused to honour the invoice claiming it was illegal for him to do so. He further claims that he alerted Netone chairman and the chairman told him that the parastatal had to protect the minister. The most glaring derive from the graft within parastatals especially the overarching roles that government Ministers have in the running of parastatals is not only endemic but has done much more to undermine growth and discourage investment. The Mandiwanzira case will prove the President’s sincerity on corruption as it involves one of his own.
Wither the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission?
Every time I have come across the work of this commission, its either it will be accused for investigating government officials in order to settle ZANU PF factional wars or high sounding nothing threats through its Chairperson, one Goodson Nguni. What is even worrisome is the fact that Nguni himself has in the past been accused of corruption. There are several politicians who are under investigation by the commission. For example, the findings of the ZIMDEF scandal were never publicized. What is even more worrying being that ZACC has coincidentally instigated a series of arrests against politicians who in the past opposed Mnangagwa ascendancy to the Presidency.
The reports that Minister Mandiwanzira is under investigation by the ZACC must not excite any progressive citizen rather it must expose the lack of independence and inability of the Commission to deal with cases of corruption decisively due to continued interference by politicians. The Mandiwanzira scandal represents a test for the new President due to the fact that the evidence of Mandiwanzira illicit involvement is there for all to see.
In the final analysis, corruption and not sanctions have caused serious hemorrhage for our economy. The no-tolerance call to corruption by the President must be lauded. Beyond the call, the President must put words into action and prosecute even his cronies who have/will be implicated in corruption and graft. The days ahead will have more eyes.
Rawlings Magede writes in his personal capacity.he tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
The adage of not biting the hand that feeds you rings true in Africa. The one who appoints might never disappoint as long as one plays cleverly to the whims and directives of the appointing authority. When Lourenco was appointed as successor by the former President, critics of the Dos Santos administration predicted that the new elect was going to continue where Dos Santos left and protect his interests. But alas, the new President has deviated from the set norm and has gone on to try and cleanse and usher in a new dispensation. Of interest the firing of 60 government officials and heads of the state diamond firms (Endiama and Sodiam) highlight how the new President is willing to get rid of cronyism that had crippled the country. His swiftness in dealing with the Sonangol rot also shows his ambition for the nation given that oil accounts for 45% of the country’s GDP, 75% of government revenues, and 98% of foreign exchange income. Enough about Angola.
Although President Mnangagwa meteoritic rise to the highest office in the land was unconstitutional (at least in my view) his stance on corruption has been welcomed by citizens. It is true that corruption had crippled prospects for economic revival and the countless roadblocks mounted by the police demonstrated how corruption has become institutionalized even by authorities who are supposed to enforce the law. President Mnangagwa approach to corruption has somewhat been different from Lourenço’s in the sense that there appears to be a selection application of arrest by the corruption body, Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC).
In November 2017, the President Mnangagwa called on people who illegally externalized money to return the money within three months. He also highlighted that there will be a three-month period in which people can return the funds without any fear of prosecution. However, after the three-month period elapses, the authorities will start making arrests. This in my view was progressive. In the subsequent months’ senior politicians such as Ignatius Chombo, Kudzai Chipanga among other high profile officials were arraigned before the courts facing numerous counts of corruption. At the time of writing this piece, former Foreign Affairs Minister Walter Mzembi and erstwhile Energy and Power Development Minister Samuel Undenge are the latest high profile politicians to be arrested by the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) on charges of abuse of office. Though the fight against corruption is laudable, but when it appears to target only politicians linked to the G40 cabal while seemingly protecting others, then it becomes worrisome.
In my last installment I noted that the President’s cabinet was uninspiring as it appeared to be a rewarding exercise for his loyalists and cronies who had facilitated his ascendancy to the throne. A lot of Ministers in the mold of Obert Mpofu and Supa Mandiwanzira were named is his cabinet. This again generated a lot of debate since some of the ministers have been implicated in cases of corruption.
Will the President Act on his cronies?
The recent scandal involving Supa Mandiwanzira, the Minister of Information Communication Technology and Cyber Security who stands accused of criminal abuse of office or corruption is a litmus test for the President. Mandiwanzira allegations were leveled against him by former Netone CEO, Reward Kangai who allege that Mandiwanzira engaged a South African firm for consultation services without going to tender as is standard procedure. Kangai as Netone CEO at the time was then shocked to receive an invoice for $4m which he claims that neither he as CEO or the other board members knew about. It is this scandal that pushed Kangai out of Netone after he refused to honour the invoice claiming it was illegal for him to do so. He further claims that he alerted Netone chairman and the chairman told him that the parastatal had to protect the minister. The most glaring derive from the graft within parastatals especially the overarching roles that government Ministers have in the running of parastatals is not only endemic but has done much more to undermine growth and discourage investment. The Mandiwanzira case will prove the President’s sincerity on corruption as it involves one of his own.
Wither the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission?
Every time I have come across the work of this commission, its either it will be accused for investigating government officials in order to settle ZANU PF factional wars or high sounding nothing threats through its Chairperson, one Goodson Nguni. What is even worrisome is the fact that Nguni himself has in the past been accused of corruption. There are several politicians who are under investigation by the commission. For example, the findings of the ZIMDEF scandal were never publicized. What is even more worrying being that ZACC has coincidentally instigated a series of arrests against politicians who in the past opposed Mnangagwa ascendancy to the Presidency.
The reports that Minister Mandiwanzira is under investigation by the ZACC must not excite any progressive citizen rather it must expose the lack of independence and inability of the Commission to deal with cases of corruption decisively due to continued interference by politicians. The Mandiwanzira scandal represents a test for the new President due to the fact that the evidence of Mandiwanzira illicit involvement is there for all to see.
In the final analysis, corruption and not sanctions have caused serious hemorrhage for our economy. The no-tolerance call to corruption by the President must be lauded. Beyond the call, the President must put words into action and prosecute even his cronies who have/will be implicated in corruption and graft. The days ahead will have more eyes.
Rawlings Magede writes in his personal capacity.he tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
Friday, December 1, 2017
It’s business as usual Mr President!
By Rawlings Magede
It will be very unfair to compare President Emmerson Mnangagwa and the current Tanzanian President John Pombe Magufuli.This is so in the sense that the two African countries face different problems at the moment. For Magufuli he has proved his critics wrong by introducing sweeping reforms in his government that has even forced his doomsayers to acknowledge that its indeed no longer business as usual. On the other hand, Mnangagwa is presently seized with the mammoth task of managing relations within ZANU PF and ensuring that he does not disappoint those who help him ascend to the highest throne in the land.
What is rather interesting about these two Presidents is that they all belong to political parties that have been in power for a long time and the founding fathers of their parties (Mugabe and Nyerere) are both credited for their stance on the need for black empowerment. When Magufuli took over Presidency in 2015, Tanzania was burdened by a myriad of problems that include ghost workers in the civil service and corruption by officials connected to his party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi among other ills. But today he has made steady progress in addressing these problems.
Coincidentally President Mnangagwa inherited a government burdened by rampant corruption, poor economic policies and in some instances gross incompetence by those in government. In the case of Magufuli, his current tenure has brought a lot of positives and incremental gains for Tanzania. He has implemented sweeping reforms and has managed to reconfigure the Chama Cha Mapinduzi party.
The thousands of people who took heed to the call by the war veterans to stage a march against former president, Mugabe, had hoped that the new president was going to lead a new era that would see a departure from the old way of running a government. Most people criticized Mugabe’s administration of recycling deadwood which he interchangeably rotated among government ministries for his own parochial interests. In Mugabe’s era there are Ministries whose actual mandate was never known by the public, a clear example is the Psychomotor Ministry that was led by Josiah Hungwe.In my view such a practice by Mugabe forced citizens to lose trust and confidence in certain Ministries. Rather than have confidence in such Ministries, citizens would make jokes out of the Ministers appointed by Mugabe. Even his cabinet reshuffle did not even reflect “reshuffling” but was just a cheap way used to coerce his lieutenants to continue supporting him.
However, on 1 December 2017, the nation awoke to the news that President Mnangagwa had announced his long awaited cabinet. From the day he was inaugurated, the new President in my view had hit the ground running by implementing cost cutting measures that even saw him missing the inauguration of Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta. He even refused to have the expensive Mercedes Benz used by Mugabe as part of his motorcade. For a moment I concurred with his supporters that the President was on the right path.
His latest cabinet is uninspiring, seems like a return to the old day of the Mugabe era and is not in tandem with his earlier calls on rebuilding the country. Most of the Ministers in the new cabinet presided over corrupt activities and still owe citizens an explanation. The new cabinet has also seen the inclusion of military personnel who have taken up two key ministries (Agriculture and Foreign Affairs respectively). Whether the military personnel have a proven track record of competency remains to be seen and is the subject for another day.
My greatest disappointment with the new cabinet is the lack of inspiration from some of the appointed Ministers. In my view, the new cabinet seems to be a reward by the President of his allies who over the years advanced his bid to succeed former president Mugabe. What is even frustrating is the fact that some of the old cabinet ministers reappointed have long gone past their expiry date. Was the new cabinet not supposed to be made up of new faces who have enthusiasm and energy to work? Even the omission of someone hardworking like Mayor Justice Wadyajena is shocking given the sterling work he did when he was chairing the Parliamentary Portfolio committee on Youth and Indigenization. Former Ministers of Youth Savior Kasukuwere and Patrick Zhuwawo dreaded appearing before the committee where they knew that the committee was tough on issues of transparency and accountability.
It even baffles the mind why the president opted to even combine the Ministry of Women affairs and Youth given that the two Ministries are diverse and require special attention. Even the age of the new Minister Sithembiso Nyoni is even an insult to the ordinary youth. Citizens expected that the President was going to go the Magufuli way and implement sweeping reforms firstly by appointing new and capable ministers in his cabinet so that there is some semblance of a “new era”.
With all due respect to Ambassador Khaya Moyo, isn’t the Energy Ministry too big for him given that his recent deployments have been around the Information portfolio and then Economic planning. I can go on and analyze each ministry and highlight loopholes and gaps. In any democracy, the success of any Ministry is dependent on citizens’ confidence in the minister leading that particular Ministry. I am totally aware that there are permanent secretaries within the various Ministries who do the majority of the work but the contribution and innovation by Ministers is key and must not be overlooked. In our case, the crop of the redeployed ministers in the new cabinet have proved over a long time that they are unable to run ministries effectively and even is some cases looted public funds for self-enrichment.
The new cabinet by the President in my view is a contradiction to his recent calls to have a corrupt free country and quality service delivery. What can the recycled Ministers bring that is new and has innovation? What is important to note is that there are some faces within his new cabinet that are detested by many because of gross incompetence and corruption. For example, Ministers like Obert Mpofu have been implicated in corruption scandals even under the Mugabe administration.
In the final analysis, there are some who have argued that permanent secretaries within the various ministries are hardworking and overshadow the incompetent Ministers. It remains to be seen whether the new ministers will reform and change for the better. As for me it seems like business as usual.
Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast from Gokwe-Kana who writes in his personal capacity. He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
It’s not yet Uhuru for Zimbabwe
By Rawlings Magede
The events of the 18th of November 2017 will go down in the history of the country as memorable, yes memorable, in the sense that people from diverse political and socio-economic persuasions united for a common cause and heeded to the call by war veterans to march against former President Robert Mugabe. What was encouraging on the day in question was that even the old, youths and even women who previously shunned demonstrations organized by pressure groups came in their numbers. To me that alone was symbolic and representative of the deep seated problems bedeviling our nation. For me the fact that for that moment people managed to suspend differences and agreed that indeed Mugabe was the elephant in the room. Never in the history of the country had we witnessed such a record crowd during a demonstration against Mugabe.
Not to be left out was the media (both public and private) followed developments with enthusiasm right from the time Emmerson Mnangagwa was fired both from ZANU PF and government. For once the combat hate-filled narratives seen in local newspapers disappeared as the media preached message of peace and unity. In all this the government was also worryingly silent and was on auto pilot. The government which during the time of Mugabe’s rule has often been abusive and predatory, transformed itself as various Ministries scrambled to have the national broadcaster to cover their events.
On the other hand, citizens utilized social media for satire and expressed their displeasure on the continued refusal by Mugabe to resign. So yes, there has been some sense of unity and common purpose among citizens and going forward it is imperative for citizens to continue demonstrating such ethos as they help to build a just and tolerant society.
Today as the nation slowly comes to terms with the reality of the departure of Mugabe, there are quite a number of serious conversations that citizens must begin to initiate. Will the departure of Mugabe herald a new culture of the observance of human rights, economic revival and the end of the culture of impunity that had shaken the very foundations on which a just and liberal society is founded on?
How did we get here?
I think there is shared consensus even across the political divide that the current mess in the country boils down to Robert Mugabe simply because as head of government he was overally responsible. Added to this and most important is how corruption had become institutionalized by Mugabe who openly rewarded his cronies even against overwhelming evidence of corruption and graft. I mean we have our archives of corruption hidden in deep parts of our memories. Yes, this is our hope at least for now, something that has become part of us and as the political tides continue to trudge towards exciting times ahead, all we can do is watch. We have so many cases of parastatals that were left in the intensive care unit by political figures who even in the wake of a new dawn continue to bask and revel in ill-gotten wealth.
But alas, in the past our courts had earned a fame of being magnanimous to criminals, by continuing to operate and skirt on corruption cases with rehearsed precision. Shockingly some quarters within society today can be exonerated for branding our courts as factional proxies used to achieve parochial fights. Even today in a “new Zimbabwe” all those people who marched in solidarity with the war veterans still hope that maybe with the change of leadership, our courts can have a semblance of a just and credible justice system.
What must Mnangagwa do in a post Mugabe era?
I am a very big fan of Christopher Mutsvangwa on the basis that from his subsequent dismissal from ZANU PF, he has been talking sense. Among issues he identified as being an Achilles heel in our economy was serious corruption by the G40 faction that he singled out as the main hurdle to economic revival. However, there are some problems that I have with Mutsvangwa. In a just and democratic society, there is no institution that is immune to criticism. The way he views the army as invincible and flawless is worrying especially from a man who was vocal to the creature of a demigod that Mugabe had become. In the past, even Mugabe was portrayed as flawless and invincible such that even those within ZANU PF believed it for 37 years! It is this culture that must never be tolerated in a new Zimbabwe. The army including the Generals are human as well who can err and make mistakes just like everyone. Positive criticism and tolerance must form the foundations of this “new Zimbabwe” for the simple reason that today skillful politicians around have proved adept at manipulating populist sentiment and using democratic structures to erect forms of personalized, authoritarian rule.
I think an onerous task lies ahead for Mnangagwa as the nation trudges towards democracy. The obvious task is to rebuild the economy and assure would-be investors that Zimbabwe is a safe investmet destination. This process might involve serious amendments to the country’s indigenization laws that have scared away potential investors. This will also involve the implementation of sound economic policies that stifle economic growth. Other issues to be addressed include responsible governance, transparency, prosecution of those fingered in corruption, free and fair elections and an even application of the rule of law. One cancer that had crippled government ministries and parastatals is nepotism. The new government must also create a conducive environment where citizens enjoy fundamental human rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the constitution.
Closely related to this is the fact that the system of Mugabeism is still very intact and had permeated even to the lowest ZANU PF structures. These structures wield a lot of influence and power that even usurp that of constitutionally provided institutions such as Traditional leadership. For these and other hang-ons, it is high noon for them to appreciate and embrace the reality that Zimbabwe just like any sovereign state is for all of us to enjoy and rebuild.
In the final analysis, incoming President Mnangagwa has a herculean task ahead of him that require a tough and no-nonsense policy on corruption and impunity. This is so because through his recent press statements, he has raised hope and expectation on the need to be inclusive in the rebuilding exercise. The citizenry at the moment is closely monitoring if Mnangagwa will weed out corruption, deal with the deep rooted problem of impunity, improve Zimbabwe’s tainted human rights record and implement policies that will herald a new dawn for the country.
The days ahead will have many eyes.
Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast who writes from Gokwe-Kana.He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com
Wednesday, August 30, 2017
Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill: A wake up call for Zimbabwe’s opposition parties
Over the years I have deliberately avoided writing about the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), South Africa’s vibrant opposition party that was formed in 2013 as I felt that it was too early to measure and evaluate its achievements. The EFF is famed for its vibrancy in the South African Parliament. Not only this, they have also been credited for inciting the public to speak out against injustices that include the Marikana incident, demanding the Executive to be more democratic and transparency among other issues. The strength of the EFF has been its ability to measure the gains of post independent South Africa against those enunciated in the Freedom Charter that was adopted in June 1955.What was striking about the Freedom Charter is that it harboured the aspirations of all the diverse races in South Africa.
Its preamble sought to address the more contentious issue of race given the diverse races that even make up present day South Africa. Therefore, its preamble was clear in that it specified that South Africa as a sovereign country belonged to all people who live in it, black or white. In short, the charter was in essence inclusive and neither racially loaded or exclusive of any group. It is to this important aspect that the charter owes its majesty. And it is from this seed that the much-lauded South African constitution took root and grew. It is this clarity by the EFF that has allowed it to gain national audience especially on issues that range from economic to political. What is interesting about the EFF is the fact it’s not the only the political party made up of comrades from the ruling African National Congress (ANC). In 2008, former ANC stalwarts Mosiuoa Lekota, Mbhazima Shilowa and Mluleki George founded the Congress of the People (COPE) but its popularity, if any was short lived as it failed to rally numbers around key issues such as inequalities that cut across race and tribes.
What I somehow emulate about the EFF is that it is a fairly new political party that has been in existence for less than 5 years but in this shortest period, it has managed to achieve quite a handful of feats that some opposition parties across the African continent can only yearn for. Since the EFF won seats in 2014,it has transformed the South African parliament to be more vibrant and explosive thereby encouraging citizens to give attention and follow parliamentary procedures which had been naturally ignored since the country’s independence in 1994.The EFF has also stirred debates in parliament demanding the Executive to be more accountable and publicly calling President Zuma to pay back the money that he allegedly used to improve his rural home of Nkandla among other key issues. So yes, this is what an opposition party that is still in its infantry stage is doing across the Limpopo. Time would fail me if I begin to talk about the numerous times the EFF has been ejected from Parliament as they protest against procedures and policies.
Why are opposition parties silent on the Implications of the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill?
The Sunday mail carried an article on the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill. The article revealed that if the bill is to be passed into law, citizens who abuse social media or any other computer based systems will be prosecuted. The bill has been described by experts as an infringement on fundamental human rights and freedoms by the government meant to tighten its grip over the control of cyber space and spy on citizens. Misa Zimbabwe, a vibrant media advocacy and lobbying group has stated that the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security bill infringes on basic people’s rights, including freedom of expression. This article is not dedicated to analyze the provisions of this bill but on the seemingly surreal silence by opposition parties that have Legislators in Parliament. Why there is no national discourse even across opposition party supporters especially on this bill still baffles the mind given that most of their activities that include demonstrations rely heavily on the use of social media platforms. Of late I have been following religiously the Parliamentary debates aired on the national broadcaster and I have been deeply saddened by lack of consensus among opposition MPs in parliament over issues that they put on the agenda. What I have witnessed are incidences of heckling and tired jokes right in the house! I have not heard or seen any incidence where Parliament was momentarily shut down as opposition parties push for an important agenda. The few who get opportunities to move motions in Parliament have however concentrated on petty issues such as ZANU PF’s factional fights and the issue of succession. This has in turn reduced Parliament to a theatrical platform where tired jokes and non-issues reign supreme. Legislators such as James Maridadi have however raised critical issues that deserve applause.
Opposition parties that have legislators in Parliament must also identify from amongst themselves resource personnel with strong research skills who can better articulate and present evidence based issues rather than cheap political slogans. Opposition parties in Parliament also have a lot of arsenal at their disposal. There is also the opportunity presented by Parliamentary Portfolio Committees that have in the past or present chaired by opposition party legislators. These committees offer an opportunity for opposition legislators to address, probe and scrutinize transparency, corruption and procurement within government Ministries.
In the final analysis, the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill presents a window of opportunity for opposition legislators and the nation at large to say no to such repugnant and draconian piece of legislation. Of course different laws apply differently for different countries but for us in Zimbabwe, our past experiences with draconian legislation from the days of the enactment of the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Aippa) have taught us otherwise. While it is necessary to have laws that help to safeguard abuse of each other’s human rights, it’s equally necessary not to enact laws that curtail the enjoyment of fundamental human rights and freedoms such as freedom of expression that are well provided for in the constitution.
Rawlings Magede writes in his personal capacity here. He tweets @rawedges and be contacted on vamagede@gmail.com
Its preamble sought to address the more contentious issue of race given the diverse races that even make up present day South Africa. Therefore, its preamble was clear in that it specified that South Africa as a sovereign country belonged to all people who live in it, black or white. In short, the charter was in essence inclusive and neither racially loaded or exclusive of any group. It is to this important aspect that the charter owes its majesty. And it is from this seed that the much-lauded South African constitution took root and grew. It is this clarity by the EFF that has allowed it to gain national audience especially on issues that range from economic to political. What is interesting about the EFF is the fact it’s not the only the political party made up of comrades from the ruling African National Congress (ANC). In 2008, former ANC stalwarts Mosiuoa Lekota, Mbhazima Shilowa and Mluleki George founded the Congress of the People (COPE) but its popularity, if any was short lived as it failed to rally numbers around key issues such as inequalities that cut across race and tribes.
What I somehow emulate about the EFF is that it is a fairly new political party that has been in existence for less than 5 years but in this shortest period, it has managed to achieve quite a handful of feats that some opposition parties across the African continent can only yearn for. Since the EFF won seats in 2014,it has transformed the South African parliament to be more vibrant and explosive thereby encouraging citizens to give attention and follow parliamentary procedures which had been naturally ignored since the country’s independence in 1994.The EFF has also stirred debates in parliament demanding the Executive to be more accountable and publicly calling President Zuma to pay back the money that he allegedly used to improve his rural home of Nkandla among other key issues. So yes, this is what an opposition party that is still in its infantry stage is doing across the Limpopo. Time would fail me if I begin to talk about the numerous times the EFF has been ejected from Parliament as they protest against procedures and policies.
Why are opposition parties silent on the Implications of the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill?
The Sunday mail carried an article on the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill. The article revealed that if the bill is to be passed into law, citizens who abuse social media or any other computer based systems will be prosecuted. The bill has been described by experts as an infringement on fundamental human rights and freedoms by the government meant to tighten its grip over the control of cyber space and spy on citizens. Misa Zimbabwe, a vibrant media advocacy and lobbying group has stated that the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security bill infringes on basic people’s rights, including freedom of expression. This article is not dedicated to analyze the provisions of this bill but on the seemingly surreal silence by opposition parties that have Legislators in Parliament. Why there is no national discourse even across opposition party supporters especially on this bill still baffles the mind given that most of their activities that include demonstrations rely heavily on the use of social media platforms. Of late I have been following religiously the Parliamentary debates aired on the national broadcaster and I have been deeply saddened by lack of consensus among opposition MPs in parliament over issues that they put on the agenda. What I have witnessed are incidences of heckling and tired jokes right in the house! I have not heard or seen any incidence where Parliament was momentarily shut down as opposition parties push for an important agenda. The few who get opportunities to move motions in Parliament have however concentrated on petty issues such as ZANU PF’s factional fights and the issue of succession. This has in turn reduced Parliament to a theatrical platform where tired jokes and non-issues reign supreme. Legislators such as James Maridadi have however raised critical issues that deserve applause.
Opposition parties that have legislators in Parliament must also identify from amongst themselves resource personnel with strong research skills who can better articulate and present evidence based issues rather than cheap political slogans. Opposition parties in Parliament also have a lot of arsenal at their disposal. There is also the opportunity presented by Parliamentary Portfolio Committees that have in the past or present chaired by opposition party legislators. These committees offer an opportunity for opposition legislators to address, probe and scrutinize transparency, corruption and procurement within government Ministries.
In the final analysis, the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill presents a window of opportunity for opposition legislators and the nation at large to say no to such repugnant and draconian piece of legislation. Of course different laws apply differently for different countries but for us in Zimbabwe, our past experiences with draconian legislation from the days of the enactment of the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Aippa) have taught us otherwise. While it is necessary to have laws that help to safeguard abuse of each other’s human rights, it’s equally necessary not to enact laws that curtail the enjoyment of fundamental human rights and freedoms such as freedom of expression that are well provided for in the constitution.
Rawlings Magede writes in his personal capacity here. He tweets @rawedges and be contacted on vamagede@gmail.com
Thursday, August 24, 2017
Africa’s Leadership renewal: A facade of Transitional Democracy
Africa is currently grappling and coming to terms with the seemingly interesting news that Africa’s second long serving President, José Eduardo dos Santos will step down after current country elections. This is after 38 years of plunder and self-accumulation of wealth.as part of a “peaceful” transition dos Santos has handpicked his ally, Defence Minister João Lourenço to be his successor. Given the past dominance of the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), Lourenco is likely to win the Presidential election. Under the new arrangement dos Santos will remain the President of his party, the ruling until at least 2021. This alone vests considerable power in him including power to choose parliamentary candidates. Earlier this month, parliament also passed legislation safeguarding dos Santos’ picks at the head of Defence and intelligence services.
While this is cause for celebration in terms of leadership renewal in Africa’s tainted history of military coups, dos Santos’ invisible hand of control will continue to dog Lourenco’s administration at least for the foreseeable future. The appointed new president is just a ceremonial president with no power of decision. Stepping down by dos Santos is meant to deceive Africa yet the truth is that he is still in control. Closely linked to this is the passing of new laws by government last month which prevent the next president from firing the military, police, and intelligence chiefs.
Just like past and present African presidents, dos Santos has also created an empire and dynasty for his family during his 38-year tenure at the helm. While he remains party president, his daughter Isabel will stay in charge of Sonangol, the state oil company, after being appointed in June 2016, and Jose Filomeno, dos Santos’ son, will remain in charge of Angola’s $5 billion sovereign wealth fund.
The developments in Angola are not new but have happened elsewhere across the world. In Cuba long serving President, Fidel Castro, who in his early 30s, aligned Cuba with the Soviet Union and used Cuban troops to support revolution in Africa and throughout Latin America, appointed his brother Raul Castro as his successor. In Venezuela, the late President Hugo Chavez credited for initiating a leftist political process, Bolivarian Revolution, appointed a former driver, Nicolás Maduro as his successor in 2013.To date the administrations both in Cuba and Venezuela have been accused of diverting from the script and plunging the two countries into retrogression in terms of previous gains by their predecessors. Their failure has also been largely to the ever unpredictable webs of patronage and business interests left by their predecessors, making them vulnerable to exposure.
So yes, the stepping down by dos Santos should not be celebrated beyond its normal confines as doing so is akin to applying lipstick to a frog. The new President Lourenco will take over from where dos Santos left and will not even seek to antagonize the current status quo. So, given the mixed experiences with the contentious but yet necessary debate of transition in African countries, we can also identify a trend where incumbent presidents have continued to grip on power by any means necessary by appointing loyal and subservient successors. Ghana should be credited for managing peaceful transitions since 1992 and today its credited for this. This is of course outside other African countries such as South Africa that have done well in this regard.
Will Mugabe ever choose a successor?
Recently, First Lady Grace Mugabe shocked the nation when she announced that it was noble for President Mugabe to choose and anoint a successor. In her own words, she said that,” the president has the right to be involved in naming his successor, and that the president’s word is final. “Since the 1990s ZANU PF members who have dared raise this controversial subject of succession have either been disciplined or expelled. What is important to note is the underlying meaning of First Lady’s sentiments. Firstly, her sentiments imply that she has finally conceded that her husband will not be there forever to offer her protection. Secondly, while its necessary for party members to debate about it, her husband must name successor and whoever that successor will be, he or she will serve at the mercy of the President. Thirdly, given in the recent past, she has demonstrated both influence and authority in the dismissal and public humiliation of party cadres who at one point were untouchable, the likely successor will also serve at her pleasure. This is more so because naturally, there is no way Mugabe will appoint a vengeful foe who is unpredictable and likely to torment and scuttle wealth accumulated by his family.
Just like the case in Angola, Mugabe’s invisible hand even from beyond the grave will continue to dictate decisions for any ZANU PF administration in the future. In the event that Mugabe does indeed appoint a successor, it will be a mere perpetuation of his rule.
When discussing about transition in Zimbabwe, succession is a puzzle that we cannot avoid. This article is not about who will emerge the ultimate successor within ZANU PF’s succession matrix but about the precedence in Africa where leaders still remote control events even from their graves. What even makes succession interesting is Mugabe’s reluctance to name a successor even when there are overwhelming signs of fatigue and incapacity on his part. The delay in naming a successor even at a ripe age of 94 reveals the continued thirst and appetite to continue ruling even when the body gives off its ghost.
Close cronies who have worked with Mugabe over the years have all revealed how power hungry Mugabe is. In his book, The Story of My Life, former Vice President Joshua Nkomo, confessed that he once asked Mugabe a question over what was the supreme organ in the country. To this, Mugabe replied that it was the ZANU PF Central Committee. This was at the height of the Gukurahundi atrocities in Matabeleland and the Midlands region after Nkomo was dismissed from government. After his subsequent dismissal from ZANU PF, former ZANU PF Secretary General, Edgar Tekere simply remarked that “Democracy is in the intensive unit”. All this points to the fact that Mugabe is willing to maintain power at any costs.
In the final analysis, Zimbabwe has reached a defining moment in as far as transition is concerned. The calls for Mugabe to name a successor are growing louder with each passing day. Even if he does concede and names his successor, he will likely name a candidate who will be loyal to him even in his retirement. It will just be a mere perpetuation of his rule just like the case in Angola.
Rawlings Magede writes here in his personal capacity. He tweets @raw edges and can be contacted onvamagede@gmail.com
While this is cause for celebration in terms of leadership renewal in Africa’s tainted history of military coups, dos Santos’ invisible hand of control will continue to dog Lourenco’s administration at least for the foreseeable future. The appointed new president is just a ceremonial president with no power of decision. Stepping down by dos Santos is meant to deceive Africa yet the truth is that he is still in control. Closely linked to this is the passing of new laws by government last month which prevent the next president from firing the military, police, and intelligence chiefs.
Just like past and present African presidents, dos Santos has also created an empire and dynasty for his family during his 38-year tenure at the helm. While he remains party president, his daughter Isabel will stay in charge of Sonangol, the state oil company, after being appointed in June 2016, and Jose Filomeno, dos Santos’ son, will remain in charge of Angola’s $5 billion sovereign wealth fund.
The developments in Angola are not new but have happened elsewhere across the world. In Cuba long serving President, Fidel Castro, who in his early 30s, aligned Cuba with the Soviet Union and used Cuban troops to support revolution in Africa and throughout Latin America, appointed his brother Raul Castro as his successor. In Venezuela, the late President Hugo Chavez credited for initiating a leftist political process, Bolivarian Revolution, appointed a former driver, Nicolás Maduro as his successor in 2013.To date the administrations both in Cuba and Venezuela have been accused of diverting from the script and plunging the two countries into retrogression in terms of previous gains by their predecessors. Their failure has also been largely to the ever unpredictable webs of patronage and business interests left by their predecessors, making them vulnerable to exposure.
So yes, the stepping down by dos Santos should not be celebrated beyond its normal confines as doing so is akin to applying lipstick to a frog. The new President Lourenco will take over from where dos Santos left and will not even seek to antagonize the current status quo. So, given the mixed experiences with the contentious but yet necessary debate of transition in African countries, we can also identify a trend where incumbent presidents have continued to grip on power by any means necessary by appointing loyal and subservient successors. Ghana should be credited for managing peaceful transitions since 1992 and today its credited for this. This is of course outside other African countries such as South Africa that have done well in this regard.
Will Mugabe ever choose a successor?
Recently, First Lady Grace Mugabe shocked the nation when she announced that it was noble for President Mugabe to choose and anoint a successor. In her own words, she said that,” the president has the right to be involved in naming his successor, and that the president’s word is final. “Since the 1990s ZANU PF members who have dared raise this controversial subject of succession have either been disciplined or expelled. What is important to note is the underlying meaning of First Lady’s sentiments. Firstly, her sentiments imply that she has finally conceded that her husband will not be there forever to offer her protection. Secondly, while its necessary for party members to debate about it, her husband must name successor and whoever that successor will be, he or she will serve at the mercy of the President. Thirdly, given in the recent past, she has demonstrated both influence and authority in the dismissal and public humiliation of party cadres who at one point were untouchable, the likely successor will also serve at her pleasure. This is more so because naturally, there is no way Mugabe will appoint a vengeful foe who is unpredictable and likely to torment and scuttle wealth accumulated by his family.
Just like the case in Angola, Mugabe’s invisible hand even from beyond the grave will continue to dictate decisions for any ZANU PF administration in the future. In the event that Mugabe does indeed appoint a successor, it will be a mere perpetuation of his rule.
When discussing about transition in Zimbabwe, succession is a puzzle that we cannot avoid. This article is not about who will emerge the ultimate successor within ZANU PF’s succession matrix but about the precedence in Africa where leaders still remote control events even from their graves. What even makes succession interesting is Mugabe’s reluctance to name a successor even when there are overwhelming signs of fatigue and incapacity on his part. The delay in naming a successor even at a ripe age of 94 reveals the continued thirst and appetite to continue ruling even when the body gives off its ghost.
Close cronies who have worked with Mugabe over the years have all revealed how power hungry Mugabe is. In his book, The Story of My Life, former Vice President Joshua Nkomo, confessed that he once asked Mugabe a question over what was the supreme organ in the country. To this, Mugabe replied that it was the ZANU PF Central Committee. This was at the height of the Gukurahundi atrocities in Matabeleland and the Midlands region after Nkomo was dismissed from government. After his subsequent dismissal from ZANU PF, former ZANU PF Secretary General, Edgar Tekere simply remarked that “Democracy is in the intensive unit”. All this points to the fact that Mugabe is willing to maintain power at any costs.
In the final analysis, Zimbabwe has reached a defining moment in as far as transition is concerned. The calls for Mugabe to name a successor are growing louder with each passing day. Even if he does concede and names his successor, he will likely name a candidate who will be loyal to him even in his retirement. It will just be a mere perpetuation of his rule just like the case in Angola.
Rawlings Magede writes here in his personal capacity. He tweets @raw edges and can be contacted onvamagede@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)