TORONTO STAR

BY OAKLAND ROSS
Apr 13, 2008 04:30 AM

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA–The guest of honour failed to show up; the most powerful man in the room said there was nothing to worry about; everyone talked for a while and then went home.

But an emergency summit of southern African leaders held yesterday in the Zambian capital, Lusaka, failed to do what many had hoped – find some way to prevent what they see as a virtual coup d’état from being carried out in Zimbabwe, where octogenarian ruler Robert Mugabe seems determined to cling to power despite his party’s apparent rejection at the polls in a March 29 vote.

The Zimbabwean leader failed to attend the Lusaka meeting, interpreted by many as a snub of his regional counterparts.
“Mugabe is determined to hold on to power,” said David Coltart, an opposition Movement for Democratic Change Senator.

Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown yesterday condemned the apparent fraud now underway in Zimbabwe, where acts of government-sponsored violence have begun, aimed against opposition supporters, and where no electoral results in the presidential contest have been released, more than two weeks after the vote.

“This is a completely intolerable situation,” said Brown. “Any intimidation, any violence, is unacceptable.” He said the patience of the international community is “wearing thin.”

But South African President Thabo Mbeki – widely seen as the man in the best position to influence Mugabe – deflated hopes yesterday he might use his country’s considerable leverage to achieve a democratic solution in Zimbabwe.

After stopping off in Harare for talks with Mugabe on his way to the Lusaka summit, Mbeki downplayed the situation in Zimbabwe.
“I wouldn’t describe that as a crisis,” he told reporters.

Mbeki has spent much of the past year mediating between Mugabe and his opponents, but the South African leader has come under fire for his “quiet diplomacy” and his failure to make much headway with Mugabe, 84, who has ruled Zimbabwe since independence in 1980.

Last week, Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa called the emergency summit of African leaders to address the situation in Zimbabwe, raising hopes in some quarters that a peaceful solution to the country’s troubles might be found.

But Mugabe stayed put and dispatched several ministers.

Meanwhile, Zimbabwe’s electoral commission will recount ballots from the March 29 vote next Saturday, a state newspaper reported today.

The Independent (London)
By A Special Correspondent in Bulawayo
Saturday, 12 April 2008

Robert Mugabe’s government banned all political rallies in Zimbabwe yesterday as tension and intimidation mounted over the still-unannounced results of the presidential election held two weeks ago today.

Police claimed they did not have the manpower to deal with political gatherings when many of their members were still guarding ballot boxes and others were posted in urban areas to prevent violence of the kind that broke out after Kenya’s recent election. A police spokes-man, Wayne Bvudzijena, said there was no need for rallies, because the elections were over.

The opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) yesterday called for a general strike to take place on Tuesday, issuing a statement which urged “transporters, workers, vendors and everyone” to heap pressure on the authorities by refusing to work. They also said that Mr Mugabe was suppressing the result because he lost decisively to their leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, and called the police announcement confirmation that Zimbabwe was now a police state.

“It’s another step towards the declaration of a state of emergency,” Nelson Chamisa, an MDC spokesman, told Associated Press. “In fact I would say we are already in an unofficial state of emergency.”

David Coltart, an opposition senator, accused Mr Mugabe of staging a “quiet coup” by refusing to publish the election results, while South African monitoring groups said the uncertainty over who was in charge of the country meant Zimbabwe was in effect under “military control”.

The ruling Zanu-PF party, which lost control of the legislature in last month’s elections, has implicitly acknowledged that Mr Tsvangirai also came out ahead in the presidential vote, but claims he fell short of an overall majority, making a second round necessary. The MDC says its candidate won outright, and has refused to take part in a second round, believing it will be delayed while Zanu-PF launches a campaign of intimidation in areas where opposition support was shown to be strong.

Gangs of Mugabe loyalists, known as “green bombers” from the colour of their T-shirts and tracksuits, have been touring rural areas, forcing villagers to attend meetings where they are warned of the consequences if they fail to support Zanu-PF next time. At some, MDC supporters have been savagely beaten.

The huts of 15 families were burnt to the ground yesterday by the Zanu-PF militia at Mount Panis Farm in Centenary, north of Harare. Some of the villagers were also assaulted while others fled to the mountains.

Another target of intimidation has been Zimbabwe’s dwindling band of white farmers, a favourite scapegoat of Mr Mugabe, who accuses them of being agents of British imperialism. In a time-worn tactic, white farms have been invaded in the past week by groups claiming to be landless veterans of the liberation war, although most are too young to have taken part. At least two more farms were seized yesterday, endangering the livelihoods of dozens of their black workers. The invasions have also hit Zimbabwe’s food supply system.

Genuine liberation war veterans have in fact sided with the opposition. An organisation called Zimbabwe Liberators Platform (ZLP), which represents former senior guerrilla commanders, criticised Mr Mugabe for the “inexplicable failure” to announce the election results.

Mr Mugabe said the veterans should “do the honourable thing and eat humble pie and leave the people of Zimbabwe in peace”.
In the towns a mood of uncertainty has taken hold as Zimbabweans wait to see whether today’s summit of regional leaders in Lusaka, and the promised High Court decision on Monday regarding the MDC’s attempt to force publication of the election results, bring decisive change.

The streets of Bulawayo, the second city, were unusually quiet yesterday, although a queue formed at a bakery which had supplies of bread. “Many people are staying away from work because nobody knows what is happening,” said one resident.

Government offices and factories in Harare were also hit by the uncertainty. “We cannot keep our production lines going in this atmosphere. We need some sort of closure on the elections. Thirty percent of our employees are staying home,” said one Harare executive. Contacts between businesses and government officials were at a standstill, he said.

Institute for War and Peace Reporting

By Hativagone Mushonga in Harare (AR No. 166, 11-Apr-08)

Opponents fear the president plans to engineer “technical coup”.

President Robert Mugabe has delivered another shock by recalling his cabinet, which by law was suspended ahead of the March 29 elections. Some see the move as a sign that Mugabe is making plans to hold onto power well past the official date by which a second round must be held.

More than 12 days after the presidential, parliamentary and local elections, the outcome of the presidential poll has yet to be released. Asked by the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, MDC, to compel the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, ZEC, to announce the result, the High Court in Harare has said it will only make a ruling on April 14.

Although the MDC has declared its candidate Morgan Tsvangirai the winner, it is possible that neither he nor Mugabe achieved an absolute majority of 50 per cent.

That would mean the two men contesting a second, run-off poll. By law, that has to happen within 21 days of the first vote, in other words by April 19.

Lawyers interviewed by IWPR said the incumbent president remains in place until he or his successor is sworn in, but the constitution is designed to ensure this period remains as brief as possible – in the case of a run-off, a maximum of 21 days.

Mugabe’s critics fear he may be planning to use the Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act to extend the deadline for a re-run – and thereby prolong his presidency – from 21 to 90 days. One pretext he might use is that the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission does not have the funds to run another ballot so soon.

His opponents say extending his term in office would be unconstitutional.

“If there is a run-off, the period he remains in office is 21 days. Extending those days would be completely unconstitutional. That will be equivalent to extending his term of office,” argued David Coltart, a lawyer who has been elected as an MDC member of the Senate or upper house of parliament. “He cannot use the presidential powers, because there are no unusual circumstances to justify their use. I know Mugabe can do anything, but this would be illegal and unconstitutional.”

He said “it is most important that the electoral commission works expeditiously.” ZEC to act as quickly as possible”, adding, “The present delay is inexplicable.”

Wilbert Mandinde, legal officer for the Zimbabwean branch of the Media Institute of Southern Africa, said cabinet ministers held their posts by virtue of being members of parliament, and now that new legislators had been elected, restoring the powers of the previous government was illegal.

“Mugabe has recalled them illegally. He has recalled them as what? Some of them lost in the parliamentary elections,” said Mandinde, adding, “He looks like someone who has something under his sleeve.”

In a statement justifying the decision, information minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu said, “Cabinet ministers are still in office until a new cabinet is announced, to allow for the smooth running of government, implementation of polices and accountability.”

Mugabe’s decision was also supported by Patrick Chinamasa, one of the cabinet members he recalled. Chinamasa, the minister for justice, legal and parliamentary affairs, lost his seat to the MDC in the parliamentary elections. Ndlovu also failed to win a seat.

Chinamasa told journalists on April 9 that it was constitutional for the cabinet to remain in place until a new president is sworn in.

Apart from Chinamasa and Ndlovu, six other ministers failed to win seats in the election. Under a constitutional amendment, the president can appoint five non-legislators to the cabinet.

According to Coltart, “Chinamasa is being referred to as the minister of justice when he lost his seat. You can only be a minister if you are a legislator.”

He explained that the law did not provide for a cabinet during an interregnum of this kind because it was meant to last only for a short time, during which “the state is in limbo. It is actually a bit of a grey area.”

Coltart said presidential results were normally announced within a few days after polling and this was the first time the country had gone almost two weeks before a president was sworn in.

A lawyer whose organisation does not allow him to comment publicly on political matters said it was clear that Mugabe was trying to cling on to power and that his actions were tantamount to a coup d’etat.

“It is something of a technical coup, considering that the ZEC command centre is now closed,” he said. “Mugabe has no power to recall them [ministers] when a number of them have lost in the elections and can only be reappointed by a new president.”

“The only thing that Mugabe has done is that he has refused to acknowledge that an election was ever held,” he added.

Lovemore Madhuku, who heads the National Constitutional Assembly, a non-government pressure group, said the aftermath of the elections showed how much Zimbabwe was in need of constitutional change.

“The problem with Zimbabwe’s constitution is that we have a president with absolute power – a president who can even control the release of results,” he said. “Even though we now have members of parliament, their first sitting requires the proclamation of the president. Mugabe can go as long as six months before calling for a parliament sitting.”

Hativagone Mushonga is the pseudonym of a reporter in Zimbabwe.

Institute for War and Peace Reporting

By Fiso Dingaan

11 April 2008

Fighting hard to hold back tears, 52-year-old Ernest Ngwenya points to three mounds of soil crudely marked with stones and burnt logs at a clearing two kilometres from his homestead.

The contorted face tells of the emotional turmoil Ngwenya is battling to control. When he eventually manages to speak, his voice is full of pain and grief.

“I have waited 24 years for this day to grieve openly with my relatives and to show them where I buried our father, brother and uncle who were killed during Gukurahundi,” he said.

“All along, I was afraid that if I talked about something like this, more of my relatives would be beaten or killed – just like what happened during Gukurahundi.”

The government’s bloody suppression of opposition in southern Zimbabwe after independence in 1980 is known as the Gukurahundi, or “the rains that sweep away the chaff”.

The North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade killed an estimated 20,000 people, ostensibly for being dissidents. Many were buried in unmarked graves or thrown down disused mines. But survivors say the killings were systematic and targeted at Zapu office bearers and community leaders such as teachers, nurses and headmen.

Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe has not publicly apologised for the massacres except to say the atrocities were “a moment of madness”.

More than two decades later, life is back to normal in Matabeleland and the Midlands. But the relative calm is deceptive.

Ngwenya was able to overcome his fear thanks to help from the local legislator and members of a social justice pressure group called Ibhetshu Likazulu. Lupane member of parliament, Jabuliso Mguni, also counselled Ngwenya and his extended family, saying that it would do them good to talk about their experiences.

Ngwenya says he needed assurances that nothing would happen to him if he spoke out.

Movement for Democratic Change legislator and lawyer David Coltart believes Zimbabwe is still in a state of denial regarding Gukurahundi. Coltart was part of a team of researchers that compiled a report, called Breaking the Silence, on the atrocities over ten years ago.

“I do not think that even many sympathetic democrats who oppose the Zanu-PF regime have a clear idea of the scale of this crime against humanity – nor the extent of the psychological damage done to the affected communities,” he said.

Indeed, most survivors are still seething with anger and grief. Elda Mlalazi is a mother of two and gets highly emotional when she recounts what she endured during Gukurahundi. She shows this reporter knife wounds that she says were inflicted by a neighbour on instructions from the soldiers.

“The scars are a constant reminder, especially when my in-laws, who don’t know how I got them, start saying I was a prostitute before I got married. They laugh and say the scars were punishment from jilted boyfriends. There is nothing I can say to them but I know the truth,” she said.

Ibhetshu Likazulu chairperson, Qhubekani Dube, says his organisation is trying – albeit on a very small scale – “to bring peace and closure among people who are still grieving and hurting inside. We realise that if people don’t bring the issue out into the open, tribal enmity will continue,” argued Dube.

The pressure group, formed in 2005, helps families identify where their relatives are buried and helps to organise burial rituals. During the ceremonies, villagers are encouraged to share their experiences and concerns over the massacres. Listening to some of the mainly Ndebele villagers recounting their experiences during a grave identification ceremony for Ngwenya’s father, Mfungelwa, his brother, Aleck, and an uncle, Kaise Moyo, one is struck by the frequent reference to how “Shona-speaking soldiers” committed the atrocities.

Dube says the organisation fears that if such thoughts are left unaddressed, tribal hatred between Ndebeles and Shona will be perpetuated. He says that Ibhetshu Likazulu is trying to explain to survivors and families of victims that they should direct their anger at Mugabe “because it was him who issued the order to kill”.

Mguni believes there is a desperate need to assuage the pain and grief of Gukurahundi. He worries that life has been at what he calls a “cultural standstill” for affected families. This, he explains, is because families have not buried their relatives according to custom and consequently they cannot communicate with their deceased as tradition demands.

“We have ways of burying our own. We have not done that. People were not given a chance to grieve. We are hurting inside. We have wounds festering within that need to be treated and healed by openly talking about how and why our relatives were killed. Keeping quiet will not do us any good,” he said.

Additionally, Mguni says people’s experiences of Gukurahundi must be recorded for posterity.

Another Matabeleland North legislator, Professor Jonathan Moyo, has drafted the Gukurahundi National Memorial Bill. Moyo is an independent member of parliament for Tsholotsho. His constituency was the first area where the Fifth Brigade was deployed in January 1983.

He says he will soon publish and distribute the proposed legislation for public input before tabling it in parliament.

Moyo, a former minister of information and publicity in Mugabe’s cabinet, reckons the bill would garner enough support to allow it to be enacted because its objective of “putting in place a mechanism to deal with unresolved issues, healing the open wounds and invisible scars by seeking truth and justice”, is noble.

Coltart, however, says legislation alone will not suffice. He accepts the proposed bill “may be a useful vehicle to ascertain the views and needs of victims” but adds, “The bill itself will not heal wounds – the wounds of this atrocity will require a deep-rooted commitment by government and the entire nation to understand what happened, to apologise for what happened, and to take far-reaching steps to reconcile..the ongoing suffering caused.”

The legislator’s views resonate with those of survivors such as Ngwenya and his cousin Mlalazi. Ngwenya says now that he has dealt with the emotional side of Gukurahundi, he can start facing up to the realities of getting national identity papers for his nephews and nieces. And, one day, he hopes that the government will compensate him and his neighbours for property destroyed during the massacres.

Even then Gukurahundi will remain a part of his life. “I won’t forget. I cannot forget. How do you forget something like that? But at least now I can be at peace with myself, I know where my father is buried,” he said.

Fiso Dingaan is the pseudonym of an IWPR journalist in Zimbabwe.

The Economist
Apr 10th 2008 | JOHANNESBURG
From The Economist print edition

FOR nine years the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has focused on ousting Robert Mugabe at the ballot box. No one questions the courage and resilience of its leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, who has been imprisoned, badly beaten up and survived treason charges. But what if he actually took office?

The MDC says its first job, plainly, would be to rescue the economy: stop printing money, stabilise the currency (with inflation officially now at more than 100,000% a year), slash public spending, call in the IMF and bring market forces back into business, while favouring some state intervention to protect the poorest. It would also scrap controls on prices and foreign exchange, which have fed a thriving black market.

The MDC says it would not give back all confiscated land to white farmers, as Mr Mugabe charges. But it would immediately start drawing up a land audit. It talks of leaseholds and decent compensation for farmers whose land has been grabbed. It also wants to “harmonise” the land-tenure system so that peasants in communal lands have individual title.

The MDC has long demanded a new constitution to limit presidential powers. But Mr Tsvangirai, a former trade union leader with little formal education, has himself been accused of being autocratic in his own party. In 2005 the MDC split after he flouted a decision of his national executive and decided to boycott an election for the Senate, arguing that the people were behind him.
David Coltart, a prominent MDC man, also criticised Mr Tsvangirai’s faction for ignoring violence in the party’s own ranks. The MDC splinter led by Arthur Mutambara refused to endorse Mr Tsvangirai as its presidential candidate in the recent poll, instead backing Simba Makoni, a former minister of the ruling ZANU-PF.

But the election confirmed that Mr Tsvangirai has the backing of Zimbabwe’s masses, especially in towns but also among the rural poor. The MDC’s Mutambara faction won ten seats in Parliament to the main one’s 99. Some of Mr Tsvangirai’s colleagues complain that, far from being autocratic, he listens to too many people and is indecisive. Some of those who wish him well think he has been serially outwitted by Mr Mugabe, especially in the past year’s negotiations under South Africa’s aegis. But the MDC was far readier for the elections this time round. In particular, it wrong-footed Mr Mugabe’s people by airing results from polling stations rather than letting them be centrally tallied.

Would Mr Tsvangirai, if he became president, prove either democratic or competent? Regional precedents are not encouraging. Next door in Zambia, another trade unionist-turned-politician, Frederick Chiluba, defeated the country’s veteran of independence, Kenneth Kaunda, at the polls, but was soon committing many of the worst sins of office. Mr Tsvangirai may be different; in any event, few think he can be as horrible as Mr Mugabe.

The Telegraph

By Sebastien Berger in Johannesburg
9th March 2008

President Robert Mugabe’s regime has stepped up its campaign of violence in the wake of Zimbabwe’s elections, evicting more than 60 commercial farmers from their properties.

The brutal response to the polls, in which Mr Mugabe is widely held to have come second to Morgan Tsvangirai of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change in the presidential race, is a direct echo of what happened last time he lost a vote.

Two weeks after Mr Mugabe lost a referendum on constitutional reforms in 2000, the first white-owned farm was invaded, and four weeks later the first white farmer was killed.

This time – even while the presidential election result has still not been announced – the reaction has come more quickly.
“We’ve got over 60 farmers who have been evicted,” said Trevor Gifford, president of the Commercial Farmers Union. “Every couple of minutes my phone is ringing with another case of eviction. Some are being given a couple of minutes or a day to vacate, but they have to leave what is there behind.”

Two of those forced from their land were black, he added. “They are targeting anyone seen as against the ruling party, it’s really sad,” he said. “We should be living in harmony, we need unity. There is enough land for everyone.”

At the same time several farmers are fighting court actions against eviction orders from the properties they have cultivated for years. With Mr Mugabe claiming the MDC are Western stooges bent on reversing his land reforms, the political motivation behind the invasions by so-called “war veterans” is clear.

Opposition supporters are also being beaten up, according to both the MDC and the campaign team of Simba Makoni, once a stalwart of the ruling Zanu-PF party who stood against his former mentor.

An army source said that at least two military camps, Magunje near Karoi about 125 miles north of Harare, and another in Rusape, about 120 miles south east of the capital, had begun fitness training for a new intake of Mr Mugabe’s youth militia.

The violence appears to be geared towards putting Mr Mugabe in a position where he can win a second-round run-off for the presidency.

Tendai Biti, the MDC secretary-general, said the war veterans’ activity was concentrated in areas that were once Mr Mugabe’s strongholds, where many voters had switched allegiance to the opposition.

“There’s been a complete militarisation and a complete re-arming of mobs who led the terror in 2000 and 2006,” said Mr Biti. “I say to our brothers and sisters across the continent: Don’t wait for dead bodies in the streets of Harare.”

He said that the government was seeking to provoke protests that it could use as a pretext to declare a state of emergency, which would Mr Mugabe to delay, or possibly even annul, the polls.

He said that he feared for the safety of five Electoral Commission officials arrested on Monday after the ruling Zanu-PF party claimed that the count was fixed against it.

A court has began hearing an MDC application for an order releasing the presidential results.

David Coltart, an MDC senator, said: “There is an eerie silence reminiscent of what followed the referendum in 2000 which Mugabe lost. He used that period of seeming inactivity to lay the groundwork for the farm invasions which followed and I fear that is precisely what is going on now.”

Zimbabwe’s information minister, Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, said the opposition claims were untrue and there was “no violence whatsoever”.

The Independent

By Daniel Howden in Harare
Thursday, 3 April 2008

After days of uncertainty, it is official: Robert Mugabe has finally lost control of Zimbabwe’s parliament. How much longer can he resist Morgan Tsvangirai?

It was a moment many believed they would never see. Zimbabwe’s ruling party lost control of parliament yesterday and this time the news was official.

One of the longest electoral teases in history finally delivered as Zimbabwe’s Electoral Commission confirmed that the opposition had won control of the House of Assembly. Robert Mugabe’s all-powerful Zanu-Patriotic Front was forced to concede defeat and the only question that remains is whether the 84-year-old will now follow suit and give up the presidency.

The respected opposition senator David Coltart, a long-time adversary of Mr Mugabe, said the “Liberator’s” options were shrinking. “The moment the nation realises that he has lost the House of Assembly is the moment he has lost in the national psyche,” he explained.

The day began with The Herald newspaper, a government mouthpiece, declaring the election was tied and predicting a run-off. This was already a serious concession from a paper that closely reflects the thinking of the Mugabe regime, and had previously predicted a crushing win for him.

In the space of a few dramatic and tense hours in the capital, Harare, the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) first announced that its man, Morgan Tsvangirai, had won the presidency according to its figures. Then it was the turn of the painfully prosaic Electoral Commission to confirm that the ruling party had lost control of the parliament.

According to MDC figures, Mr Tsvangirai took 50.3 per cent of the vote in Saturday’s election to Mr Mugabe’s 43.8 per cent, a share which if accepted would hand him a narrow first-round victory. The MDC based its findings on publicly available results posted outside polling stations nationwide and then collated by party officials.

The official results of the presidential vote have still not been released more than four days after polls closed. Already there are serious concerns among independent observers that the commission has been “padding” Zanu-PF’s share.

The incomplete official count for the parliamentary poll showed the MDC had taken 105 seats, a breakaway faction 9 and an independent one in the 210-seat parliament, making it impossible for the ruling party, which gained 94 seats, to win a majority.
The smaller opposition group has confirmed to The Independent that it will help form a majority against Zanu-PF.

For a party and a president accustomed only to winning, the twin announcements came as a huge shock. Bright Matonga, the deputy information minister, was initially speechless on hearing the result, but then attempted to brazen it out: “We don’t have a problem; there is no panic here. That [the vote results] is the wish of the people and we, Zanu-PF, respect that.”

The competing announcements of the day were only the public face of frantic political and diplomatic discussions behind the scenes.

The tale of two Harares is one of five-star hotels and luxurious havens surrounded by disintegrating roads, burnt-out traffic lights and desperate, starving people. The attempts to broker a negotiated settlement between the competing ambitions of the security forces, opposition parties and governing elite take place in the former – a surreal place almost completely divorced from the struggles of ordinary people.

One senior Western diplomat who had been convinced on Tuesday that there would be no run-off was backtracking yesterday. “A run-off is looking more likely,” he conceded.

Last night, calmer voices within the ruling party were attempting to caution against any attempt to brush off the vote and declare a win, warning that the loyalty of the rank-and-file in the army and police cannot be counted on.

Sources close to the back-channel communications between the rival parties said the likeliest solution remained a negotiated settlement that would install a power-sharing government presided over by Mr Tsvangirai.

However, as Zimbabwe’s democratic drama entered its sixth day, no one could be certain that logic would dictate the outcome.