What Parliament Ad Hoc Committee said about delimitation report- full report

4.1.2    OBSERVATIONS MADE ON MAPS

(a)        Complicated Coordinate System.

The Committee noted that the coordinate system used by ZEC was too complicated for ordinary citizens to understand and interpret spatial data represented on the maps. It is the Committee’s considered view that ZEC had an option to use a simpler geographic coordinate system that represents location in terms of degrees, minutes, and seconds, such that users can simply enter the coordinates on Google maps to identify locations in their respective wards and constituencies. ZEC indicated that it used the Geographic and Projected system which is modern and also adopted by other countries in the SADC region. The coordinates on the maps are meant for experts while the descriptions were for use by the general public.

Whilst the coordinate system used by ZEC was in line with new models of mapping in the SADC region, ZEC should have considered other user-friendly methods which can be understood by ordinary citizens. In the Committee’s view, it was not prudent to prioritize regional benchmarks without considering the interest of citizens. We do not know whether the benchmarks that are being referred to by ZEC also extend to how electoral commissions must choose coordinate systems.

(b) Map Scale Not Defined in the Description in Annexures

Section 161(12) asserts that if there is a discrepancy between the description of any ward or constituency boundaries and the map or maps prepared by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, the description prevails. However, ZEC neither provided any description of the scale in its report nor did it indicate or specify the scale on the actual map.

Therefore, it is within ZEC’s obligation to describe the map scale used in each map in their description. The absence of clarity on the map scale used made it difficult to compute average walking distances to get to the polling stations. For example, ZEC indicated on the maps that the maps were digitized from a scale of 1:50 000 and 1:250 000 but did not indicate the actual scale in which the data on the maps was presented. The Committee was unable to obtain clarification from ZEC on the specific map scale that was used.

(c) Some Wards Defined in the Description but not Labeled on the Map

Section 161 (7) (b) of the Constitution asserts that, ‘after delimiting wards and constituencies, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission must submit to the President, a preliminary report containing a map or maps showing the wards and constituencies. ZEC provided maps where some of the wards were labeled and some were not labeled, making it difficult for one to identify those wards that were unlabelled.

Due to limitations on scale, the coordinate system used and the absence of topographic features on the map, it was difficult to identify these wards using just the descriptions provided by ZEC. A few examples are in Mashonaland West, Hurungwe RDC that has 26 wards; five of them were not labeled and identified on the map. In Mashonaland Central, Guruve RDC and Mazowe RDC, four wards were not labeled and identified on the map by means of their ward numbers.

ZEC indicated that all wards have numbers, but in a case where a ward number is not appearing, it may be a question of placement. It may not be visible on a small map but would be visible on a separate blown out map.

Continued next page

(314 VIEWS)