The Kenyan dissimilar parallels and the comedy of errors in the ZEC Delimitation Draft Report.

Several expert opinions, court challenges, and political parties' responses have been flaring the media concerning the ZEC Delimitation Draft Report. In this article, I add my opinion, especially on the importance of establishing strong institutions for democracy and veiled advice to wishful thinking borrowed from the Comedy of Errors play by Shakespeare.

Since 2007 there have been thought-provoking parallels between the Kenyan and Zimbabwean political and electoral processes. A most common and well-remembered example is that of the establishment of coalition governments in both Kenya and Zimbabwe following post-election violence without an outright presidential winner. In the wake of the 2007-2008 Kenyan crisis, which followed the contentious 2007 presidential election, a unity government was created through negotiations between Mwai Kibaki, the incumbent president of the Party of National Unity, and Raila Odinga, the leader of the Orange Democratic Movement. While in Zimbabwe a unity government was established between ZANU PF led by Robert Mugabe and the Movement for Democratic Change led by Morgan Tsvangirai from 2008 to 2013. Despite the overwhelming similarities in the unity power-sharing parallel, the dissimilar power transfer in the former and the power retention in the latter has been regarded as forced comparison of dissimilar political processes while others have argued that it is a mirror through which Zimbabwe used to look into to pre-empty possible power transfer.

The year 2023 is an election year for Zimbabwe as provided in the Constitution of the country yet, just a week into the year a dissimilar parallel with Kenya is recurring. In a dissimilar fashion, the Kenyan elections were held in 2023 in a fairly peaceful environment except for the chaotic pre-emptive rejection of the presidential results by four out of seven commissioners of the Independent and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).  Led by the deputy chairperson of the electoral commission, Julian a Charera, the four commissioners disowned the presidential results before their announcement citing errors in the final tallying that could swing the vote in favour of William Ruto, a former Deputy President. On the other hand the Chairperson of the IEBC, Wafula Chebukati dismissed the rationale by the four commissioners, noting it is false and misleading. Chebukati pointed out that the four commissioners had a nefarious agenda of pushing for a re-run. A presidential re-run could have plunged the country into two horse race and probable chaotic post-electoral violence leading to the discrediting of the whole election process where an elite pack might be considered.  Chebukati went on to announce the results which eventually saw William Ruto being declared the fifth president of Kenya after a court ruling.

Five months after the electoral commission disagreement and breaking of ranks in Kenya a parallel but dissimilar breaking of ranks happened in the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission where seven out of nine commissioners refused to sign the draft delimitation report. In their appeal to the president the seven commissioners, including the outspoken Jasper Mangwana  raised concern  that “the current draft delimitation proposal does not meet the minimum standards expected regarding transparent procedures that strengthen stakeholders' confidence and dispel potential gerrymandering allegations; and further concerned that the current delimitation proposal is not people-centered and not in an understandable format; we hereby resolve to put aside the current draft delimitation proposal except as a reference point for a proper delimitation process to be conducted and wholly guided by Commissioners after the 2023 harmonised elections,”

The major question in this appeal is how are resolutions made by ZEC and why are they appealing to the president’s office away from its internal processes. ZEC is a commission established under the auspices of the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:13] (Act No. 25 of 2004) which came into operation on 1st February 2005, which means it has its ways of settling disputes, especially in case of a draft report such as this one.  The seven rebel commission chose not the laid down procedures of setting aside a report by appealing to the president. Disregarding internal processes may mean the rebel commissioners saw it as a futile enterprise or they had already attempted to seek recourse to no avail. But what will the president do upon receiving this appeal? It all goes back to the debate of institutions and big-man politics in Africa. A president in Africa is mostly regarded as an imperial vicar of God with powers above all other institutions or with power to influence all the institutions and pillars of the government. But is the centre still holding or mere anarchy is loosed upon the political whirlwind and there is a widening gyre? Many are proclaiming a second coming of the coup but will such a draft prophesy a “spiritus mundi" influenced by the chaotic events of 2017? Zimbabwean political terrain is highly unpredictable and drawing parallels is a futile academic exercise. The current politics in Zimbabwe is like what W. B Yeats  spoke about in his poem the Second Coming as  “a  rough beast, whose hour come round at last”

 

 

Violation of the Constitution and Gerrymandering

In terms of the  Constitution,  the delimitation report seem to have violated Section 161 (6), (f) which stipulates that “...the Commission may depart from the requirement that constituencies and wards must have equal numbers of voters, but no constituency or ward of the local authority concerned may have more than twenty percent more or fewer registered voters than the other such constituencies or wards.”

In light of the variations in the population of the constituencies and wards the commission seems to have adopted the Lancaster House Constitution provisions  in Section 61A (6)  which) stipulates that, that difference should be less than 40%. The minister of Justice Legal and Parliamentary Affairs argued that they determined under section 161 (6), a 20% variance from the national average of 27 640 voters per constituency. But a browse through the draft report will indicate huge variations in constituencies’ population of voters.

The unconstitutionality of the report is further exposed by Elton Mangoma, a leader of an obscure opposition Renewal Democrats of Zimbabwe who lodged his complaint to the ZEC chairperson Priscilla Chigumba and speaker of Parliament Jacob Mudenda.  Mangoma cited that; “Note 4.1 in the draft delimitation report on page (xii), Zec worked with guidance of 33 169 as the highest and 22 122 as the lowest number of voters per constituency. The difference between these is 11 047. “This difference is 50% of the lowest number and 33% of the highest number, which is clearly above 20% dictated by the Constitution. ZEC has used these wrong parameters and consequently, the resultant draft delimitation report falls foul of the Constitution.”

It is beyond doubt that the commission was well aware of these constitutional basic arithmetic variations but the elusive question is why did they publish a report with such glaring mathematical errors. When a man commits overt errors and pretends to be ignorant of the error it can only mean he wants you to notice them and concentrate on the errors. The benefit of chasing these errors will lead to the nullification of the report as it will be deemed unconstitutional.

To set aside the report as unconstitutional is the pursuit of Tonderai Chidawa,  who through  Lovemore Madhuku  Lawyers and Legal Practitioners have challenged the constitutionality of the report. The little-known Chadawa, whom the late Dr. Alex Magaisa would have called “a tortoise on lamp post “stated how the report violated Section 161  of the constitution and holds this as the basis of its nullity and rejection. In further splitting of hairs Chadawa, stated political rather than a constitutional aversion to the report when he said;   “It appears that the preliminary report tabled in Parliament is not an act of ZEC as a body corporate, at most it may be an act of the chairperson of the commission (Priscilla Chigumba) and her deputy (Rodney Simuka Kiwa),”

The challenges are truly constitutional but political purposes are served more than just constitutional. In essence the mistakes in the draft report are just but political comic reliefs for a potential cataclysmic electoral outcome. The main political accusation raised against the draft report is gerrymandering. Who will benefit from the obvious collapsing of more than seven constituencies which are strong bases for the incumbent. What is also the benefit of diluting the incumbent’s strong rural vote with urban vote. The report is not just an unconstitutional error, it is a gerrymandering attempt –a comedy of errors to say the least. 

A Comedy of Errors

The Comedy of Errors is a play written by William Shakespeare. It is one of his earliest plays and is considered a farce or a comedy of mistakes. The play centers around the story of two sets of identical twins, both named Antipholus and Dromio, who were separated at a young age. The twin Antipholus and Dromio of Syracuse arrive in Ephesus, where the twin Antipholus and Dromio of Ephesus already live. This leads to a series of mistaken identities, causing confusion and chaos amongst the citizens of Ephesus and the visitors from Syracuse.. The mistaken identities created confusion for the wife of Antipholus of Ephesus' wife, mistakes Antipholus of Syracuse for her husband, and drags him home for dinner.  Confusion erupts between the two twins, the slaves (who were also twins), and the wife. The wife later discovered her real husband in a happy ending igniting a happy family reunion. Ultimately, the twin brothers are reunited with their long-lost family and the play ends in a celebration

In politics, the comedy of errors may not result in happy endings if one embraces and dine with the wrong identical twin as their political husband. The line seems slim for one to tell where this comedy of error will lead and who will be happy in the end.  Many political scientists and journalists seem to think there is a growing rift between the twins in the presidium and a showdown is imminent. The 2017 events seem to influence most analyses being made concerning the ongoing comedy of errors.

If the twins together executed a well-calculated coup in 2017, who among them would be reckless to approach the much-touted showdown in such an erroneous and glaring miscalculated fashion? When errors are evident to the one who is making them, and the erring party allows the errors to be public, take note the errors serve a greater purpose than the imminent negative effect it has on the erring twin. The serving leaders in the commission particularly the chairperson are highly qualified and trained legal minds to whom such errors will never escape her first glance of the draft but why did she let such errors pass through her watchful eyes? What is the bigger purpose, in the play the Comedy of Errors, the bigger purpose was a family reunion? Can one think of 2017 as a creative destruction moment for the party; a metamorphosis or a Machiavellian self-serving prince preserving their power? A wise man does at once what a fool does finally –let the hopeful opposition take heed. A self-serving party will consolidate into a big family unity during election time and sort its mess after, no one prince clears the way for an invading new leader.  

The dilemma of incumbency and the institutions of democracy

In the case of Kenya the elite pact between the then-incumbent president Uhuru Kenyata and Raila Odinga was rejected by the voters but what won the day was the institutions of democracy in the country.  Serving self-interests is a major aim of human nature be it in politics, love, and even in worship. It is this realisation that has led people to create institutions whose values will transcend human selfishness and serve the greater good of humanity of course not without mistakes. Two big political men were defeated in Kenya because of the fair judiciary system and the transparent electoral system.

The case of the delimitation draft report will be determined by the institutions of democracy in Zimbabwe in due course. If the winner in this case is the incumbent, who will be the loser, and what will happen to the two leaders of the commission? If the winner is the commission’s chairperson will the ruling, see the light of day what will happen to the president? The true winner or loser, in this case, are the institutions of democracy that will either safeguard or disregard the Constitution of the country, the institutions with either uphold the will of the people enshrined in the supreme law of the country or throw out the will of the people. In Zimbabwe, the unthinkable happens in very fashionable ways.

Conclusion

What separates Zimbabwean and Kenyan dissimilar parallels are the key institutions that safeguard the will of the people through upholding the constitution of the country. However, in the comedy of errors in politics, there are happy endings for the winners and a very unhappy ending for the losers, especially for opposition parties. One protagonist in the titanic battle for power once said, "Kumagumo  Kune Nyaya"