Public desperate for people-driven constitution
Posted by ZDN on July 31, 2009
A debate on whether or not the new constitution process represented a false start attracted a capacity, enthusiastic audience at the Mass Public Opinion Institute’s monthly forum last night (July 29). Speakers were Bishop Ancelimo Magaya on behalf of the Christian Alliance, Dzimbabwe Chibge, a lawyer, and the Hon. Douglas Mwonzora, MP for Nyanga North and co-chairman of the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Constitution.
The last speaker stressed that it would indeed be a people-driven process, with all the 17, 25-member thematic committees agreed at the all-stakeholders’ conference comprising 70 per cent civil society and with gender equality. He said that there were additional checks and balances in the process outlined under Article 6 of the Global Political Agreement than in the acclaimed South African constitution-making process.
“Whatever document is finally agreed by the various working groups, it will be subjected to a referendum so that the people have the final say,” Mwonzora said.
Comments from the public sought reassurance that the process would produce a people-driven constitution, that people participating would be protected “not just by statements from the joint minister of Home Affairs” from the looming violence.
Nona Sibanda, speaking from the floor, asked that the National Constitutional Association do its job and explain the process to rural people instead of designing its own constitution.
He said: “In rural areas the leadership is ZANU (PF) and those illiterate people will just say yes to whatever the leadership proposes. Tell Madhuku to get out there instead of wasting time and money.”
He added that in his view the process is dangerous to the people of Zimbabwe. “I have read this Chinamasa draft and I tell you, it will lead to a one-party state in Zimbabwe.” All contributors blasted the Kariba draft: many were terrified that the government would impose it: “because the President has said it is the basis of the new constitution – and it is the only one that has been published in The Herald.”
MP Mwonzora pointed out that Paul Mangwana, the ZANU PF co-chairman on the select committee, was the one who told the all stakeholders’ conference that the committee would not be bound by the Kariba draft and that the process would have a 50:50 gender balance with a 70 per cent representation by civil society.
A ZBC reporter quibbled at the figures and was told firmly that all political parties had agreed to have 600 representatives each out of the 3,596 people who attended the first all-stakeholders’ conference.
Rev. Magaya gave an overview of the history of Zimbabwe’s constitution before looking at the potential benefits and pitfalls in the current process. Mwonzora set the current scene by saying that our social and economic problems are endemic and the constitution must guarantee the integrity and security of all citizens.
“Under Article 6 we are holding all-stakeholder conferences at all stages of the process,” he said. Once the balanced thematic committees have completed their input there will be an outreach programme with adequate literature. “We intend to have 435 people, 131 of whom will come from Parliament, working on this programme,” he said.
“We have expert help for this now, simplifying the language of the rejected constitution and the Kariba draft and once this process is completed and printed we shall hold a second all-stakeholders’ conference with the same number of people but a better registration process, better food and improved accommodation.
“While there were problems with the first meeting, the second day went well, we achieved buy-in by the delegates – people were by and large tolerant of different views on the Tuesday – the 17 thematic sub-committees were agreed, the detractors were exposed and the law enforcement agents finally awoke and protected people. It demonstrated the stoicism and determination of the Zimbabwe people who have been talking about a new constitution for 10 years now.
“The need for national healing was brought to the fore and we are dealing with this, no draft was imposed on the meeting and the fact that detractors tried to stop it taking place shows how powerful and right the process is.”
Mwonzora described the constitution-making process as “a baby, one that will scream and wet itself and fall over – but he is not a false child. Lastly, we are all still Zimbabweans together and we pray there will be no disturbance to meetings of people who do not hold our views. That is the democracy we are fighting for – and by the way it will not be a Pilsner driven constitution but a people-driven one.”
There was much applause at a question as to why the people who disrupted the first constitution conference were not arrested. “We know who they are: we saw them on TV. Why are they free while MDC MP s are arrested and charged on the smallest of pretexts?”
Bishop Magaya’s reservations about the process were that it is being managed by politicians “who don’t have faith in each other. We don’t have a one-party state: we have an inclusive government with warring parties and those with alternative policies should be allowed their space,” he said.
“The constitution is being drafted in a highly polarised society. Some people think under it ZANU PF should remain in power: others think it should facilitate their removal. People don’t see beyond Morgan and Robert.”
He felt it was a pity that ZBC and the Hon. Webster Shamu in particular kept saying that the constitution would be used as a vehicle to return the country to Britain. “I also see that some elements are using it to create a situation that will once again allow violence. And we are told that there is one draft – the Kariba one. There are areas of the GPA itself which are problematical and can be used to suppress people.”
On the positive side he pointed out that, unlike the process in 1999, this is not a one-party event. “We know the GPA is flawed but we have made reasonable inroads. We have a middle of the road approach bringing together the two extremes – one that it should be executive-driven, the other that it should be people-driven. There are not many examples of this latter concept. At least Parliament is facilitating the process: it is after all our only legitimate democratic body.”
Rev. Magaya felt that, despite the challenges faced at the first conference, the second day had gone well, the process has been endorsed by the churches and by many civil society groupings that are now interfacing with Parliament.
“My words of warning, however, to those who are involved and those who are sceptic: ‘interrogate the process continuously, the all-stakeholders’ group must be the supreme body: the executive and Parliament cannot alter their draft by one iota – and we must all learn to combine principles and pragmatism.’ Some of you are using ZANU PF tactics. Let us play clean politics.”
Dzimbabwe Chibge looked at the legal aspects and started out by saying that the only thing everyone agrees upon is that we need a new constitution as enshrined in Article 6. He pointed out that a company does not ask a new employee to draft his own employment terms, thus the people must not leave the constitution in the hands of politicians.
“For a new constitution there are three key points: first the environment – we need freedom of association, expression and movement; second the process, which is the most controversial aspect but it must be inclusive with the public participating; and thirdly it must be credible – we need reliable people to drive the process, which will be critical when it comes to the referendum. The supremacy of the will of the people is to be respected and it is critical that we all understand the content.”
Turning to the problems, Chibge was concerned about the intention to apply the Kariba draft, which he said was made, by six people on a cruise boat, a complete negation of everything he had just outlined.
“Article 6 says that the parliamentary committee tasked with drafting a new constitution ‘may, as deemed necessary, call upon experts.’ We all know what ‘may’ means. And what does parliament need to debate if the people have spoken? The constitutional conference started with violence, no one has been arrested and this looks like the way things will continue.
“And as a lawyer, I have never seen a constitutional amendment like our Number 19 “there shall be a prime minister called Morgan Tsvangirai.”
The evening was chaired by Herbert Ndona who waited some time for the fourth speaker, Dr Lovemore Madhuku, to arrive before opening the debate to the floor. The Mass Public Opinion Institute holds debates on the last Thursday of every month at 5.30 p.m. in the Rainbow Room of the New Ambassador Hotel in Harare. More details from www.mpoi.org.
Submit Reply
