The Democratic Importance of Zimbabwe Political Party Primary Elections in 2018

“Primary Elections: Strengthening or Undermining Internal Party Democracy?” in Zimbabwe’s 2018 General Election

A presentation to a Mass Public Opinion Institute (MPOI) Public Meeting

Thursday 31 May 2018

New Ambassador Hotel, Harare, Zimbabwe.

By Takura Zhangazha*

Cde Chairperson,

As always, I am grateful at having been invited to come and share some of my thoughts on the official topic of this public discussion today concerning what is now a certain general (harmonised) election on 30 July 2018 in Zimbabwe.

The issue that I had been advised to share thoughts on, “Primary Elections for 2018: Strengthening or Undermining Internal Party Democracy” may initially appear to have been overtaken by recent events such as the signing into law of the Electoral Amendment Act as well as the proclamation of three key electoral dates namely the holding the election itself on 30 July 2018 preceded by nomination court on 14 June 2018 and just in case presidential candidates final to garner the 50%+1 vote count, a presidential run-off vote scheduled for Saturday 8 September 2018. 

To begin by stating the obvious, for what would be considered the biggest prizes (presidential office and parliamentary majorities) of electoral contestations since national independence, the political party is key. 

This latter and initial point of my brief discussion may sound abstract but is, in my view, a fairly pragmatic assessment of our political realities. 

Even the title of the topic under discussion suggests I am correct in my assertion. 

If we are to discuss, as advised by MPOI, the ‘(political party) primary elections of 2018; strengthening or undermining internal party democracy’ we, as would contemporary Christian theologists and their understanding of the religious functionality of the ‘family’as the primary unit of society,  look for a primary organizational unit that underlies our understanding of what would be national politics.

In post independent Zimbabwe’s case the primary unit for political mobilization in pursuit of political power has historically been the political party.  This unit, in its ability to organize and mobilise the proverbial ‘masses’ to a specific cause has remained supreme over and above all other political considerations.  In the case of the ruling party Zanu Pf, this understanding of the pre-eminence of the organization (party) led to the ouster of its long standing leader, Robert Mugabe, undemocratic as it may have been (in the final analysis the party ‘triumphed’). 

The same with the largest opposition party the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC in its perpetually varying formations) the passing away of its again longstanding leader, Morgan Tsvangirai has left remaining leaders with a claim to internal party legitimacy fighting over control of, you guessed it, the party or what remains of it. 

So the question of ‘internal primary elections’ and their meaning for democracy in Zimbabwe’s context, can only be answered from the perspective of understanding the supremacy of the party as the foundational unit of political activism/action and belonging in our body politic. 

And it is important to also point out that internal party processes have a direct bearing on national political culture and actions. That is to say, the more democratic a ruling or main opposition party is internally, the more likely the nation state or country will be also democratically governed.  
This is because democratic internal party party processes such as primary elections allow a culture of transparency, democracy and direct leadership accountability.  It also allows ordinary members of the party leadership eligibility and as a result thereof performance assessment in relation to principles and objectives of the party.  

This is currently not happening in the ruling or opposition parties that straddle our national political landscape.  And I will come to an assessment of each shortly.  . 

Where we are faced with a general election the key questions that emerge are whether this primary political organization is up to the task of seeking and acquiring electoral victory.  Because the topic at hand is time specific vis-a-vis the 2018 elections, it is important to outline the reality that the internal status of the party is a key determinant to its prospects for electoral victory.

I will begin with the ruling party Zanu Pf.  Following its coup-not-a-coup internal party transition of removing Mugabe from power, it appears to have re-coagulated around its intention to retain state power via a re-legitimisation process that would be the 2018 general election.  It has however faced internal challenges over retaining those that had previously stood with its former leader and those that embraced (and stuck their necks out) for what it now refers to as the new dispensation. 

It has attempted to balance both for expedient electoral reasons.  Hence its primary elections were a hotchpotch of accusations and counter accusations of local leaders having never supported the ‘new dispensation’ and therefore undeserving of elected positions in the 2018 elections.  What is has however done is sought to reinvent itself in intra party democratic tradition.  It has allowed its members to contest in its primary elections on what would on the face of it be regarded as a ‘fair’ electoral field. Even if you were alleged to be part of the now infamous ‘G-40’ that sought to retain Mugabe you were allowed to contests as a candidate (so long you were not part of the direct ‘criminals’ around the former leader).  And some of these alleged candidates won resoundingly in the ruling party’s primary elections. Others who were at the front of ‘Operation Restore Legacy’ of November 2017 had to be restored to internal party primary election ‘victories’. 

The fact that there have been various meetings including one ironically dubbed a ‘reconciliation meeting’ between winning and losing candidates points to the fact that these primary elections in Zanu Pf still have untold stories about their effect on its actual electoral performance come polling day.  But as Zanu Pf leader Mnangagwa has publicly stated, they have a strong expectation of victory despite the challenges they have faced in their own internal party leadership transition.  The primary elections in the ruling party are therefore assumed as a routine process.  Not only by way of its own internal undemocratic tradition but also by way of seeking a new intra-party legitimacy for its controversial ‘new’ leadership.

Where we consider the opposition MDC-T and its loosely put together MDC Alliance, the differences far outweigh assumed similarities.  The former relate to the fact that the opposition has still not only not completed primary elections but more significantly is still squabbling over sharing pre-election spoils with its ‘alliance’ partners.  Assuming that these pre-election spoils survive to become post-election ones, again there are challenges as to whose candidates in the alliance won and who gets to control them. 

Where the (united) MDC-T had chosen to go it alone, their primary elections would have been simpler and pointed to an internal democratic processes.  But because of the ‘sharing’ of safe seats in the context of the alliance and a transposed ‘consensus’ candidate selection system in the MDC-T, the intra party process has served more to divide than unite their party(ies).Alliance or no alliance.  This means that the primary elections in the opposition, whatever format they have taken and will take, are no longer supportive mechanisms to an electoral victory. At least not via the party(ies).

Cde Chairperson,

Because the topic is so broad I cannot capture all of the key points I wanted to raise, I will restrict my remaining time to only two key further points.

The first being that the 2018 elections, in so far as it concerns the ruling party is a foreign policy election.  Their newfound attempts at 'internal democracy' via their recent their primary elections are not just for their party but also to try and show face with the broader world that they are a changed party after Mugabe's rule. 

It is more of a public relations exercise but they do not intend to lose the general election in its presidential, parliamentary or local government aspects.  In their assumptions of electoral victory they intend to re-establish themselves as a ruling establishment in the neo-liberal mould of the 1990s.  This is when the seeds of free market capitalism or the  ‘ease of doing business’ was key to linking up those in political power and those with capital to combine to create an assumedly unassailable power pact of a rent seeking elite ruling class.  

All in keeping with what global capital (east or west is rapaciously seeking across our African continent, especially South of the Sahara).

The second key point that is necessary to make is that the mainstream opposition as led by the MDC-T in failing to demonstrate a different intra-party political trajectory/culture from the ruling Zanu Pf party is falling into a tragic trap of mimicking that which it may not be able to dislodge from political power.  The ‘consensus’ candidate lists of the alliance and the divisions that they have caused in the larger MDC-T together with a consistent lack of intra-party political and financial accountability has left all opposition forces politically hamstrung.  Regrettably this has meant that they have generally followed Zanu Pf lead in how to either dissipate their internal disputes by trying, vaingloriously, to resolve them by laying claim to either ‘chine vene vacho (the party has owners)’ or ‘generational consensus’. 

The third and final point I am concluding by Cde Chairperson is almost a reiteration of the point I made at the beginning of our discussion.  The political party, in Zimbabwe’s context is the basic unit of political mobilization/organization for elections in relation to the topic.  But more significantly, the political party is a purveyor of political values and practices. Where a party is internally undemocratic and either in power or close to power, its tendencies negatively affect national political culture and practice. Where the opposite is true, that means internal party democratic practice means a democratic national political culture.   Not only in the heated moment of primary elections but for posterity.  At the moment neither of the two main political parties vying for state power have demonstrated that they are thinking beyond their historical liberation war legacies, celebrity statuses, age or a globally failing consumerist/neo-liberal/free market culture. 

Thank you cdes. 

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