by Ian Smith
There is a human rights organisation in Zimbabwe which operates under the name of ZimRights. In the past they have criticised the government for elections which were not free and fair, and generally for violations of human rights, which have been rampant and continuous. They organised a meeting for the weekend of 18 February to discuss the question of political violence and the need to ensure that the coming election would be free of intimidation and the other irregularities of the past. All political parties were invited to attend, and in particular the recently appointed chairman of the electoral supervisory commission was asked to address the meeting.
His office regretted his inability to attend. One would have thought that there could be no more important meeting for commissioners to attend if they genuinely believed in prosecuting their mandate. In fact they recently publicised a report they presented to Mugabe:
If the government is perceived as one that will not take firm measures to prevent election violence and punish those guilty of it, the whole election process is undermined, the belief of the people of this country in the fairness and freeness of the election process and the legitimacy of the election process is undermined, and in the end confidence in the government of the day is undermined.
These are fine, high-sounding words, but one can only be left with the uneasy feeling that, given government’s record over the years, they bear little relation to its current actions.
The meeting, which was well attended, despite being boycotted by the electoral supervisory commission and ZANU(PF), accused the commission of conniving with government in their cover-up operations, and called for the establishment of an independent electoral supervisory commission. They also stressed the importance of impartial security during the election, and the disbandment of the special constabulary unit, which was well known to be a partisan unit of ZANU(PF).
Needless to say, there was no response from the government, other than to declare the general election for the first week in April.
The main opposition parties, after many meetings and great deliberation, had decided to boycott the election. Their reason was clear and logical. Apart from the fact that the whole system was loaded in favour of ZANU(PF), in addition to the 120 elected seats to Parliament, Mugabe controls the appointment of an additional thirty seats. The President appoints twelve members, and the eight Provincial Governors, nominated by the President, automatically become members, and the Chiefs’ Council nominate ten members. Chiefs have had a clear message on a number of occasions, that if they attempt confrontation with ZANU(PF) their powers and financial assistance will be curbed. Accordingly if ZANU(PF) win forty-five of the 120 elected seats, they remain in power, in spite of being defeated in seventy-five of the constituencies. And they continue to boast about their democracy and the inherent freedom of one man, one vote. Sadly, a few of the smaller opposition parties had decided not to join the protest, and were supporting ZANU(PF) in condemning the boycott. Lack of unity among the opponents of government detracted from the impact it was hoped to make on the rest of the world.
Early in March a report leaked out that the Zimbabwe Air Force had received a Super Puma helicopter to be used by Mugabe in the election campaign. The cost was Z$200 million, and it was fitted with every luxury and the most modern fax and telephone facilities for contact with those on the ground. Not surprisingly, the government was embarrassed and tried to cover it up. After all, the Ministry of Health would dearly have loved to have a million dollars for urgently needed medical supplies. And a couple of million for the Ministry of Social Welfare would have assisted in covering the desperate needs of children and the elderly. Moreover, to use taxpayers’ money to assist a political party, ZANU(PF), in a general election was unconstitutional.
Nomination Day came in the middle of March, and ZANU(PF) were unopposed in fifty-three constituencies. In other words, they had already secured the necessary majority to form the next government before a single vote had been cast!
The final election results were known by 10 April. ZANU(PF) won 118 of the 120 electoral seats. In the south-eastern border area of Manicaland province, remote and adjoining Mozambique, where there has always been much border crossing and family links, the voters remained loyal to their own community, as they did in the previous election, and returned two opposition candidates.
A post-mortem analysis reveals different tactics from the previous election, where open intimidation, thuggery, and even elimination of opposition candidates were carried out with impunity. These actions evoked much criticism, not only locally, but from reputable, external sources, so ZANU(PF) changed their tactics. From 1980 onwards, after winning their first election, they had gradually assumed more and more control of the mass communications media and developed an intimidatory machine, with the advice and assistance of Moscow and North Korea in particular, which was becoming effective in the latter half of the 1980s. Perhaps their methods were rough and crude, but nevertheless they achieved the necessary results. Accordingly, from 1990 onwards these two areas received concentrated attention in order to ensure that their operations became more subtle, and hence less obvious to the casual observer. In addition, easy finance was a necessary ingredient. The first step was to create a Ministry of Political Affairs, with the stated objective of explaining the workings of government and informing the people of the services available to them. This was a novel idea, and one for which there did not seem to be a precedent anywhere else in the world. Offices were opened in the main centres throughout the country, staffed by civil servants, provided with transport and any other necessary equipment. The true intention, however, soon became obvious: it was a gigantic operation to brainwash the masses into believing that everything they enjoyed in life, including handouts from donor countries, came from Mugabe and his ministers. If there were shortcomings, these were a ‘result of the legacy inherited from the previous colonial regime, and were taking time for the government to correct’!
Next came a direct vote in Parliament of taxpayers’ money to the party in power — ZANU(PF). This was something previously unknown in this country. Not surprisingly, there was a ready answer: namely, there are other governments in the world which provide grants to political parties in order to enable them to participate in the democratic system. I believe this is so. But there is no precedent for a government making a donation of taxpayers’ money to themselves, their own political party, with not one cent going to any other party.
In spite of all of this, stories came in of blatant misuse of government power during the election campaign. Mugabe used the new air force helicopter, purchased with taxpayers’ money for the defence of the country, to travel far and wide in support of his party candidates. He called on the people to ‘come out and vote in force in order that we can eliminate the opposition’. At a meeting in Highfield (a large populous area of Harare) the audience was warned that if they did not come out and vote in full force they could be mistaken for opposition supporters boycotting the poll. There was a distinct element of threat. In the eastern border district, which had previously returned opposition MPs, the people were told that the reason for the poor development in their area was that they had supported the opposition. In Matabeleland, where voters had been sitting in a queue all day, the polling officers having failed to arrive on the scene, people openly expressed fear that they would be punished if they did not vote — drought relief would be withheld in their area! These poor people were already suffering from inadequate food and water supplies. I could go on quoting cases of how certain candidates were prevented from visiting parts of their constituency, and others were publicly threatened and humiliated. Reports to the election supervisory commission were ignored. Moreover, the mass communications media were blind to any public criticism.
In January 1995, even before the election campaign had commenced, an Amnesty International report accused the Zimbabwe government of harassing its political opponents and resorting to serious violation of internationally accepted human rights sta
ndards. The report states that: ‘Journalists investigating government corruption scandals have been threatened with prosecution, and journalist Basildon Peta was detained for writing a story alleging a tax evasion racket by three companies owned by ZANU(PF).’
In the same month, we received a report of a speech made in France by Nigerian Nobel Prize Laureate Wole Soyinka. Noted for his straight talking, he said:
African dreams of peace and prosperity have been shattered by the greedy, corrupt and unscrupulous rule of African strongmen. The dream has evaporated because of the treachery and betrayal of leaders with their pursuit of power and wealth. One would be content with just a modest cleaning up of the environment, development of opportunities, health services, education, eradication of poverty. But unfortunately even these modest goals are thwarted by a power crazed and rapacious leadership who can only obtain their egotistical goals by oppressing the rest of us.
He has certainly produced a very accurate portrait of the history of Zimbabwe over the last fifteen years. And yet ZANU(PF) get away with it, with a minimum of criticism from the leading free world countries. I would say that there is less freedom and justice in Zimbabwe today than in countries such as Nigeria, Nicaragua or North Korea, where one-party states have been established and the reasons for them openly declared. Whether you agree with them or not, at least they are honest. In Zimbabwe, in theory, we have a democracy and a voters’ roll, but in practice, as I have recorded in this book, to attempt meaningful opposition to ZANU(PF) is to court disaster. Superficial opposition, which clearly is of no concern, is welcomed, as it enables ZANU(PF) to point to this as proof that the democratic process is operating. But the facts will prove that, proportional to population, more people have been murdered in Zimbabwe because of their opposition to our government than in the countries I have mentioned above.
So the election was an ‘overwhelming victory’ for ZANU(PF), and the government, with the endorsement of the election supervisory commission, which acclaimed the election to be ‘free and fair’. The truth, however, is in total contradiction of this, and there are a number of telling facts which will substantiate this claim: for the past five years, indeed fourteen years, the government has owned and controlled the only national daily newspaper, and the only radio and TV service in the country. These have been used exclusively to propagate the cause of ZANU(PF).
In the 1985 election the national media denied my political party, the Conservative Alliance Zimbabwe — at that time the official opposition in Parliament — any advertising space. There are employees of the Broadcasting Corporation who will concede, obviously in confidence, that they operate under an instruction that every newscast, unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise, should commence with the words: ‘The President Comrade Mugabe says, or has done …’ Mention of any opposition political party is verboten unless done in such a manner as to discredit or ridicule.
Next we have the CIO (Criminal Investigation Organisation), which works unremittingly to seek out criticism and opposition to government, and thereafter obtain a political verdict on how to solve the problem. The Mafia could learn a few tricks from these people.
Then the entire electoral mechanism comes under the jurisdiction of Mugabe, and hence the politburo and ZANU(PF). The President appoints the delimitation commission, and the complaints about gerrymandering are legion and have seldom succeeded in causing any change. The Registrar General is Mugabe’s appointee. The election supervisory commission is appointed by Mugabe, and the chairman is one of his appointees to Parliament. And in the end if all of this does not deliver the goods, Mugabe has the power to overrule the courts and declare any illegal election result legal, and any legal result illegal!
The final cherry on the cake is finance. Over the past five years ZANU(PF) have voted themselves, from taxpayers’ money, over one hundred million dollars per annum. Not one cent had been voted for any other party. And into the bargain, as mentioned previously, Mugabe controls the appointment of thirty Members of Parliament whatever the election result.
Under these circumstances the party in power in Zimbabwe must win every election — unless they are a bunch of half-wits, or in a permanent state of intoxication. ZANU(PF) derive a great deal of satisfaction and pleasure from complying with the communist creed that ‘once in power, you stay in power for ever’. Does anyone know where in this world so-called ‘free and fair’ elections are rigged more efficiently than in Zimbabwe?
Sadly, although the general election was over, there was no chance of a period of political freedom and justice, and straightforward, decent honesty, because the following year, in March 1996, the presidential election took place.
It was held over 16 and 17 March, and true to my prediction, for the two months prior to the election the ZANU(PF) propaganda machine reached a crescendo. Every day the main news bulletins on both television and radio were used exclusively for the government party to extol the virtues of President Mugabe and his ZANU(PF) government, and to advertise the times and places of their campaign meetings. The same performance was repeated in the one and only national daily newspaper. And it is important to point out that all of these services are at no cost to ZANU(PF). The Mugabe government, using taxpayers’ money, took over and enjoyed a monopolistic control of the telecommunications media and the national press. Opposition parties were compelled to pay for the space and time they used, and there were occasions when their submissions were rejected because of the criticism directed at government.
The greatest tragedy was the insensitivity of ZANU(PF) leaders to their own much-publicised policy of reconciliation and the promotion of racial harmony. The resultant damage to international confidence and much-needed investment was of no concern to them. There was only one issue: the retention of power. Whatever their failings, and these are legion, it stands to their credit that they never deviate from the principles and philosophy which brought them to power. The politburo remains the supreme body in Zimbabwe. Cabinet, Parliament, government are all subsidiary. The guiding motivation is to support their party, with its top-heavy infrastructure of comrades, always acknowledging the one overriding objective of totalitarian governments: retention of power.
Their analysis of what must be done in order to retain the necessary support and votes is meticulous. The greatest desire among our indigenous people is for a piece of land. Only 100 years ago they were all peasant farmers, and ownership of land is still part of their culture, tradition, history. After coming to power, ZANU(PF) leaders embarked on a policy of acquiring land and settling comrades. There was no problem with land, and on the ‘willing seller, willing buyer’ basis they obtained approximately 4 million hectares and when more is required it is readily available. However, their settlement plan turned out to be a disaster, and their own appointed black conservation officers called for a stop to the indiscriminate settlement which was resulting in the destruction of our natural resources. This forced the government to change its plan and declare that in future only qualified farmers would be allocated land. The result is that over a million hectares of productive land which was taken over is lying unoccupied and derelict. Of course it would detract from the vote-winning campaign if this blatant incompetence and mismanagement were to be made public. Instead, its main theme has been to sympathise with the general desire to obtain a piece of land, but the problem, so the people are told, is that the white man is unwilling to part with his land. However, the masses are assured that their government is formulating a plan that will enable it to take over land in the face of the white man’s intransigence. Not only is it a blatant distortion of the truth, but internally it provokes racial antagonism, and externally it prejudices confidence and investment.
Second on the list of the government’s priorities, especially for our urbanised black people, is finance to enable them to start a business, or procure the necessary capital equipment. There are already in existence special banks and other financial institutions specifically charged with financ
ing indigenous businesspeople with concessionary loans. But even these banks look for some kind of security. What does one do with people who have no security, and those who lack the experience and skills necessary to gain the confidence of the lender? This is a problem which does not only affect black Zimbabweans, it applies to all kinds of people all over the world.
However, Mugabe has been telling the voters that our banks and other lending institutions have a racial slant and give preference to their white customers, and secondly, that historically the economy has been controlled by the white community, and it is their intention to maintain it that way. Once again this is a slant which stirs the cauldron of racial hostility and sets back efforts to promote confidence. In fact all evidence is to the contrary, with a rapid growth of black participation in the economy, the occupation of top positions in commerce, industry and the professions, and the acquisition of high-class residential properties in all the suburbs. There are reputable economists who say that today our black people are in control of 50 per cent of the nation’s economy and this figure grows by the day. But of course there is no mention of these truths from the election platforms!
It so happened that both of Mugabe’s opponents withdrew from the election, unfortunately too late to make any significant impact. If they had made it clear from the outset that they were not prepared to participate in a bogus election, because the whole affair had been so blatantly rigged, and accordingly it was the intention of all the opposition parties to bring a case of appeal before the courts, this would have been a cause of great concern worldwide. Instead ZANU(PF) was given free rein to carry on with its bizarre campaign, squandering millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money, coupled with exclusive use of the government-controlled propaganda machine to brainwash the poor unsuspecting electorate with eulogies about its heaven-sent leader and his dedicated government.