By Musa Kika
So finally there’s news from Harare. The second draft of the new constitution was submitted to parliament and the not-so-united government of national unity this month.
For over a decade we have tried to come up with a new constitution that reflects the people’s will and replaces the 1979 Lancaster House Constitution, a ceasefire document drawn up at the end of the liberation war. We cannot afford to miss this opportunity. This is the rationale: constitutional development is a process and not an event.
It has taken decades and centuries for the democracies we admire to be where they are today and that is why South Africa’s almost overnight transition in 1994, enabled by the 1993 interim constitution, is referred to by many as a miracle. SA adopted its current constitution in 1996.
SA probably has the most progressive constitution in the world. In Zim we want a miracle, and that is the problem. We cannot achieve a clean break from the past so easily. This constitution should be accepted with its few flaws (whatever those are) and be used as a bridge to a new era. Who said a final constitution cannot be adopted later?
From what I have read I have noted many provisions that bring about positive reform to our beloved nation. A few examples will illustrate this:
A constitutional court
It’s important the nation have an independent constitutional court. This will develop our constitutionalism and foster expediency in the judiciary.
Human rights
It’s commendable that we have gone beyond civil and political rights and entrenched socio-economic rights. I would obviously not know how it will go with the implementation part, but it is one thing to fight for the recognition of socio-economic rights when they are not in the constitution and another to fight for them when they are constitutionally entrenched.
Social cohesion
Zimbabwe will have 16 official languages! That’s a lot, but these languages are spoken in Zimbabwe. And sign language is one of these. I am particularly touched at how we have included languages originally not Zimbabwean. Some of them spoken by people who came to Zimbabwe as migrant workers. Chewa is a classic example.
Electoral reforms
They might not be as tightly knit as we’d like but the process was led by three, rival, political camps and we should therefore accept the outcome is a compromise. Products of compromise have their limitations.
We have seen a lot of stagnation in the inclusive government and we seem to be failing to agree on issues of national importance. Many people would hold a different view but I think it’s time we build a solid government. The unity government played its part to save us from the brink of catastrophe but I cannot envisage a situation where we would go to elections using the current constitution and electoral system without first regulating the environment under which the elections will be held to avoid a repeat of June 2008.
I would not know what the three parties will conclude on the draft but in the event that they do agree to take it to a referendum, my opinion is that people should go for the YES vote.
It is healthy that civil society is there to guide voters on the merits and flaws of the constitution and will sensitise voters to vote in a certain way, but civil society also needs to understand that progress comes gradually and opportunities to change the status quo for the better should not be missed.
The National Constitutional Assembly has voiced it will campaign for a no vote, not based on its analysis of the content of the draft, but for the sole reason the process was led by politicians.
Indeed no right-thinking Zimbabwean ever wanted politicians to lead the process but in all this the voter should have progress in mind in the voting booth. It has cost us a lot of resources to put together this draft and we have also willingly participated in the two-year-long process. Will it then not be irresponsible of us to throw the document away?
Musa Kika is a second year LLB student at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and an SA Brightest Young Minds Alumni. He is interested in human rights, governance and constitutional law. He writes in his personal capacity.
@Musa, how can SA have the most progressive constitution in the word when nobody is elected in SA. This country is run by a group of self appointed kingmakers with no regard to well being of the people. Do you know who in parliament represented you in SA?
Speaking of Zim’s new constitution, this paper is good as long as the strong man is willing to abide by it.
good piece of art i may say..but why wud the COPAC in the issue of languages include the languages we never heard of?the question is why now?why wr these languages made to be invisible in the past???just a concern
@Sterling: The issue of the manner in which representatives are elected in SA is really something I do not entirely favor. However, in spite of the system, the elections are well-regulated I must say. There are no electoral problems that are manifest in most parts of the country and in any case it was a system that was agreed to by the people during public consultations that led to the constitution in 1996. Other areas of importance include the justiciable Bill of Rights which underpins the nation’s values, and these rights have largely been given effect. What is even more important is that the 1996 Constitution in a big way achieved the political transition that was sought by the national democratic revolution. The sticking point of economic transition which is topical now is attributed more to political will of the sitting government rather than constitutional deficiencies.
@Rose: Remember the input came from the people during the thousands of public consultations held across the country. The issue is these languages are spoken in Zimbabwe but were not given recognition. that is why some people never heard of them. It is simply a way of bringing about equality and valuing the languages of minority groups.
Interesting. One of our doctoral students is basing his research on the idea that Zimbabwe still didn’t have a formal language policy after 32 years. Seems he’s been pre-empted — or maybe it was a big issue for the constitutional guys.
I hope it’s a nice short, sweet constitution, though, and not a grab-bag of half-baked ideas like so many products of committees!
I think it is a brilliant document. It even lets the killers, rapists and human rights abusers keep their stolen land and get away scot free with their crimes against humanity. I also quite like the fact that racism is also built in.
It’s a brilliant piece of work by Zanu-PF. To add to the mix, I like the way the MDC-T has come out and called it “people driven” when even a complete lunatic would know that it was made by politicians to preserve Zanu-PF.
In the land of reverse logic, we have Zanu-PF calling for a NO vote when they really want a YES vote and you have naively foolish MDC-T doing the opposite by calling for a YES (falling for it hook line and sinker) vote when they should be calling for a NO vote.
So Zanu-PF will be laughing all the way to the bank and the losers are the people.
SADC will be very happy with this situation as it helps Zanu-PF and who gives a continental toss for the people anyway?
What Africa needs is a SOCIAL revolution, not a political or economic one. Dictators rise in the presence of a weak society.
If the masses were informed, in a easy-to-understand, vernacular manner, it would not be so difficult to assume change would be inevitable.
Knowledge is power, and Africa will continue to be bound by its inherent weaknesses, unless a significant shift occurs in African, political thought. In order to effectively change a ‘bad’ government, one needs to change the people first.
Any government, but specifically in our continent, should be absolutely dependent on the people. Rules, procedures, actions, or any other form of government intervention in the lives of its citizens should be for the utility of the people.
Failing the people is unacceptable, and until the day we can boast a strong-willed citizenry, corruption and mismanagement will continue to reign over African development, in all fields, and all levels.
There is way too much power concentrated in the hands of one man, the President. The history of Zimbabwe, and indeed Rhodesia, has been one in which the consolidation of power in an individual has nursed and nurtured dictatorship. That is one of the seminal issues that came out in the flawed consultative initiative but which for obvious reasons ( principally because of the controlling involvement of the two parties with power-obsessed individuals) has not been captured in the draft document.
We are simply repeating our shortcomings and errors, we ought to have learnt from Mugabe’s rule that power , even within the Executive , should be spread.
The second issue is that Corruption is the scourge of the majority of African societies and there will be no meaningful development, politically, socially and most significantly, economically, if we do not take serious steps to prevent and eradicate this ill. This most appropriate way of doing this would have been to make provision for a trly independent Anti-Corruption Commission, with full investigative and prosecutorial powers, independent of the Police and the Attorney-General or Prosecutor-General. Such a body ought to be operationally comprised of professionals with the Commission members acting in an advisory capacity. Noone, noone, should be immune to investigation by such a Commission and public procurement procedures should be subject to the oversight of this Commission.
@Musa Kika. You’re a worthy pragmatist. Just remember though that there are times when pragmatism will not suffice.
After all is said an done, still the black massess of afrika suffer worst. Equal rights and justice is a cliche used governments; politicians and bankers to confuse the massess…. A constitution may be helpfull however we need to go back to the 1984 accord by the UN and collonised – The RIGHT TO DEVELOP- none of our leaders ( political and otherwise) are looking at the these… our rsources should benfit us…a people revolution is needed..