Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change may be using the constitutional drafting process to delay elections because it has realised that though it won more seats in the 2008 elections than its main rival the Zimbabwe African People Union- Patriotic Front most people do not share its views on the new constitution.
A source with access to the data being used to draft the new constitution said the data was clearly indicating that ZANU-PF would have an upper hand in the new constitution.
“If you look at what has been happening, the MDC was calling for early elections before the constitutional outreach programme. Now they are very quiet and they could actually be using the current exercise to delay the vote,” the source said.
Asked whether ZANU-PF’s views were not merely dominant because of the intimidation the party is reported to have embarked on during the exercise, the source said that was just an excuse being used by the MDC and its supporters. The evidence was too overwhelming to have been influenced by intimidation as it spread across the country.
The source said the data was so overwhelmingly in favour of ZANU-PF that the MDC was probably reading something else from this data.
The party had already backed down on its views on land and on gays.
“They wanted a land programme that would give people freely transferable title deeds but they have since backed down. They wanted a constitution that would allow rights for gays, but they have also backed down,” the source said.
Sentiments by our source seem to be confirmed by reports in the latest Constitutional Watch. Members of the Constitutional Select Committee (COPAC) reached a deadlock last week but are said to have resolved their differences.
The differences are said to have been centred on whether to use the quantitative or qualitative approach in analysing the data collected during the outreach programme.
ZANU-PF was insisting on the quantitative approach- that is to count up how many times an opinion had been expressed and the most frequently expressed views to go forward as what the people wanted- while the MDC favoured the qualitative approach –that is that the essence of all suggestions should be put forward for consideration.
“In view of the many problems associated with the outreach exercise the MDC felt very strongly that account must be taken of the quality of the data coming in – for example, whether it was informed opinion or mere parroted repetition of a party political election slogan having little to do with constitutionalism; and whether it resulted from bussing-in or intimidation, or other opinions being shouted down [an example being the repeated shouting of “government critics should be “killed”].
“In other words, they wanted the atmosphere of each consultative meeting to be factored into the analysis. They also wanted allowance to be made for the uneven rural/urban consultation. There were far more meetings in rural areas – three per ward – than in the more densely populated urban areas, where there was normally only one meeting per ward. As the number of meetings held did not accurately reflect the very different rural/ urban population numbers – a quantitative-only approach would mean rural opinions being unfairly weighted against urban opinions,” Constitutional Watch says.
The differences led to a stalemate with MDC members walking out but ZANU-PF continued to work. After crisis meetings agreement was reached with COPAC issuing the following statement:
“The Constitution Select Committee, COPAC, would like to advise that the disagreement over data analysis methods which led to an impasse has now been resolved. Stakeholders to the process agreed to move forward as follows:-
- “There is agreement to collapse three meeting points in a rural ward into one in order to equalize the disparity between urban and rural wards and because the process is ward based.
- “Where there was more than one meeting in an urban ward, or in any other ward, these shall also be collapsed into one.
- The analysis of the rural data will be done separately from the urban.
- Frequencies or preponderance will not be the absolute determinant of popularity or importance of an agreed concept.
- Both quantitative and qualitative approaches will be applied in data analysis.
- Where we use both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis, none shall take precedence over the other.
In the qualitative approach, key attributes will include the following:
- * attendance
- * gender
- * youth
- * disability
- * atmosphere of meeting
All the reports already done shall be revised to take into account the new qualitative dimensions.
COPAC would like to reassure all Zimbabweans that the constitution-making process is on course and would like to allay fears that have arisen from reports that are circulating.”
(18 VIEWS)
0 Comments