By Takura Zhangazha*
Understanding the raw political ambitions of individual Zimbabweans
is a complex exercise. One that is full
of familiar dictum's/accusations such as they want ‘power for power’s sake’ or ‘they
are in it for the money’. On the rare occasion
comments about how certain political leaders ‘mean well’ in their pursuit of
political power. Or that at least they are ‘one of our own’ and the now
ominously familiar, ‘they have liberation war credentials’.
These individuals invariably join/form political parties to
better enable their intentions at some form of power. The parties that they form or are a part of are
also queried as to their intentions with power.
In the case of the ruling party the general accusation is that even if
they may have been all about liberation, their long rule has made them appear
to be all about self aggrandizement.
With the main opposition the occasional accusation is that they are also
in it for the perks but also, luckily for them, they would still be perceived to be the
metaphorical ‘better devil’.
The prevalent view it would appear is that politics and
political ambition are linked to some sort of benefit(s) from the state. And that whatever happens at the top of the
political ladder, lower level leaders and supporters get some piece of the
pie. This would also be known as
political patronage.
What has been interesting has been the legal role that the
state is obliged to play in support of those that would publicly be perceived
as only motivated by milking from it.
This week the ministry of finance and economic development
announced that it has allocated a total of US$ 8 million (lets not argue about
currency here as I am certain they all have ‘nostro’ accounts) to the ministry
of justice for distribution to the political parties that are in parliament. This is done periodically in terms of the
Political Parties (Finance) Act. In this
act, each political party that got at least 5% of the total votes cast for its
members in the last general election shall be entitled to an equivalent
percentage of the total money allocated to political parties in each financial
year.
So the ruling Zanu Pf party is going to get at least
US$6million and the opposition MDC Alliance is certain to get US2 million. At least according to the ministry of justice
permanent secretary Virginia Mabhiza.
The act does not advise political parties what the money is
to be used for. It is entirely at their discretion
save for when the relevant minister issues out regulations as to how these
monies are to be accounted for. And as
far as I recall, these regulations are yet to be publicized. Nor has any minster of justice previously
tried to make it an accountability issue beyond accusations of foreign funding which incidentally is not quite disallowed.
The long and short this act is that apart from other
motivations such as getting actual executive power (the presidency) in terms of
current Zimbabwean law, there is definitely money to be made by running as a
political party, for parliamentary office. All you have to do is to get at
least 5 percent of the total vote count for candidates in the National Assembly
(which also entails actually wining some first-past the post seats/
constituencies). And as it turns out, it
can be a lot of money just for your party (and as controlled by the party leadership).
This would not always be a bad thing if it was clearer as to
what the money was being used for. Preferably
this state funding would be intended to
help political parties strengthen their internal democratic processes and
represent their constituencies better. Even if its not stipulated in the
relevant act or in existent supporting regulations.
In reality, experience shows us that these monies are
largely unaccounted for and tend to be under the direct control of political party
leadership.
This would probably explain why the public may be skeptical of
such state funding arrangements for political parties in a time when government
is talking about ‘austerity’ (unpopular as it is). Moreso given the amount the ruling party is
being allocated.
This state funding of political parties has not promoted
internal party democracy, a national democratic culture or seen a flourishing
of issue based politics. And that is
why the Political Parties (Finance) Act must be amended to include in its
parameters how state funding is intended to contribute to the enhancement of
intra party democracy, public accountability and issue based political practices. This should be done in tandem with removing/reforming
the constitutional clauses that allow political party leaders to dismiss MPs
without due procedure.
Zanu Pf and MDC Alliance would probably not agree with the
above proposition for a number of reasons.
The utmost being that it would limit their ability to practice political
patronage over parliament. It would also
seek to make them more intra democratic and as a consequence contribute to a
better national democratic consciousness that sees beyond just our five year
electoral contests.
Smaller opposition parties may also be wary of such reforms because
they would feel that they would never have a chance of winning against parties
that receive state funding. A gentle
reminder to them would be that at least in its beginning the MDC (as then called)
did not receive such funding and gave Zanu Pf more than just ‘a run for the
money’.
Civil society organizations that work on elections, democracy,
accountability and human rights would be advised to take this up more concertedly. Because this might be an opportunity to help direct
our national democratic consciousness into less personalized and more institutionalized
understandings of a people centered polity.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot
No comments:
Post a Comment