Elections In Zimbabwe Research Articles

Commonwealth Update

A power-sharing deal was hammered out in Kenya after eight weeks of ethnic violence had threatened to tear the country apart. Opposition parties in Pakistan overwhelmingly defeated the allies of President Pervez Musharraf and a coalition government began to form between the party of the late Benazir Bhutto and her rival Nawaz Sharif, while secular parties won unexpected victories over Islamists. Former deputy president Jacob Zuma was elected leader of the African National Congress and became South Africa's likely next head of state. The Ugandan government signed a ceasefire with the rebel Lord's Resistance Army. President Robert Mugabe faced opposition from within his own party in Zimbabwe's elections.

Elections and Vote Rigging/Electoral Fraud in Zimbabwe: A Critical Analysis of the 2000-2008 Parliamentary and Presidential Elections

Elections in Zimbabwe at the inception of the 2000 millennium have received widespread attention and have generated a varied interpretation both from local and international forum. Central has been criticism of the whole electoral system, which has been fine tuned to influence a certain voting pattern that depicts electoral fraud and vote rigging. The situation obtaining and that are under criticism are spread from the organisation of the electoral system prior to elections, the conduct of the elections themselves as well as post election period. It is the purpose of this paper to analyse the irregularities surrounding the electoral system, elections, voting patterns and voting rigging in Zimbabwe within the framework of parliamentary, presidential and senatorial elections that were held from year 2000 to 2008. The paper submits that irregularities in elections and electoral systems are as old as elections themselves as a way of enhancing democracy. However, the paper is not an attempt to justify fraudulent behaviors and systems but to illuminate on problems and challenges bedeviling elections as a system and condition of enhancing democracy and democratic systems.

Mediating the 2000 Elections in Zimbabwe: Competing Journalisms in a Society at the Crossroads

This article analyzes the framing of the 2000 elections in Zimbabwe through editorials and selected front page news reports in selected Zimbabwean newspapers. It argues that three models of journalism, namely, “patriotic,” “oppositional,” and “independent nationalist” were applied in framing the election. These models were the offspring of a society at political crossroads, where public life became bifurcated, and where the press became one of the most visible sites of struggles for control of the state. The article further argues that though the models represent different public spheres ahead of the election, the media framing of the election narrowed—rather than broadened—the scope of public debate. The dramatic shifts in the political economy of the country—including the formation, suspension, and (re)negotiation of alliances between political parties and fractions of capital and civil society—meant that all were interested in one way or another in controlling the national media and its framing of the 2000 election.

Mediating the 2000 Elections in Zimbabwe: Competing Journalisms in a Society at the Crossroads

This article analyzes the framing of the 2000 elections in Zimbabwe through editorials and selected front page news reports in selected Zimbabwean newspapers. It argues that three models of journalism, namely, “patriotic,” “oppositional,” and “independent nationalist” were applied in framing the election. These models were the offspring of a society at political crossroads, where public life became bifurcated, and where the press became one of the most visible sites of struggles for control of the state. The article further argues that though the models represent different public spheres ahead of the election, the media framing of the election narrowed—rather than broadened—the scope of public debate. The dramatic shifts in the political economy of the country—including the formation, suspension, and (re)negotiation of alliances between political parties and fractions of capital and civil society—meant that all were interested in one way or another in controlling the national media and its framing of the 2000 election.

Persistent Inequalities: Women and Electoral Politics in the Zimbabwe Elections in 2005

This paper examines the 2005 elections in Zimbabwe in the context of persistent gender inequalities that have existed since 1980. These inequalities have been exacerbated by an entrenched patriarchal culture and an electoral system that neither facilitates nor adds value to the increased representation and participation of women. The 31 March 2005 parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe were held amid profound struggles and disagreements over how best to change the formal political machinery. At the same time, struggles by the opposition to broaden and deepen political, economic and civil rights had intensified. Within this same struggle for democratisation the women's movement has defined itself by a liberal human rightsbased agenda and has waged the struggle at two levels. The first is the level of a feminist consciousness, where women have fought a war against patriarchy since 1980, through a critique of discriminatory legislation and demands for committed measures to increase women's political representation. The second is at the oppositional level, where some women's groups in alliance with other civil society organisations and opposition political parties have challenged the state and the legitimacy of the ZANU-PF rulers and the lack of a free participatory environment. A reflection on the results of the 2005 elections shows that women have not won these two battles. Patriarchy still remains entrenched in political institutions and political parties. A culture that uncritically accepts the need for women as political leaders does not exist. The under representation of women in Zimbabwe has been so stark since 1980 that the injustice seems beyond question. When women occupy a mere 16 per cent of the seats in Parliament, it should be clear that there is something unsatisfactory in the current political arrangements or in the electoral system.

Moods of Bitterness: How Political Polarisation has Influenced Zimbabwean Elections

Since 2000 elections in Zimbabwe have been characterised by bitter struggles, mainly between the ruling party, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). In the 2000 parliamentary elections and the 2002 presidential elections these struggles became so violent that lives were lost on both sides, with the protagonists blaming each other for instigating the violence. Real and imagined violence became the language with which even the international community, especially the media, articulated the Zimbabwean crisis at the expense of other equally problematic issues such as the land question, the constitutional debate, economic and personal sanctions, drought and hunger, and poor political decisions by major players on both sides of the political divide. This paper argues that the violent character of the Zimbabwean crisis is a result of a general mood of bitterness that had been building up for decades prior to the current crisis. That mood is traceable to the brutality of the liberation struggle and the bitterness continued in the early 1980s with the Matebeleland crisis, whose violent suppression raised bitter ethnic questions. The mood continued to thicken with the militarisation of Zimbabwean politics when the war veterans entered the political fray especially after the February 2000 constitutional reform referendum. Although Zimbabwe has had a multi-party system since 1980, the real contribution of past political parties, civil society and the international community in Zimbabwe's democratic experiment has been lost in the rhetoric of violence of the last five years. The general mood of bitterness has made it impossible even for wellmeaning religious groups and concerned governments of neighbouring countries to negotiate a compromise political solution. Sections of the international media, human rights organisations and some Western diplomats, rather than helping to tone down the bitterness have increased tensions by employing the rhetoric of violence, even in the elections of March 2005, long after the conflicting parties had expressly and demonstrably abandoned violence.

Political Parties and the 2005 Elections in Zimbabwe

Parties play a crucial role in elections for they reflect the configuration of political power in the contestation for state control. Political parties constitute an important medium for citizens' participation in the political process during and between elections. How have parties fared in the context of the Zimbabwe political situation, in particular during the 2005 elections? Although the 2005 elections were as tightly contested as those of 2000 and 2002, there was a remarkable difference between them. The environment during the campaign of 2005 was peaceful, compared with the political violence and mayhem that accompanied the 2000 and 2002 elections. A new element built into the framework of the election campaign was the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections, a framework with which SADC member states were enjoined to comply. Another significant factor was the Zimbabwe Government's strategy of restricting the number and variety of observer missions that would be allowed to witness the election. This paper will not attempt to assess the 2005 election process as a whole but will concentrate on the role of political parties in the contest. Significantly, a major difference from previous elections was the reduction in the number of parties that contested the elections.

The Politics of the 2005 Parliamentary Elections in Zimbabwe

The political and legal framework governing the 2005 parliamentary elections played a significant role in determining the freeness and fairness of the elections. The repressive legislation and partisan institutions put in place to govern the previous two elections were perpetuated, with new names, new personalities and invigorated allegiance to the ruling party. The continued use of repressive institutions and legislation appears to stem from the ruling party's insecurity and its desire to maintain its hegemonic position. The establishment of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing the Conduct of Democratic Elections was both a timely and welcome development for civil society organisations and human rights activists. The government of Zimbabwe responded by selectively applying critical tenets of the guidelines. Undoubtedly there was a relative reduction in state-organised violence but repressive legislation designed to favour the ruling party was not dismantled. New but partisan electoral bodies were appointed to manage the elections and there was rampant and excessive executive interference in the operations of the electoral bodies. As a result the manner in which the delimitation process was conducted compromised the electoral result. The media were biased throughout the campaign period, only improving a few days before the poll. The voters' roll was a shambles, with names duplicated or omitted and including the names of deceased or nonexistent voters The announcement of the results in the absence of political party representatives raised suspicions about their validity. Civil society organisations and opposition political parties dismissed as a fraud an election that must be characterised as flawed - it was free but not fair.

‘Make Sure They Count Nicely This Time’: The Politics of Elections and Election Observing in Zimbabwe

This article examines the controversy surrounding Zimbabwe's elections in 2000 and 2002. It situates these elections against Zimbabwe's experiences of elections since 1980. It argues that the conditions for this controversy emerged from the institutions and practices that developed in Zimbabwe from the time of independence. At the same time, election observers – influenced both by criticism of earlier observation missions in Africa and international policy concerns – were positioned to make an example of the Zimbabwe elections. The Zimbabwe elections became an international crisis point not simply because of observer reports or electoral fraud, but because of the interactions between Zimbabwe's domestic politics and external relationships.

The presidential elections in Zimbabwe, March 2002

The presidential elections in Zimbabwe, March 2002

Democracy and Multiparty Politics in Africa: Recent Elections in Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Lesotho

The shift from one-party to multiparty politics in many African countries has made the issue of democratisation a crucially equally important part of the development agenda. Efforts to create an economically enabling environment and build administrative and other capacities will be wasted if the political context is not favourable. This article focuses on political developments in Zambia to illustrate how a government elected on a ‘democratic ticket’ can become corrupted by the conscious development of a personality cult, and how the hunger for power can lead to the erosion of democratic values, electoral fraud, and the near breakdown of a relatively well-functioning multiparty system. A brief note on Zimbabwe is presented to amplify the Zambian case, and reform of the electoral system in Lesotho is outlined to suggest that the successful completion of elections on 25 May 2002 may serve as an excellent example of how, and under what conditions, ‘free and fair’, multiparty elections can be conducted in an African country.

Multi-stage monitoring and declaring elections ‘free and fair’: The June 2000 Zimbabwe election

Multi-stage monitoring and declaring elections ‘free and fair’: The June 2000 Zimbabwe election

Briefing: Zimbabwe's 2002 Presidential Election

THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in Zimbabwe, from 9 to 11 March 2002, was arguably the most significant election in Zimbabwe's 22-year post-independence history. Moreover, it was an event that attracted widespread international political attention and media coverage. At the centre of this attention was Robert Mugabe, one of the central figures of Zimbabwe's liberation struggle, whose politics and rhetoric since the late 1990s had taken on an increasingly vehement nationalist and anti-imperialist cast around the long-standing demand for land redistribution in the country. The strongly anti-Western tone of his political message, the anti-neo-liberal policy interventions of the beleaguered Zimbabwean government, and the state-sponsored violence through which such policies were being pursued, pushed Mugabe into the forefront of African and international politics. Mugabe and his ruling ZANU-PF party articulated their politics as a return to the unfinished land agenda of the liberation struggle. Their central targets in this onslaught were the small white community, still dominant on the land and in much of the industrial sector, and, behind them, British, European and American foreign interests. Mugabe's core election message was thus expressed in a combination of the central legitimacy of the liberation struggle, a call for pan-Africanist unity around the fight for economic independence, and a denunciation of Western encroachment on African sovereignty, against what were considered Western notions of human and civic rights. As Zimbabwe's Minister of Information, Professor Jonathan Moyo, put it, Zimbabweans 'do not believe in moving from independence and sovereignty to new colonialism, they do not believe in the discourse of human rights to deepen inequality'.1 In this political configuration African identity and solidarity were constructed in essentialist terms, and the political and civic opposition identified as the enemies of 'Africanness' and 'the nation'.

Commentary: The New Partnership for Africa's Development and the Zimbabwe Elections: Implications and Prospects for the Future

Controversy surrounding the presidential elections in Zimbabwe, and the manner in which this matter has been handled by African heads of state, has cast serious doubts on the Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). THE NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICA'S DEVELOPMENT (NEPAD) was launched in October 2001 as a blueprint for Africa's regeneration. Its limited approach to interrogating the global political economy has already been commented upon elsewhere.' This commentary, however, rather concentrates on holding NEPAD's commitment to democracy and peace signed by African elites themselves to account. It contrasts the actual concrete action that various African elites have pursued (or not pursued) in the aftermath of the Zimbabwe presidential election with the rhetoric they have been advancing in recent months. The NEPAD document itself asserts that 'African peoples have begun to demonstrate their refusal to accept poor economic and political leadership. These developments are, however, uneven and inadequate and need to be further expedited.'2 There is, so the document claims, 'a new resolve to deal with conflicts and censure deviation from the [democratic] norm'.3 This springs from the view that 'development is impossible in the absence of true democracy, respect for human rights, peace and good governance'.4 The NEPAD shows, the document claims, that 'Africa undertakes to respect the global standards of democracy, which core components include political pluralism, allowing for Ian Taylor teaches international relations at the University of Botswana and is also visiting research fellow at the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa. 1. Ian Taylor and Philip Nel, 'Getting the rhetoric right, getting the strategy wrong: New Africa, globalisation and the confines of elite reformism', Third World Quarterly 23, 1 (February 2002), pp. 163-180. For an assessment of the NEPAD initiation see above, pp. 387-402, Kempe Ronald Hope, Sr, 'From crisis to renewal: towards a successful implementation of the new partnership for Africa's development'. 2. The Economic Partnership for Africa's Development, October 2001, p. 2. 3. Ibid., p. 10. 4. Ibid., p. 17.

The Zimbabwe Elections: A personal experience

The Zimbabwe Elections: A personal experience

III. AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT: The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD)—Old Wine in New Bottles?

The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) suggests a new trend in the strategies of relevant African political leaders compared with previous, exclusively socio-economically focused initiatives. The article summarises the origin of NEPAD vis-à-vis the African Union, offers a short overview on its substantive aspects and raises the issue of acceptance within the continent and the critical responses to the initiative. It deals in more detail with the notions of democracy, good governance and human rights as new elements of NEPAD in contrast to earlier strategy papers and blueprints for Africa's development. Emphasis is put on the contrasting paradigms of collective responsibility and peer review as possible means of intervention defined in NEPAD versus the postulate of national sovereignty so far maintained by the African governments as an ultimate guiding principle. The recent controversies around the presidential elections in Zimbabwe are used as a reference point and case study, displaying the underlying conflicting approaches. It is argued that the current efforts to gain credibility and achieve external material support for NEPAD have not yet passed the test phase.

Parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe, 2000

Parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe, 2000

Parliamentary Elections in Zimbabwe, 2000

Parliamentary Elections in Zimbabwe, 2000

Voting Patterns in Zimbabwe's Elections of 1980 and 1985

Voting Patterns in Zimbabwe's Elections of 1980 and 1985

Legacies of the Past? The Results of the 1980 Election in Midlands Province, Zimbabwe

Opening ParagraphWestern journalists and other commentators offered two contrasting explanations for the results of the 1980 elections in Zimbabwe. The defeat of Bishop Abel Muzorewa's United African National Council (UANC) by the guerrilla parties was explained in terms of immediate and short-term intimidation. On the other hand, the victory of Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union (Patriotic Front) (ZANU(PF)) over Joshua Nkomo's Patriotic Front was explained in terms of primordial history. The Shona and the Ndebele, it was held, were divided by 'traditional' tribal history–and in the elections the majority Shona voted for Mugabe and the minority Ndebele voted for Nkomo.