ZEC's Data Driven Electoral Relationship with Zim Mobile Phone Companies

*By Takura Zhangazha

The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) is officially concluding its initial voters' roll inspection process on Tuesday 29 May 2018.  To its credit it did so with a decent amount of advertising on state television,  radio and mainstream print media.  In a first, it collaborated with the three major mobile phone companies (MPCs) Econet Wireless Zimbabwe , Netone and Telecel (the 3 sisters) to establish a Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) platform for those that registered and gave their actual mobile numbers and physical addresses to ZEC to confirm that their names were on the new voter’s roll.   

What made this new methodology employed by ZEC and the MPCs  was that there was probably a service provider -to- customer relationship between them.  And therefore an exchange of money. Probably from ZEC to the three (3) companies.  This transaction was probably more effective with Econet because it’s the largest mobile phone service provider in the country. Both by way of numbers of its subscribers but also its countrywide reach and services. 

Beyond this what was also transacted between ZEC and the MPCs was basic but mass data.  The MPCs know your number (if you are on its network).  ZEC also knows your current address or at least where you will most physically definitely vote from (and has a record of you fingerprints). The protection of that personal data is the preserve of all of the above.  Almost in similar fashion to how you use mobile banking, a combination of your bank collaborating with mobile phone companies to link your bank account with your phone.  With the promissory note of protecting the privacy of transactions that you undertake.

The only key difference is that ZEC is not a bank. Nor were you asked to fill in a form to allow the MPCs to be given even minimal and 'bank-like' secure access to your data.

But for many urban voters in Zimbabwe issues or explanations of how data is protected or even utilised by ZEC and other players does not surpass the evident convenience of checking their names on the voters' roll via their mobile phones while seated on their couches. This is despite that some who had the energy to go and cross check their names physically found that there were still one or two details such as spelling of names that still had to be corrected. 

Perhaps the most interesting issue is how ZEC came to the decision to work with mobile phone companies in the voter’s roll inspection exercise.  And what sort of tenders are being issued and the nature of contractual arrangements (payments) that are being made.

To take it further, there is also the issue of a broader debate about what license ZEC has with the bio-metric data it has collected.  Even if it has not illegally shared it with unknown or known third parties. Before and particularly after the general election (we do not really know for now).

This is also in light of developments in the global north where the European Union has enacted a new law that seeks to prioritise the protection of privacy via major holders of personal data of its individual citizens.  Called the ‘General Data Protection Regulation’ or GDPR it seeks to strengthen the right of individuals to privacy through for example shortening explanations of data protection policies of organisations that hold it as well as imposing heavier fines for breaches of the same. And also to ensure that there is a simpler and more understandable consent process for the use personal data by companies/organisations.

We do not have such a law in Zimbabwe except for the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) as well as a draft bill on data protection. This is probably because there is no outcry about how privacy is protected via companies (banks, mobile phone service providers and state institutions) with access to our private data. Or also because too many questions over and about data and its use in the country may affect the profit margins of the same companies or their ability to know every other detail of our lives not only for advertising revenue but also political predictability/control. Even though for now we are not aware of its capacity to use algorithms to affect political perceptions and thereby actions or results.  

The convenience provided by some of the service providers that we give our personal data to is also a big factor here.  Not just because we want to be more modern and sophisticated (especially if we are in urban areas) but also because in and of itself the technology that enables the synchronisation of (mass personal) data is like a new toy we are not sure what to do with.  And we tend to learn after it injures us.

Just to be clear, there would be nothing wrong with ZEC being more accountable with how it intends to use as well as protect the decent amount of data it has on Zimbabwean voters.  And where it chooses to work in tandem with private telecommunications players based on the same data, to not only be publicly accountable for such processes but also seek our consent for the same. Even if the main argument might be ‘convenience’ it does not surpass our right to the privacy of personal data. Or what ZEC or those it decides to collaborate with decide to do with it. Even after the 2018 election. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)

Political Activism and Zimbabwe's 2018 Harmonised elections

A Presentation to the University of Zimbabwe, Election Resource Centre Symposium on the 2018 Harmonised Election. 

Friday 18 May 2018

  

By Takura Zhangazha*

Cde Chairman,

Let me begin by thanking you, the Faculty of Arts here at the University of Zimbabwe and the Election Resource Centre for inviting me to share my views at this important symposium on the country’s 2018 harmonised general election.  And to be particular to share my perspectives on ‘Political Activism and the Harmonised Elections’ as advised by the organisers.

On the face of it, this is a fairly straightforward topic.  Mainly because wherever there is an election, obviously all the political activists come into full bloom.  Even those that you would have thought were more preoccupied with religion or sport than all things electoral or political.

The more ambitious activists become candidates or campaign managers of others. 

This is the lighter side of political activism around elections.  And on the assumption that it is done in a democratic context.  But I will return to this point toward of this brief presentation.

The reason why this topic is important is because of the dark history of political activism and elections since national independence and as informed by the culture of violence that stemmed in part from, the liberation struggle. 

Since 1980 the dominance and power of he ruling party has set the tone around what it means to be a political activist or an activist for a political party in pursuit of political power.  Intentions at dominance led to ruling Zanu Pf party leaders carrying over the culture of violence that informed the liberation struggle into its own civilian structures, particularly in the rural areas.  Hence where there were differences with the then main opposition PF Zapu, there were regular incidences of violence meted out against opposition activists trying to hold meetings especially in what were considered ruling party strongholds in the early 1980s.  This violence was to escalate with the historical tragedy that was to become Gukurahundi in the same decade where at least 20000 civilian lives were lost in the Southern parts of the country.  

Even after the unity accord between the two main liberation movements in 1987, an intrinsic culture of violence in political activism did not peter out. It continued with ruling party activists continuously harassing the new Zimbabwe Unity Movement opposition activists in 1990.  And the same became more evident in 2000 onwards with extreme levels of violence being meted out on the Movement for Democratic Change activists. 

Historically therefore, the dominant form of political activism has largely been one characterised by resort to violence against those that are not in support of the ruling party.  Ideas rarely mattered.  Defence of personalities and the ‘party’ did.

In recent times an interesting dynamic has occurred.  The victim has also learnt how to become a perpetrator.  Opposition activists, so long bearing the brunt of ruling party violence (with state assistance) have taken on similar characteristics of not only violence but more significantly protecting the party and its leading personalities.  Again, the activism is less and less about ideas but power, even if only internal party power, and protecting it.  Hence the perpetual splits and violence against former party members in the main opposition MDC party.

Where we consider this year’s general election and the political activism that we are witnessing around this, we must not lose sight of these historical considerations.  While the events of November 2017 have been touted as a new dispensation by the ruling party, the proximity of the general election makes it diffiuclt to tell if indeed the latter has changed its approach to political mobilisation. 

The current political activism that we are witnessing largely through primary elections and rallies has been admittedly less violent.  this is a tone, as in the past, that is being set by the ruling party and its leadership.  The reasons for this new approach is as they have stated, to give the elections an irrefutable legitimacy in they yes of the international community.  And after the departure of Mugabe, they had had a lot of goodwill from the diplomatic community which they do not intend to squander in the short period before the election.

So the activism this time around will be much less violent with such incidences being the exception rather than the rule.  

But I must make a specific point about this state of affairs based on what we witnessed in 2008.  The relatively peaceful political activism of the moment and on the part of the ruling party is predicated on an assumption that it will still be able to win the election.  Where it fails to win the 50%+1 presidential vote count required for victory, it may change its spots in a run-off.

There are is one other key aspect concerning contemporary political activism that I will allude to before concluding.   This is the startling fact of how in the now a lot of political activists (never mind their ages) are motivated by materialism.  And its not just the t-shirt, cap or bag of rice that they are given in return for political support but I am referring here to bigger materialist motivations.  More and more campaigners, ‘kingmakers’ are thinking beyond the t-shirt and more at tangible economic opportunities that proximity and ascendancy in a political party can bring.  And some of these material benefits can be in the form  of residential stands, tenders, access to credit and protection of business interests (including for those in the informal sector). 

In conclusion cde Chairman, the political activism of the 2018 harmonised elections is largely going to be peaceful as informed by the approach and attitude of the ruling party.  The opposition will tend to mimic this except in incidences of frustration or where they become victims and resort to retaliation.  It is an activism that will not be driven by a pursuit of ideas but a motivation to protect the party and its leading personalities.  All in return for sometimes crass but general material reward.

*Takura Zhangazha spoke here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com) 

Zim 2018 Election: Trading Democracy for Neoliberal Foreign Policy

 By Takura Zhangazha*

President Mnangagwa’s spokesperson and permanent secretary in the Ministry of Media, Information and Broadcasting Services, George Charamba's  recent statement on the scheduled 2018 harmonized elections should have quite literally stopped the press.  Or at least had one or two an activist apoplectic about the pre-empting of what would/should be a democratic process.  

At a conference organized by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) and the Zimbabwe Media Commission (ZMC)  and other media  stakeholders, he is reported to have said that these elections are about international re-engagement and (international) legitimacy of the Zimbabwean government and the country. 

To quote him at the length,

“This election is about restoring international re-engagement and legitimacy; that is where we are. It must be flawless, it must be transparent, it must be free, it must be fair, it must meet international standards, it must be violence free and therefore it must be universally endorsed because it is an instrument of foreign policy...it’s about re-engagement and legitimacy; we are playing politics at a higher level.”

This was a statement said with a great amount of confidence.  Not only on the basis of its assumed irrefutable political logic but also its evident link with the expected political fortunes of Mnangagwa’s short tenure government.

Read in another way and looking for nuance, Charamba’s statement is a declaration of intent on behalf of the ruling establishment/party.  And its most obvious intention is to win this election.  Not in aide of true democracy.  But instead only in order to further its re-engagement with global powers and capital while at the same time shedding off any international concerns about its ‘electoral’ legitimacy beyond accusations of coup-de-tats.

So for the ruling establishment this election is a mere formality to what it considers a consolidation of its intended long duree hold on political power. All the while currying favour with global capital and giving pretense to concerns of a liberal international political gallery. 

Everything else therefore around the 2018 election is not necessarily driven by any deep notions of commitment to democratic practice let alone values.  At least not by those with incumbency. 

So as they say, this election will appear to be the most normal, the most peaceful, most observed or monitored and even most reported in decades.  The end effect however is pretty much choreographed and elitist. 

Choreographed in the sense that it is almost the equivalent of a political rite of passage for those that would have been accused of undemocratically/forcibly removing a president from power.  They therefore need this election, not as a rite of passage fraught with the risk of an electoral loss, but more with a guarantee of a legitimacy that may be more for the outside world than it is for the country’s own citizens. 

This may not matter as  much as most elections on the African continent have to pass the test of global capital in collaboration with global superpowers (if you can tell the difference between the two). 

What makes Zimbabwe’s case unique is that the collusion between the incumbents, global capital/superpowers may be enough to ensure the election passes the legitimacy test and enhances the re-engagement (neoliberal) agenda. 

And I do not think that Charamba’s statement demonstrates any fear of the mainstream political opposition, let alone an unexpected ‘cliffhanger’ political situation in which his party loses the election.  The opposition, divided as it is, fits snugly into the broader scheme of things.  The ruling establishment needs an opposition for it to pass the test.  If the MDC-T was not there on its own, they would, for the purposes of 2018, have invented it. 

But there is an opposition which appears to have greater freedom to campaign than it had under Mugabe.  The only regret is that the opposition may be too preoccupied with itself to miss the full import of Charamba’s statement.   And in any case, the whispers in the corridors of opposition political power is that the 2018 election is a dress rehearsal for 2023.  So a greater majority of opposition leaders don’t expect to win this year.  They however want to either be in parliament or be considered strong enough to have the ear of a ‘victorious’ establishment  and hopefully be around to be presidential candidates in 2023.

So what Charamba calls ‘high stakes’ is not so sophisticated.  Its basically a new cohesion of the ruling party leaders, private capital and religious leaders in order to consolidate a new hold on power with an intention at permanence in it.  The main opposition players, mostly by default, but others a little more deliberately, are bit part players in this (with due recognition and material reward to be realized at a later stage). 

You may ask, does any of this really matter to the people?  A well-considered response would be yes it does and where there is any doubt, yes it should. What we are witnessing is a coagulation of two types of elites.  The political and the economic. The former being those at the head of Zanu Pf (with a sprinkling of opposition individuals/leaders) and the latter being global and local private capital(ists).  They are all united in one thing, their (long term) right to dine exclusively at the high table of the free market.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)

Africa and the Internet as Religion

 By Takura Zhangazha*

The internet’s relationship with Africa is always going to have moments of colonial throwbacks. Mainly because it is not just a technological construct that emerged from thin air.  It is a representation of technology that comes with the historical, social and contemporary baggage of racism, sexism, discrimination and even manipulation of human behaviour. 

This is an issue I was reminded of while listening to presentations/talks from experts on the internet, algorithms and privacy a the recently held re:publica 2018  three day meet up in Berlin, Germany. 

These discussions/interactions were very much aware of the fact that the internet has done more good than harm (social media, engineering, communications, augmented/ virtual reality, internet of things and artificial intelligence).  The point however was to elaborate on what is least discussed about it. 

As an African who had been invited to be on a panel about blogging in Africa via the website AfricaBlogging, I was always going to be keen to see, hear and understand the continent’s placement and interaction with the internet and its offshoots. 

What emerged (for me at least) was the very harsh reality that in Africa we don’t take a critical let alone objective appreciation of the internet.  At least in relation to how it impacts our rights (both positively and negatively, for instance, juxtaposing the right to free expression and the right to privacy). Or how we may/don't consider immediate comparative analysis of how the internet may be used to manipulate our own perceptions of political, social and economic events using algorithms based on its major currency, big data.  

So Cambridge Analytica may not be that much of an issue on this side of the world.  Yet it should be.

This also includes considerations on what exactly are the internet and social media  global monopolies such as Google and Facebook really up to on the increasingly connected continent. A participant in one of the sessions made an all too familiar assertion that ‘in Africa the internet is Facebook and Facebook is the internet.’ This assertion is based on the given fact that the application has around 177 million subscribers. And is also offering what is referred to as ‘free basics’ to an increasing number of countries.

What then becomes important is how Africans derive meaning from the internet and its utilitarian value.  In general, this value has largely related to its social media aspects as they relate to a phenomenal increase in the capacity of us Africans to receive and impart information.  And as it relates to the human rights of freedom of expression, access to information and in part the right to freely associate.  The jury is still out on how the application relates to the human right to privacy.

The catch is that even these universal values may not apply equally over and about the internet across the world. (I dont quite know if any African in Africa has earned the right to be forgotten by the internet.)  

As a result a key question is what do the inventors let alone controllers of the internet intend for it to do/impact on the African continent?  And what would it be similar to?

In my very personal view, the reach of the internet and its mitigated content (algorithm anyone?) is as enlightening as it can be limiting.  It sort of reminds me of varying strands of missionaries bringing the bible, its teachings with both an outline of a new and 'better' lifestyle as well as more significantly, the Livingstonian perspective on the significance of 'commerce'. 

The internet connected (free basics) mobile telephone therefore becomes not only a tool of this profit motivated perspective but also a controlling mechanism of how we as Africans may be able to perceive of the internet.

As abstract as it may seem, we are in the age of the reinvention of the African persona.  Both as global human beings but more tellingly as those that are on the backfoot of this no longer so new technology and its epistemological (knowledge production) implications. Almost as though it is the contemporary version of the colonial 'new frontier'.

As Africans, we have not explored enough of what this all means.  Nor will we be allowed to do so, especially via the same platform(s).  We are viewed as a market for its products as well as potential reinvention.  Mainly as the 'Saidian' 'others' and as consumers of the  internets' massive arsenal of the convenience of communication never before witnessed in global human history.

But it is here to stay.  Algorithms and all.  We are better off, as Africans,  seeking to harness to our contextual interests and ensuring that we produce enough content for its gigantic 'content appetite'. And also understanding how it functions, at the moment on 'big data'.

We should be screaming back at the global north and the monopolies that have the greatest internet influence over it on the basis of our own ability to understand for example coding, algorithms and more significant its contextual utilitarian value.

Where we fail, we will continue to attend society and internet 'get togethers' in similar fashion to those that attended, as Africans, global religious summits, by being considered as those that were on the right path to new knowledge but never close enough to help determine the same's future. Gatherings that had and now have high priests, popes, archbishops and followers of 'the way'.  Hence we return to colonial throwbacks. Online. Resistance may not however be as futile as assumed.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)

Africa, Algorithms and Resilience @re:publica2018

By Takura Zhangazha*

Its great to be back in Berlin after a two year hiatus for re:publica18. This year’s conference main motto 'POP', as it suggests, seeks to ‘pop the filter bubbles, step out into the public and make net culture and politics tangible for everyone.’

Its turning out to be an enlightening experience that is motivated by fun, intellectualism and a firm grasp of issues such as the internet and knowledge production (epistemology), algorithmic influence, digitization’s impact on labour and how resilience really works (the future as a commodity).  Among many, many other topics of great interest.

There were and will be many other topics that have/will be discussed in the remaining two days.  But for the first day I participated, there are a number of issues that are worth highlighting.

The first being the issue of algorithms and their impact on perceptions, political attitudes and persuasions.  It is a hotly debated topic in the global north and significantly so on how algorithms have come to be default (or de-fault if you want) purveyors of racist and sexist attitudes.  It turns out there are some phases you may ‘google’ in good faith (even if full trust of your preferred search engine) but the first page of our ‘your’ results may have links to sexist/racist content.  

And how all of this is not driven by what individuals on the internet prefer but how they are working on algorithms through ‘clickbaiting’ and how search engine companies/leading monopolies such as google may be more motivated by following the advertising revenue/profit over than promoting fairness and equality.

If you are an African or of African descent, this is nothing new in real life but very significant in relation to your online presence.  And as some of the amazing speakers such as Dana Boyd, Safia Umoja Noble and Wendy Chun (see their profiles here) outlined, these algorithms or about getting the numbers/clicks are not merely mathematical but also informed by tapping into historical prejudices (colonialism, racism, sexism).  And therein lies the challenge not only globally but also specifically to be considered on the role of algorithm in influencing African societies.

African countries, largely as a result of colonial legacies/global cold wars (with some complicity), generally do not have as strong a tradition of democratic values and by dint of the same, an ability to push back against the conforming and persuasive influence on perception that are algorithmic functions of the internet/ and social media.  There is therefore need for African governments and citizens to reexamine the role of algorithms in creating perception that may reinforce racist, sexist attitudes or that may altogether create false and valueless political realities much to the detriment of much needed democratic values. The latter having reportedly been tried in the most recent Nigerian presidential election and the first round of the Kenyan general election. 

The second issue I picked up was one on the significance of always linking up any social media activism with action on the ground (basic point, I know).  But in her presentation Ece Temulkuran titled, ‘How to lose a Country, the New Political Ice Age’, I learnt that genuine or at least public interest intellectualism of sorts is always key.  And that social media platforms are facing a huge vacuum in this respect.

A final topic that was of great interest was one on resilient speculation by Orit Halpern. Illustrated with equations, engaging thoughts on data and climate change and examples of smart mining, smart cities, the chilling knowledge that the future has become an exchangeable commodity gives one pause for serious reflection.  While most of the examples given were from the global north and east, the uptake of smart cities as a concept on the African continent is growing.  The speculation and investment around a future that may not obtain as envisaged by those with the capital to do so is not yet well known.  And may never be unless we all step up.

A final thought however that crossed my mind was that in all of the issues/topics I picked up during the course of the day, I realized that back home, be it in Zimbabwe or the rest of the African continent, these are issues that we haven’t begun to deal with at such a thoughtful, passionate and even intellectual scale.  Perhaps in the near future we will do so with a new sense of urgency.  Because after all, the internet as a medium will invariably be everywhere. Deriving democratic utilitarian value from it requires greater understanding of context and an active pursuit of ensuring that it also retains a significant public interest role in Africa. And now on to Day 2 of @re:publica18 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)