MDC must exploit parliamentary power

MDC must exploit parliamentary power

• MDC: Making the best of a bad situation

• Zimbabwe: Talks and tears for Tarisai

• There's no bad constitution. It's the human factor

• Managing the bad news from the Pretoria talks

• Sanctions could strangle Zimbabwe 'baby' at birth

• Be watchful when hunting with hounds

• There're no angels in politics

• After the Zanuslide, beware of Zanu PF bearing gifts

• On the legality of Tsvangirai's pullout from election

• 'St Paul moment' can't be far for Mbeki

• What would Masipula say of military rule in Zim?

• Zimbabwe's disenfranchised voters

• MDC must prepare for worst case scenario

• Understanding Mugabe's 'End of History' ideology

• Zimbabwe's winter of discontent

• Zim's presidency and balance of power

• Mugabe's crisis of legitimacy

• Judging Justice Uchena's judgment

• Did they have to die for this?

• Challenging ministers' constititutional authority

• Waiting for Godot

• Mugabe: beware the Ides of March

• The Godfather and the Zanu PF Mafia Part III

• Fallacy of the secret ballot in Zimbabwe

• The significance of Dabengwa's conversion

• Preventing a tyranny of the majority

• Who is imposing whom and why?

• The Tsvangirai-Makoni question: the results

• Can Tsvangirai make the ultimate sacrifice?

• Makoni'sbattle against conspiracy culture

• Makoni and the politics of stability

• The trouble with gifts for the judiciary

• The limits of megaphone central banking

• Makoni, Tsvangirai & Mutambara: wise men from the East?

• Democracy without wealth: the Gordian knot in African politics

• Democracy: Africa's elusive dream?

• A non-human rights perspective of Zimbabwe's collapse

• Zanu PF'succession: Mujuru and Mnangagwa in tactical retreat

• Zimbabwe: when the elephants fight, it's the grass that suffers

• Big Joes, Little Joes: Zimbabwe's merchants of disorder

• Politics is for the well fed, an old timer told me in Mbare

• The Godfather and the African Mafia Part II

• The Godfather of the Zanu PF Mafia

• The President's missing clothes

• Confronting Zanu PF's anti-imperialist rhetoric

• South Africa's self-serving quiet diplomacy

• When will Africa demonstrate solidarity with Zimbabweans?

• Do they sleep soundly at night?

• Indepedence: was it worth the sacrifice?

• Judges under pressure: the Madzimbamuto case

• Succession debate a means of control for Mugabe

• Reflections on Ghana's Jubilee

• What happens when politicians fail?

• Fanon and the car as a symbol of progress

• Could change in Britain have impact on Zimbabwe?

• Machiavelli and perils of change in Zimbabwe

• Of rats, donkeys and the CNN story

THE faithful multitudes of the Beautiful Game, as that greatest of its exponents, Pele called it years ago, are familiar with the oft-repeated claim that no matter the level of the match, a team must always play to win, if only because winning is a good habit. The same applies; more so, perhaps, to that other game of life and death, the less aesthetically pleasing one, called politics.

There can be no doubt that the Tsvangirai-led MDC scored a significant political victory over their adversaries with the election of Mr Lovemore Moyo as the new Speaker of the House of Assembly, turning the tables on Zanu PF, for the first time in 28 years.

These developments surrounding the institution of Parliament have to be seen within the context of the negotiating process. Having failed to pin down the MDC in Pretoria, Zanu PF played what they perceived to be a disarming card, by going ahead with the convening of Parliament.

For a moment, this decision appeared to have caught the MDC unawares given the apparently conflicting signals over the matter last week by the MDC leader Tsvangirai and his Secretary General Tendai Biti. But after the initial panic, they made the right decision to play their own card and, so far, as events have shown, it was a card that Zanu PF found hard to counter.

Zanu PF, plainly, miscalculated, thinking erroneously, not only that they would benefit from the support of the Mutambara MDC MPs but also in hoping that the MDC would carry out its threats of boycotting, in which case they would have had ample room to manoeuvre and gain an upper hand in a House of Assembly in which they are now juniors.

The proceedings also demonstrated the angst among MPs who showed they can no longer be easily manipulated as has been the case in previous Parliaments, when that institution was no more than a rubber-stamping organ of the Executive.

At a time when the confidence in the judiciary as the last bastion of protecting fundamental freedoms is very low, Parliament has, like a phoenix, risen from the dead to demonstrate, at least fleetingly, that it can stand its own ground. One can look to the future and say that gone, perhaps, are the days when Parliament was simply part of the gravy train, which the Executive took for granted. That can only be a good thing for Zimbabwe’s fledgling democracy. These are the small but no less significant gains in the tortuous road towards democracy.

For my part, this new found power is something that the MDC must build on. They should recognise that, finally, they no longer have to play the hand-maiden at the party. It is no longer necessary to resort to the all-too-familiar tactic of boycotting because they now have power which can be used pro-actively. The MDC should not underestimate the kind of power that comes with the type of leverage they now have in the main House of Parliament. The heckling on Tuesday is just one form of protest but it not enough – they now have to be pro-active in the use of the law-making process.

Instead of boycotting and withdrawing into its cocoon for purposes of scoring moral victories, the MDC must exploit their parliamentary power and use it pro-actively to redress the repressive legislative framework represented by laws such as AIPPA, POSA, the Electoral Act, etc. They might fail because of obstacles that will be placed in their way but they should not stop trying. In other words, instead of saying, ‘chitongai tione’ (Go ahead and govern), they should be saying ‘ngatitongei tione’ (Let’s Govern) because in this arena they can now assert a counter-power to its adversaries in the business of government.

Clearly, what these developments show is that for as long as it intends to use the veil of legal process to govern, Zanu PF has, rather inconveniently, driven into a cul-de-suc and the options are very limited without the co-operation of the MDC.

A government needs to make laws, which in terms of the Zimbabwe Constitution, have to be passed by both Houses of Parliament – Assembly and Senate. It is crucial to appreciate that under Section 32 of the Constitution, the legislative authority vests in the legislature which consists of the President and Parliament. Bills ordinarily originate from the Assembly, pass through the Senate and eventually require Presidential assent in accordance with the provisions of Section 51. And herein are the ingredients of a possible constitutional crisis, which means no party can govern effectively without the other.

The law-making process requires a simple majority except that where it involves the amendment of the Constitution, there must be a two-thirds majority. This means that on the basis of the precedence set at the election of the Speaker, the MDC can, surely, muster a simple majority to effect changes to the vast plethora of legislation that it has challenged without much success over the years because it has been hamstrung by Zanu PF’s dominance.

Of course, success will be subject, first, to the agreement of the Senate, which is dominated by the handpicked faithful of Zanu PF and second, the overall power of the President, who may withhold his assent to legislation. But it is important to note that this power of rejection by the President is not absolute.

This is because, the Constitution states under S. 51(3b), that were certain conditions are met, a that is Bill rejected by the President may be returned to him if the House of Assembly by a vote of at least two thirds majority resolves that this be done. In that case, the Constitution states in mandatory terms that the President ‘shall assent’ to the Bill within 21 days. His only other option at that point would be to dissolve Parliament, a circumstance that cannot be ruled out, but is unlikely.

This of course is predicated on the assumption that the MDC can persuade some Zanu PF MPs in order to muster that two-thirds majority. This cannot be guaranteed but also can no longer be ruled out given the voting pattern for the Speaker which appeared to show that some Zanu PF MPs voted for the MDC candidate. Zanu PF’s failure to crack the whip on this occasion is unusual and indicates some fissures within the ranks, which the MDC might exploit.

There also seems to be a latent marginalisation of the Mujuru faction, signalled most prominently by the relegation to the inferior divisions of former Mashonaland East Governor Ray Kaukonde in favour of Aeneas Chigwedere, who in the wake of electoral defeat had sought to claw his way back by claiming the controversial Mubaiwa Headmanship. The question remains whether and how they will react to this apparent marginalisation.

What this boils down to is that Mugabe cannot go ahead in the business as usual mode. By convening Parliament, there is now the realisation that Zanu PF will need to work with the MDC, as equal partners, not juniors and his affirmation that negotiations are still possible indicate his own recognition that there is not much way out of this conundrum.

Conversely, the MDC would also need the cooperation of Zanu PF, because it could create the same blockages, through the Senate or the Presidency, which might be hard to surmount. In normal democracies, such a scenario would ordinarily lead to a coalition arrangement. This indeed is the cases in older democracies such as Germany. This reliance on partners presents an effective check on the potential excesses of the Presidency.

But, in the midst of the celebrations, it is important that the MDC keeps the eye on the ball. They have now shown that they have the power in Parliament which Zanu PF cannot do without unless it decides boldly to by-pass that institution and rule by decree. Mugabe of course can still use the temporary powers under the notorious Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act. But these would eventually require Parliamentary approval and can only buy time for no more than six months.

In addition, having been forced into a corner, there has to be that old and familiar fear of how Zanu PF will react. The security structure, which holds de facto power will have been watching from the sidelines and, surely, this will have caused some consternation. Knowing Zanu PF and its history of dealing with setbacks, one would be naïve not to expect a ferocious counter-attack from the old warriors. The challenge for the MDC is to plan ahead, anticipating, yet again, another worst case scenario.

In the Beautiful Game, faithful followers know very well that clinching the title comes after a marathon – you have to win the big games as well as the small games but when you lose, you learn to pick yourself up and look to another day. I will be saying a prayer for my beloved Arsenal. I will also be saying a similar prayer for Zimbabwe. It a little hard, I have to admit, at this stage, to be a Gunners faithful and Zimbabwean at the same time. But you have to remain hopeful – after all, as they say, Hope springs eternal. If you watched that inspirational film, The Shawshank Redemption, you should know that everything is possible.

Alex Magaisa is based at Kent Law School, The University of Kent. He can be contacted at wamagaisa@yahoo.co.uk
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS