Zimbabwe's Open Wound: Why Zimbabweans Are Still Protesting a 3-Year-Old Election

An urgent exploration into the difficulties of Zimbabwean electoral reform in the age of Robert Mugabe and #Thisflag

Phillis Nyamombe was an election agent in the 2013 Zimbabwean elections in Nyariya, a small village in the eastern province of Manicaland. A local representative of the largest Zimbabwean opposition party—Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)—Nyamombe’s job was to be at the polling station and make sure things were going orderly.

“There was a lot of intimidation during the 2013 pre-election period, people were being threatened by death if they vote for MDC-T,” she tells me in the back room of a crowded bar in Nyariya. It’s loud enough in the bar that people cannot overhear the conversation.

At the time, members of Zanu-PF, Zimbabwe’s long-time ruling party would approach opposition members and warn them not to vote. According to Nyamombe they told her ‘If you do like what you did in 2008, you were pardoned in 2008, this time around you must know that things have changed, you will die”.

“We continually encouraged our members to stand firm,” she said.

But on the day of the elections there were other problems. “We noticed some deceased people’s names that were still appearing on the voters roll.” Some people had been long dead, she said, and she also witnessed people who came into the polling station, at the local Zambe Primary School, and couldn't find their name on the lists so they didn’t vote.

One of these people was Catherine (full name withheld on request), a woman in her late 50s. Catherine has been voting for the opposition party in her village since it was established in 1999. But in the 2013 elections, when she came to the polling station, she was told her name wasn’t on the list. She was asked to go to another polling station. But it was too far. Catherine’s health is shaky, there are no vehicles in Nyariya, and walking five kilometers in the Zimbabwean summer was too much. She gave up and didn’t vote.

The local polling station at Nyariya Photo: Yael Even Or

Still Protesting Today

On August 26th of this year, Zimbabweans took to the streets of Harare to push for electoral reform. Police attacked them with tear gas, water cannons and arrested 67 people. For most outsiders it was another demonstration in a series of protests against the 36-year rule of Robert Mugabe—and the many economic issues Zimbabweans are struggling with. But the demand was now different. People were demanding electoral reforms.

The recently founded National Electoral Reform Agenda (NERA) is a consortium of political parties fighting for electoral reforms in Zimbabwe. If demonstrations are not in the headlines anymore it’s only because recently Zimbabwe's High Court decided to uphold a police ban on protests in the capital on the grounds that this was “necessary to preserve peace.” But the demand for electoral reform is very much alive and it has a lot to do with the frustration over the 2013 elections, where Mugabe won in a tremendous landslide. Those elections are still an unsolved case for Zimbabweans.

Trouble With The Voter Rolls

One good way to start talking about the flaws in Zimbabwe’s electoral system is with the voter roll. The roll, containing the names of the people who can vote, is a magnet for most of the problems in the country's elections.

The voter roll got its mysterious reputation largely by its inaccessibility and the extreme difficulties people are going through in order to take a look at it. Until 2008, the voter roll was kept as a state secret, despite many court challenges. In 2008 it was supposed to enter the public domain, and yet access to the full roll prove next to impossible for opposition activists.

Politician Tendai Biti, formerly with MDC-T, was active in trying to get a hold of the roll in order to audit it. Biti, who’s known for his fierceness, served in 2013 as Zimbabwe’s Minister of Finance in the unity government. But even from his seat he couldn’t lay his hands on the whole electronic roll.

Prior to any election in Zimbabwe there is an inspection period in which the voters are supposed to make sure they are registered and if they need to change their address in order to vote in another constituency.

In June 2013, almost two months before the elections, Biti and his partners got a provisional PDF copy of the list but it was not the complete roll as registration was still on going.

An analysis of the roll that was released in June has shown problematic results. An audit that The Research and Advocacy Unit [RAU], an independent non-governmental organization in Harare, conducted prior to the 2013 elections found that there are some 2 million potential voters that are not on the roll.

The report revealed that more than another 1 million voters on the roll are either deceased or had departed. This led to an absurd situation that on the election day it was reported that on the roll there were 132,540 people older than 90 years-old. The country’s average life expectancy, meanwhile, is 45.

It also found that 63 constituencies have more registered voters than inhabitants. There was a clear bias in favor of rural constituencies, which are known to be dominated by Zanu-PF supporters. In rural areas there was 91.9 percent voter registration compared to only 78.3 percent in urban constituencies.

One Million New Zimbabwean Voters

Biti’s wife was one of the many people who weren’t able to vote due to the fact that her name wasn’t on the roll at her polling station. But because of her husband’s involvement, they were able to track her name on another list.

“When we went to vote on 31st of July 2013, my name was there, but Helen was not there,” he told me in an interview at his office in Harare. “She was suddenly told that, ‘You are not in the voters roll.’ We then went to the computer center and then at the command center, they then put your name in the overall computer. She was now registered in Mudzi.” Mudzi is 250km away from Harare. Biti’s wife has never been there.

Another anomaly was the massive increase in the number of voters registered. In 2008 there were some 5.7 million voters registered and according to the July 2013 hard copy there were about 6.3 million.

The increase in numbers was even more magnificent in the voting itself. In the March 2008 presidential election, about 2.5 million people voted, and in 2013 a million more voted. That’s an increase of over 37 percent. And Mugabe’s tally more than doubled—from about one million to some 2.1 million.

Trusting the Registrar General

The voter roll is under the responsibility of Zimbabwe’s Registrar General, Tobaiwa Mudede, who’s been in his role since independence in 1980. Many are suspicious of him because of his allegiance and past behavior. One of those is Rugare Gumbo.

Gumbo used to be the spokesperson for Zanu-PF. During the 2013 elections he was in charge to keep the press informed on the process, but now, no longer with the party, he admits there might have been some wrongs.

Gumbo at his backyard in Harare

“In the past the registrar general was the one who really was running the show, and he was quite partisan. He always said that he was a member of Zanu PF, which is unfortunate,” he said.

Gumbo is now spokesperson for the much-talked-about “People First” party. It’s leading the demand for electoral reforms these days.

Since its formation in 1999, MDC-T party was fighting for an independent body to manage the elections instead of the Registrar General.

They were able to recruit the SADAC, the Southern African Development Community, to their struggle. Backed by the SADAC, MDC-T and other opposition efforts seem to bear fruit before the 2008 election, when by an act of the Parliament from 2004, the Zimbabwe Electoral Supervisory Commission was established. ZEC was supposed to be the new independent body to completely administer the elections. But in practice, this hasn't happened and ZEC authorities remained largely on paper.

In many other countries, there are clear restrictions to the executive power on how election management operates. An election commission reports directly to parliament, gets its funding from the treasury, and proposes changes to the electoral law on its own. But that’s not the case in Zimbabwe, even when the constitution now says otherwise.

Deciding Who Can Observe Elections

One telling example to ZEC impotency is how it elects the foreign observers that can determine “free and fair” elections and in fact did so in 2013.

In the ZEC committee for choosing foreign observers, there’s an office for the president’s cabinet so Zanu-PF ministers are making that decision and they make sure to choose their friends. In the 2013 elections Zimbabwe denied the participation of Australia, U.S., U.K., and other European countries, all of which are critical of the Zimbabwean government and electoral system.

Beyond the issues of electoral bodies composition and procedures, voters’ registration, constituency manipulation and delineation, an overarching and sometimes all-consuming issue is fear. Because of all of these, many Zimbabweans don’t believe they can trust the electoral system: they fear their vote will be changed or wouldn’t count, at best, and that there will be consequences at worst.

That’s another factor that can explain the astonishing low number of registration on the roll. People don’t stop in not voting—they go as far as not wanting to even be on a list that says they’re eligible.

Research for this article was supported by a Taco Kuiper Grant for investigative journalism. Nyasha Mukapiko contributed to this story.

News Brief

Prominent Zimbabwean Activist  Sheds Light on Current Crisis

Doug Coltart, a vocal activist and human rights lawyer based in Harare, speaks to Okayafrica about what's currently happening in Zimbabwe.

A few days ago, the Zimbabwean government issued a directive to major cellular network providers Econet and TelOne to disable the internet and all access to social media. The directive was an attempt to prevent any information from spreading outside the country's borders with regards to the nationwide protests which have led to the deaths of at least five people and the injury of at least twenty-five others.

Keep reading... Show less
The front page of The New York Times on January 16, 2019

Kenyans Are Furious at the New York Times for Posting Photos of Terrorist Victims

After the the deadly attack on Tuesday, many are accusing the American newspaper of having a double standard on which dead bodies they allow into the paper

Is the New York Times guilty of a double standard when it comes to publishing images of dead bodies?

Kenyans, and others fed up with the coverage, took to social media in the hundreds to denounce a Times article that included an image of victims of Tuesday's Nairobi terrorist attack, bloodied from bullets, and lying hunched over their laptops, dead.

It has cause enough debate online to where the Times' incoming East Africa Bureau chief Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura felt the need to explain their photo policy, which is to show the dead only if their faces cannot be seen in the image. The photo in question fits the policy as the faces are facing away from the camera. She would later apologize before posting the official policy to her Twitter account. The photo remains up.

The Times' official response, as those tend to do online, has only created more anger. But unlike many unruly Twitter mobs, those responding to the official statement have a rather coherent message—"you wouldn't do this with photos of the American dead."

Some of the responses to the Times' official statement.

In a response to the controversy from the Poynter Institute, a typically astute observer of journalistic practice in the United States, they run through the typical American journalism school approach to publishing photos that might shock or offend. They write:

Should the Times have run the photo?
There is no easy answer.
The first question any news organization must ask when deciding to publish violent images is: WHY show it?
In other words, what is the news value? Does the public need to see such an image to fully grasp what happened? Does the public need to see such a photo to confirm or disprove the official account of the events?
An argument could be made that a writer's words could accurately describe the scene without being as disturbing as the image. In addition, when it comes to an act of terrorism, might publishing such a photo actually advance the cause of the terrorists, showing the damage they caused, thus fueling dread and panic?
Also this: The photo on the Times website came without warning. As a reader, you didn't know you were going to see a photo of dead people until you actually saw it.
Those are arguments to not run such a photo or, at least, warn readers of its graphic content.

While it's a fine analysis of when to show a violent image, it misses the central issue at play for those aggrieved by the Times' posting—that the American news-gaze values certain lives differently. Black, brown, foreign, poor—American journalism organizations, including the New York Times, cannot escape a base ethnocentrism in their coverage. It's so embedded into how these institutions operate, and the gap in understanding is so wide, that to much of the world, the Times' official response is laughably wrong at first glance.

"We take the same approach wherever in the world something like this happens--balancing the need for sensitivity and respect with our mission of showing the reality of these events"

And while there are examples from the Times that complicate this feeling, like these images of the dead in the terrorist attack in Nice, France, it doesn't discount the wider and correct feeling that the white victims of American mass shootings are treated differently than their African counterparts. And while there are complicated and systematic reasons for this which will always make discussing it difficult, to simply deny that different standards exist, does not increase the Times' credibility with Kenyans or the newspaper's growing online audience which will only become more vocal about how they're portrayed.

Falz 'Moral Instruction'

The 10 Songs You Need to Hear This Week

The best music of the week featuring Falz, King Monada, Zlatan, Yemi Alade and more.

Every week, we highlight the cream of the crop in music through our Best Music of the Week column.

Here's our round up of the best tracks and music videos that came across our desks, which you can also check out in our Songs You Need to Hear This Week playlists on Spotify and Apple Music.

Follow OkayAfrica on Spotify and Apple Music to get immediate updates every week and read about some of our selections ahead.

Keep reading... Show less

get okayafrica in your inbox