By Takura Zhangazha*
The outcome of the main opposition MDC-T Extraordinary
elective congress have seen a myriad of reactions from the public and
pundits. It is a good thing. Not least
because the MDC-T remains the largest opposition party in Parliament .
There were three major issues that emerged from it. The
first being the fact that it was held to elect or give fresh mandates to
incumbent or new leaders. The second being that it made recommendations for
structural changes to its constitution. The third that it also had resolutions
that sought to look at what it perceives as key challenges faced by the
country.
The importance of these three aforementioned developments is
however in no order of preference as all of them are closely interlinked. The reason for this being that the party has
tended to mix the three up with relative ease.
From statements of how the party cannot do without its re-elected
leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, through to its internal divisions based on the
distribution of power (presidency vs
secretary general) and its intention to wrestle power electorally from
Zanu Pf on a democratic change platform, the end result was always going to be a mixture of personalities, power distribution
in the party and eventually decrying the state of national affairs.
True to form the issue of personalities and their
indispensability in the party emerged as the most triumphant. The top three positions in the party were
retained uncontested by Tsvangirai, Thokozani Khupe
and Lovemore Moyo (president, deputy president and national chairman respectively) . This has been the leadership
of the MDC –T through two major elections. One which was highly disputed (2008)
and led to an inclusive government. The other which was more a shock in
defeat (2013) and led to the severe weakening of the party’s parliamentary
presence.
That their congress chose to retain the same top three
leaders is down to the oft repeated issue of the party president being a
‘brand’ who is still deemed to be the only one capable of dislodging the ruling
party from government. It is a
characteristic that has seen it through two successive splits with
Tsvangirai remaining at the helm of the main and larger MDC. And given his lack
of contestation at this recent one, it is something that is not going to change soon. Or for at
least the next five years.
In the same vein, there were and remain assumptions of the
importance of personalities in the contest for the fourth most powerful
position in the MDC-T. Where Mwonzora
and Chamisa squared off for the post of Secretary General, allegations were
that the former got the favour of the president in order to win. The thread of
borderline personality cult and control continued to emerge. Other views however hold that the congress
electoral process was in itself free and fair with the more popular candidate
emerging victorious.
In both sets of views, one can discern a lack of an evident
internal democratic culture in the party, where initially there were disputes
over nominations and then disputes over congress electoral results both based
on the roles played by individuals and not party rules or regulations.
This then brings into view the issue of the recommendations
to increase the role of the party president in the administration process of
the party. Some of these functions were
initially the prerogative of the secretary general. It can only be surmised that these
recommendations are the end result that the party’s presidency intended to
prevent a situation where the secretary general exercises power without its
direct supervision.
This intention at centralisation of official party authority
around the presidency may be convenient but undermines intra-party democracy
and the all important sharing of leadership responsibilities. It is a marked departure from the
general principle of collective leadership responsibility that may not bode
well for an opposition party that needs to harvest more than it discards
capable and empowered leaders.
Especially where this concerns constitutionally given roles and
processes.
The final import of the MDCT-T congress was in how it sought
to speak to the broader concerns and challenges it deems are faced by the
country. True to its long standing tradition and history as a party that originated
from labour, its resolutions reflected more a tinge of social democratic ideological outcry of the
state of affairs in the country.
These were however short on solutions and therein lies the problem. It is not enough to claim distraction via
internal processes of the party on addressing much more robustly the challenges
the country is facing.
Congresses may have electoral contests but these should not
overshadow immediate and urgent issues that must be placed within the public domain
as emanating from a party that has the broader issues ordinary citizens are challenged
with as a priority. So their congress
should have had prior meetings to discuss its broader socio-economic agenda for
the country going forward, even if at provincial levels and finalised the same
at their important meeting.
Finally, it is healthy to still have an opposition in
Parliament. Especially one that is willing and able to hold a congress. What is however more important is the democratic
national character it portends beyond
electoral contests, personality clashes and internal distribution of
power. In this, the MDC-T and many other
opposition parties still have a lot of work to do.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment