Debunking the myth about Tsvangirai’s ouster

CHIKARA CHEZANU PF MDC PRESIDENT AND ZIMBABWE PREMIER RIGHT HONOURABLE MORGAN TSVANGIRAI AKA SAVE

Its all very well for people like Tawanda Mudzingwa to make preposterous and outrageous statements about the leadership stability in the MDC led by Premier Morgan Tsvangirai.

But for him to cause real alarm and despondency within the MDC grassroots, he needs to do a lot better than claiming without a shred of evidence, that the MDC leader is about to be ousted by the so called “enlightened members in his party” whatever that is supposed to mean.

First it is important to understand that there is no intention on the part of Tsvangirai or any of the MDC party leadership to create a supreme leader of the party let alone a life President.

To that end therefore Tsvangirai’s days as leadership of the MDC have always been numbered and not worthy of any speculation.

There is absolutely nothing new in Mudzingwa’s latest commentary about Tsvangirai’s prospects of remaining in charge of the party except a level of unconvincing naivety that will be difficult to surpass by other commentators on the subject in future.

Tsvangirai can only be ousted from leadership of the party by constitutional means or through incapacity to carry out his duties as MDC-T President due to infirmity and not because so called enlightened supporters of the party wish for that eventuality and actively agitate for it as Mudzingwa has done.

MDC-M dissidents will give Mudzingwa better testimony to that reality.

Tsvangirai’s current term as MDC President runs from April 2006 to April 2011 and on his current performance he will more likely than not complete his term and get nominated unopposed for a second term ending in 2016 whether or not the enlightened supporters like it or don’t.

The problem with the so called enlightened supporters of the party is that they are mainly cowardly refugees in the diaspora without a clue as to what is required to democratise Zimbabwe other than the ouster of Mugabe.

The same refugees are not even conscious of their political shortcomings they think they are better strategists than Tsvangirai.

Their strategy is to seek asylum and let the country disintegrate as a result of economic hardships until Mugabe goes then they will return home to rebuild the country.

It is the same strategy they believe will also help them oust the MDC President prematurely and take charge of the party.

But there is no empirical evidence to support that such a strategy will work in their favour.

Teaming up against a party leader who defeated the mercurial Mugabe in the March 2008 Presidential elections and has stabilised the economy within 30 days of joining government does not sound like a strategy that enlightened democracy advocates would employ where the opponent has resorted to using military force to retain power.

At a time when the MDC is slowly but surely and systematically dismantling the dictator’s power base it makes absolutely no sense for enlightened or is it blinded MDC supporters to waste precious little time in cobbling retrogressive ouster programmes for the leader who is carving wide inroads in Zanu PF’s power enclaves.

This lot of “enlightened supporters” appears oblivious of the fact that in the event they succeed in their agenda, Tsvangirai can easily start another political initiative that will give him a further 10 years in leadership and as things stand may very well prevail against challenges from the enlightened remnants and their new leadership as well as Zanu PF.

Tsvangirai not only has the organisational capacity to achieve such a feat but has the experience and reputation to create a formidable brand name in Zimbabwe politics after the MDC success story.

All MDC members are held with equal esteem and are free to hold views about the party that may be at variance with those held by the leadership of the moment but they can only successfully push for the adoption of their ideas through influencing grassroots opinion and seeking support there from to ascend to leadership positions.

Nobody is bigger than the party and thus immune to being contested in any position at party congress but those that try to saw seeds of disunity and seek to divide supporters through unconstitutional means will find the hard way that the party followers are not easy to dupe.

Tsvangirai has survived many attempts to oust him from leadership of the party and the scalps of Munyaradzi Gwisai, Welshman Ncube. Gibson Sibanda, Paul Themba Nyathi, Arthur Mutambara, Priscilla Misihairambwi, Simba Makoni and many others are in his display cabinet to bear testimony of his political acumen.

Not only that but the successes of Tendai Biti, Elton Mangoma, Thoko Khupe, Lovemore Moyo, Lucia Matibenga, Sekai Holland, Theresa Makone, Paurina Mpariwa, Nelson Chamisa , Thamsanga Mahlangu and many other top guns in his party are inspiring examples of what a winner Tsvangirai is as a political leader.

Such leaders are not easy to replace and yet Tsvangirai is very willing to groom loyal youths in his party for future leadership and even a takeover of his position.

The suggestion that Tsvangirai must resign his leadership of the party is nothing new as we have had the tired and myopic suggestion from as far back as the days when Gwisai got the boot.

It was repeated with increasing intensity by the Mutambara led splinter group and in the UK the defunct Tapa led executive of the party’s province tried to besmirch the party President with limited success if any at all.

Towards the harmonised elections in March 2008 there were similar concerted calls for Tsvangirai to relinquish leadership of the party to Dr Simba Makoni and other conspiracy theories about his impending ouster by splinter groups led by Lucia Matibenga and or Tendai Biti none of which materialised.

All have come to pass as will the doomsday prophecy by Mudzingwa and at the end of the day Tsvangirai will be there providing enlightened leadership for the party.

That is so because his leadership does not derive legitimacy from Zimbabweans in the diaspora but rather party grassroots supporters in Zimbabwe who have learnt to trust in his leadership and benefited immensely from that trust.

To show how detached Mudzingwa is from reality on the ground he finds Tsvangirai guilty of inexcusable defence of his relationship with Mugabe without elaborating what it is he finds disconcerting about the current relationship between Tsvangirai and Mugabe.

What Mudzingwa misses is the fact that the decision to join the GNU was not a voluntary one for Tsvangirai and the MDC but one coerced by insurmountable military and political obstacles.

For that relationship to subsist Mugabe and Tsvangirai have to find a way of working for the people while retaining their political differences because none of them can deliver effectively without the cooperation of the other.

Mugabe and his Zanu PF cannot claim legitimacy to govern after refusing to accept election results that show them losing elections in March 2008. Without that legitimacy Zimbabwe would remain a pariah state incapable of delivering economically, socially and politically and ultimately militarily.

In like manner with all the legitimacy they have and had to govern Zimbabwe after the March elections, Tsvangirai and his MDC would not and will not be able to effectively deliver where the country’s security command was and is still fighting against him and the progression to democracy his leadership of the MDC epitomises.

In order to gain the cooperation of the security apparatus the astute Tsvangirai realises that he must take Mugabe on board and in order to remain President, wily Mugabe realises he must take Tsvangirai on board.

What is then disconcerting about a political leadership that recognises its strength and weaknesses and enters into alliances to overcome its weaknesses?

To argue that MDC MP’s have been wantonly arrested and imprisoned without the Party President saying anything about the impunity and persecution deserving of the punishment of his ouster is a mischievous and dishonest political distortion that must be dismissed with the contempt it deserves.

How will such a stupid move ameliorate the arrests and persecution of MDC MP’s? The whole country other than perhaps Mr Mudzingwa, knows that as long as Zanu PF and Mugabe have unbridled control and influence over the Security and Judiciary Ministries legal and militant persecutions will be an integral political strategy of the government.

That is why Tsvangirai made so much noise about the Home Affairs Ministry and is fighting for the appointment of a neutral and professional Attorney General as well as the RBZ governor as well as immediate convening of the National Security Council meetings in terms of the law.

These are key drivers in the political persecution initiative which must be kept in check and dismissing the very person with the vision to reign in on the sources of the evil will be rather disingenuous of the party as it will leave Zanu PF with unchecked powers to do as it pleases.

To conclude that because one MP from the MDC-T Harrison Mudzuri Zaka Central has provided empirical evidence that the Premier does not want to speak evil about the GNU is stretching imagination a bit too far.

How does the opinion of a single MP out of 100 from the same party become empirical evidence of the alleged refusal by the party President to badmouth the coalition government evils of which there are many instances he has passionately appealed for the lunacy to end? Are we to assume that the single MP has views that override those of the 99 others?

Tsvangirai has never pretended that all is well within the GNU. If anything he has admitted publicly that there are residual elements from Zanu PF bent on derailing the GNU except that the extent of the pockets of resistance is much less than what his party had anticipated which is not disputable given the extent of unsavoury acts in comparison to what they were a year ago.

If the truth be told there has been none more vocal against Zanu PF scripted impunity and selective application of the laws by the GNU than the very person Mudzingwa accuses of negligence in that respect.

Are we to believe that impunity and selective application of laws will cease forthwith if Tsvangirai’s leadership of the MDC is brought to an abrupt end?

That would be political naivety of the worst order.
It is not surprising that Mudzingwa and those of his ilk are of the opinion that it is wrong for vacancies to be filled through by-elections when that is the norm rather than an exception in any other democratic nation.

The reason why Mudzingwa and those of his ilk prefer avoidance of by-elections is because of the violent conduct that has characterised previous elections in the country rather than the fear that Tsvangirai does not have the capacity to lead the MDC into elections victory which has proved capability to do against all odds staked against his party.

The preposterous proposals for the way forward proffered by Mudzingwa will be good for kindergarten student politics not Zimbabwean national politics.

The recommended pull out from the GNU will create a political void for the country and party whose consequences are too ghastly to contemplate unless Mudzingwa and company have a plan to cope with Zanu PF impunity if left to govern without checks and balances provided by the MDC involvement at present.

Indeed MDC had no reason to be in a coerced GNU after winning elections but the reality of the matter is that they were denied a chance to form a government by military interventions at the behest of Zanu PF.

For five months after the elections in March the MDC cried out loud to anyone willing to help it salvage its stolen electoral victory but enlightened Mudzingwa and his friends did not step up to the plate and salvage the situation until Tsvangirai decided to sign the GPA to ease the burden of violence directed at his supporters.

Even having done so, Tsvangirai held out from consummating the GNU before certain conditions were addressed but again Mudzingwa and his like minded enlightened supports did not step up to the plate to force Zanu PF and Mugabe as well as SADC to resolve the concerns.

Now 5 months after the consummation of the GNU Mudzingwa emerges from the blue to demand a pull out without suggesting what would the party do after the pull out to retain its political relevance.

Which serious politician would buy into such nonsensical advice with the greatest potential to sign the death warrant for the politician and his party?
Political arrests of MDC MP’s are better resolved by an MDC with government clout than as an opposition.

To suggest relinquishment of power in order to secure reprieve for its members is to suggest for the MDC to shoot itself in the feet while it is trying to walk through a minefield of political traps set by opponents.

The journey will be that much more arduous for the party to complete.
Whatever the MDC cannot do within the government they will not achieve outside the corridors of power.

If Mudzingwa is the ambitious enlightened and visionary MDC supporter he claims to be he must be aware that Tsvangirai will not resign because of misguided calls for him to do so by overambitious yet cowardly supporters in his party.

Those unhappy with his leadership can resign their membership of the party and form a new party that will compete against the MDC and win elections.

Mudzingwa cannot expect MDC supporters to sink to the level of Zanu PF mafia to oust their leader from power without them attracting the same wrath directed at Zanu PF.

The more radical means with which to topple Tsvangirai is to defect from the MDC to another political formation and ensure that the new party will fare well in elections against Tsvangirai’s party.

Mudzingwa appears to belong to the radical change school of leadership renewal.

That is why he advocates for a coalition of organisations under one banner led by Nkosana Moyo or alternatively Tendai Biti and certainly not himself or Dr Lovemore Madhuku, Dr Simba Makoni or Dumiso Dabengwa or Morgan Tsvangirai whom he argues have shown undemocratic tendencies.

It matters little to him that some of the people he has discounted have already shown an appetite for leadership of political parties and in particular Morgan Tsvangirai has been very successful at it while those he prefers have not announced their arrival.

Even more astounding is the suggestion that regrouping in a new formation will advance the cause for democracy in Zimbabwe through the ouster of Zanu PF than if those interested in ousting Zanu PF can rally behind the most successful brand of the MDC-T that has managed electoral victory over Zanu PF but has been denied ascendancy to power by military interventions.

It simply does not make sense. If there is need to unite opponents of Zanu PF then the MDC-T presents the best tried and tested opportunity for success. But no Mudzingwa would want to diminish the gains that the party has managed so far and remove its experienced leadership and replace it with an inexperienced leader who has not even offered himself for leadership.

Others would argue that the only leadership qualities that Nkosana Moyo has shown are that he cannot stand the political heat and will jump ship at the earliest intimation of trouble.

The proposal for the nation to rise above tribal politics without giving specific examples of which current political leader/s are using the tribal card to remain relevant is lethargic.

Coming short on the heels of a declaration by the MDC-M to promote a leadership challenge from the Matabeleland region and him nominating a name from that region after reiterating the elitist political dogma that led the MDC-M to support Dr Makoni’s presidential bid for no reward yet demanding collateral from Tsvangirai for similar support one would be tempted to conclude that Mudzingwa is an MDC-M advocacy officer.

How else would he justify the conclusion that the MDC-T with a parliamentary majority and a leader who defeated Mugabe and Dr Simba Makoni supported by Zanu PF and MDC-M as well as financed by Dr Nkosana Moyo is on its deathbed as a result of its involvement with the GNU but not the MDC-M.

Using statistical data from previous elections how does Mudzingwa envisage a new party overhauling the support enjoyed by MDC-T that the party is consolidating by its participation in the GNU which many have realised immense political and economic salvation from and are prepared to defend with whatever little they have?

That Tsvangirai’s days as MDC leader are numbered is not news because the number has always been prescribed in the party’s constitution.

What is news is the implication that it will be caused by non members like Mudzingwa led by Nkosana Moyo which is farfetched.

The attempt to bring Biti into the fray is nothing new because that is what Zanu PF has been working with MDC-M and Professor Moyo to achieve conflict between Tsvangirai and Biti in order to weaken the MDC-T momentum.

But it is unlikely to work because unlike Mugabe and Zanu PF MDC-T has been actively grooming and promoting its youth leaders into senior positions in preparation of their taking over leadership of the party from the old guard.

The positions held by Nelson Chamisa and Thamsanga Mhlangu are enough evidence of the succession planning within the MDC-T that is remiss in Zanu PF.

JOMIC green light of Kariba Draft inconsequential

Treacherous JOMIC co-chairmen Prof Welshman Ncube-MDC M, Patrick Chinamasa Zanu PF and Elton Mangoma attempting to foist Kariba Draft Constitution in our country under Article VI of the GPA. They must be resisted at all cost.

The discredited and directionless Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC) attempt to foist the Kariba draft constitution as the centrepiece of the Parliamentary Select Committee spearheading the country’s constitutional reform initiative is not only provocative but an extension of the impunity slowly but surely being galvanised by the coalition government.

Just in case JOMIC and the Parliament Select Committee on Constitutional reforms have not yet grasped the national mood on constitution making, the reform initiative is not a government wish but a commonly shared desire of the people of Zimbabwe to dispense with the heavily patched Lancaster House constitution and replace it with a home grown constitution.


The motive behind this is simply that the Lancaster House Constitution (LHC) was never a product of the people of Zimbabwe’s directives on how they want to be ruled but rather a tripartite treaty between Liberation War fighters, Zimbabwe Rhodesia rebels and British Government imperialists on ending armed hostilities and unwelcome occupation of our country by the imperialists.

The Lancaster House treaty that has outlived its usefulness has now been superseded by yet another tripartite agreement between Zanu PF, MDC-T and MDC-M- the Global Political Agreement (GPA) of 15 September 2008- as the principal transitional management document to the final democratisation of our national politics and governance.

The GPA triple entente resembles the LHC triple entente dubbed the Zimbabwe Constitution in both intent and purport except that the subscribers are different in that the imperialists and renegades at the LCH signing have been replaced by legitimate Zimbabwean political formations with representation in the country’s legislative assemblies.

It is the Legislators who were elected on the strength of promises that they will address the long overdue national concerns about procrastination on constitutional reforms by the then ruling Zanu PF that must hold sway in pushing for the promised reforms and certainly not an imposed JOMIC that has absolutely no mandate to direct the process from anyone.

JOMIC’s involvement must start and end with ensuring that parties to the GPA adhere to the provisions of Article VI of the GPA in so far as implementation of the constitutional reforms are concerned.

Nowhere in that Article is it tacitly or impliedly made mandatory for the reforms to be modelled around the Kariba draft as the numerous attempts to ram this falsehood down our reluctant throats from Zanu PF and now JOMIC would seem to imply.

For the avoidance of doubt that both Zanu PF and JOMIC are concocting the purport of Article VI of the GPA for a yet to be disclosed intention, we have to reproduce that Article in its entirety and show cause why we are at variance with the Zanu PF/JOMIC interpretation of the Article.

“6. Constitution
Acknowledging that it is the fundamental right and duty of the Zimbabwean people to make a constitution by themselves and for themselves;
Aware that the process of making this constitution must be owned and driven by the people and must be inclusive and democratic;
Recognising that the current Constitution of Zimbabwe made at the Lancaster House Conference, London (1979) was primarily to transfer power from the colonial authority to the people of Zimbabwe;
Acknowledging the draft Constitution that the Parties signed and agreed to in Kariba on the 30th of September 2007, annexed hereto as Annexure "B";
Determined to create conditions for our people to write a constitution for themselves; and
Mindful of the need to ensure that the new Constitution deepens our democratic values and principles and the protection of the equality of all citizens, particularly the enhancement of full citizenship and equality of women.
6.1 The Parties hereby agree:
(a) that they shall set up a Select Committee of Parliament composed of representatives of the Parties whose terms of reference shall be as follows:
(i) to set up such subcommittees chaired by a member of Parliament and composed of members of Parliament and representatives of Civil Society as may be necessary to assist the Select Committee in performing its mandate herein;
(ii) to hold such public hearings and such consultations as it may deem necessary in the process of public consultation over the making of a new constitution for Zimbabwe;
(iii) to convene an All Stakeholders Conference to consult stakeholders on their representation in the sub-committees referred to above and such related matters as may assist the committee in its work;
(iv) to table its draft Constitution to a 2nd All Stakeholders Conference; and
(v) to report to Parliament on its recommendations over the content of a New Constitution for Zimbabwe
(b) that the draft Constitution recommended by the Select Committee shall be submitted to a referendum;
(c) that, in implementing the above, the following time frames shall apply:
(i) the Select Committee shall be set up within two months of inception of a new government;
(ii) the convening of the first All Stakeholders Conference shall be within 3 months of the date of the appointment of the Select Committee;
(iii) the public consultation process shall be completed no later than 4 months of the date of the first All Stakeholders Conference;
(iv) the draft Constitution shall be tabled within 3 months of completion of the public consultation process to a second All Stakeholders Conference;
(v) the draft Constitution and the accompanying Report shall be tabled before Parliament within 1 month of the second All Stakeholders Conference;
(vi) the draft Constitution and the accompanying Report shall be debated in Parliament and the debate concluded within one month;
(vii) the draft Constitution emerging from Parliament shall be gazetted before the holding of a referendum;
(viii) a referendum on the new draft Constitution shall be held within 3 months of the conclusion of the debate;
(ix) in the event of the draft Constitution being approved in the referendum it shall be gazetted within 1 month of the date of the referendum; and
(x) the draft Constitution shall be introduced in Parliament no later than 1 month after the expiration of the period of 30 days from the date of its gazetting.”It is common cause that Article VI acknowledges the existence of not just the Kariba draft Constitution but also the Lancaster House Constitution.
Our point of departure with the Zanu PF/JOMIC interpretation is over the purpose that these particular “Constitutions” were singled out for mention in Article VI.

We contend that the LHC was singled out for special mention in the article not only because it is the prevailing constitution of the country but also because its primary purpose had to be put in the context that justifies the need to review and replace it.

“Recognising that the current Constitution of Zimbabwe made at the Lancaster House Conference, London (1979) was primarily to transfer power from the colonial authority to the people of Zimbabwe;”

We are further guided by the statement below from the preamble to Article VI that acknowledgement of the Kariba draft was not for the purport that is now assigned by Zanu PF and JOMIC but rather for the purpose of including certain sections and or chapters in that draft in the GPA without having to reproduce them but by merely annexing them through the acknowledgement.

“Acknowledging the draft Constitution that the Parties signed and agreed to in Kariba on the 30th of September 2007, annexed hereto as Annexure "B";”
We are convinced beyond any shred of doubt that JOMIC has overstepped its mandate as the legitimate superintendent of the implementation processes of GPA clauses.
The JOMIC misdirection is of such a material and fundamental nature that it has the greatest potential to stymie independent thinking so vitally important in constitution making processes.

The only way left to restore people’s rights to come up with a constitution that is free of Zanu PF/MDC-T/MDC-M political entrapments is for legal action to be taken now to compel JOMIC to retract its misguided statement about the Kariba draft forming the basis of any constitution making process and for individuals on that committee to be interdicted against any collective or individual attempt to foist any constitutional provision or document on the Parliamentary Select Committee.

We are prepared to coordinate such class action to ensure the right of every Zimbabwean to input into the process independent of any political compulsion is respected and upheld throughout the process.

The legitimacy of the current government is intricately linked to its adherence to the GPA provisions and none of the clauses is more important than the programme steps in Article VI in so far as restoration of our rights to choose a government of our choice is concerned.

The reason why reference to the Kariba draft was made in Article VI of the GPA was to give rational meaning to Articles 24.1 and 2 of the GPA and nothing else.

“The Parties hereby agree:

24.1 that the constitutional amendments which are necessary for the implementation of this agreement shall be passed by parliament and assented to by the President as Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment Act No 19. The Parties undertake to unconditionally support the enactment of the said Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No 19;

24.2 to include in Constitutional Amendment No19 the provisions contained in Chapters 4 and 13, and section 121 of the draft Constitution that the Parties executed at Kariba on 30 September 2007 (Kariba draft).”

If there was agreement between the parties to the GPA that they will support the Kariba draft as the basis of Constitution reforms they should submit that draft to the Parliamentary Select Committee as their collective input and desist from barring other interest groups in the initiative to equally input their thinking into the draft that will be produced by the Parliamentary Select Committee through the improper use of JOMIC.

If JOMIC and Zanu PF believe in the Kariba draft they should simply fast track it through parliament as they did with Constitutional Amendments No 18 and 19 rather than waste time pretending that they are going to write a people driven constitution.

They should not even waste precious little time on the outreach programme to collect ideas that are not going to be incorporated in the final draft constitution and should just table the Kariba draft for parliamentary debate after which they can enact the Kariba draft as the new constitution and then we will decide in the “free and fair” elections enabled by that to decide whether or not any or all of the three parties should continue governing us with that constitution.

The coalition government is in contempt of the constitution over by-elections

MDC-M secretary general and Industry Minister Prof Welshman Ncube who also doubles as the moribund JOMIC co-chairperson is at the centre of all breaches by the coalition in staging by elections.

ARTICLE XXI of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) states;
“ELECTORAL VACANCIES
21. Electoral Vacancies

Aware of the divisive and often times confrontational nature of elections and by elections;

Noting the need to allow this agreement to take root amongst the parties and people of Zimbabwe; and

Cognisant of the need to give our people some breathing space and a healing period;

21.1 The Parties hereby agree that for a period of 12 months from the date of signing of this agreement, should any electoral vacancy arise in respect of a local authority or parliamentary seat, for whatever reason, only the party holding that seat prior to the vacancy occurring shall be entitled to nominate and field a candidate to fill the seat subject to that party complying with the rules governing its internal democracy.”

This wording is however omitted from schedule 8 of the Zimbabwe constitution and replaced with the following;

“20.1.10 filling of vacancies
In the event of any vacancy arising in respect of posts referred to in clauses 20.1.6and 20.1.9 above, such vacancy shall be filled by a nominee of the Party which held that position prior to the vacancy arising.”

Evidence at hand seems to point to the fact that president Mugabe is working towards a programme to fill vacancies in the Legislative assembly at the earliest opportunity after 15 September 2009.

At present there are 12 vacant seats 6 each in the Parliament and the Senate 11 of which must be filled through common roll by elections while the 12th must be filled by the Chiefs Council Electoral College.

There are a potential 3 vacancies that will arise in Parliament following the dismissal of 3 MDC-M MP’s should the party stick with its decision to dispense with the MP’s and officially notifies Parliament to that effect .

The split of the vacancies likely to be contested in by elections is;
Parliament

MDC-T: 6, Zanu PF: 5 MDC-M: 3 totalling 14.

SenateZanu PF: 4 and Council of Chiefs: 1 totalling 5

Factoring in changes reported in composition of Provincial Governors will result in the following voting strengths for the three parties that agreed not to contest each other for vacancies that arise in the Legislative Assemblies over a period of 12 months from the signing of the agreement on 15 September 2008;

Parliament
MDC-T as at 31 March 2008-100 elected plus 2 for PM& DPM less 1vacated by L Moyo less 5 suspended for criminal convictions pending on appeal leaving 96 seats secure.

Zanu PF as at 31March 2008-99 elected plus 2 for VP less 6 (5 deaths and 1VPMujuru replacement not named) leaving 96 seats secured.

MDC-M as at 31March 2008-10 elected plus 1forDPM less 3 expelled leaving a total of 8seats secured.

Independent as at 31 March 2008-1 elected remains unchanged.

Out of the expanded 215 Chamber there are therefore 201 secured seats leaving 14 seats up for grabs due in by elections distributed as follows MDC-T minus 5 Zanu PF minus 6 and MDC-M minus 3.

Bearing that one vacancy attributable to Zanu PF is a result of 1 seat allotted the party that has never been filled if nothing else happens between now and 15 September when the 12 months by election competition moratorium between the three parties in the coalition elapses Zanu PF will fill this vacancy without the need for a by election and have a majority of 1 seat in Parliament thereby overturning the advantage the MDC-T had over it.

Senate
Zanu PF as at 31 March 2008-30 elected plus 6 special Presidential appointees’ including 1 gained from GPA plus10 Provincial Governors less 11-1 vacated by Senate
President, 2 vacated by Governors 6 reassigned Governors and 1 never filled leaving strength at 36

MDC-T as at 31 March 2008-24elected plus 4 appointed from GPA plus 5 Governors leaving strength at 33.

Chiefs as at 31 March 2008-18 elected less 1 deceased leaving strength at 17.

MDC-M as at 31 March 2008-6 elected Plus 2 appointed from GPA leaving strength at 8.

The expanded upper chamber of 100 seats thus has 94 substantive members. MDC-T and M have nothing to lose in by elections as all vacancies affect the Zanu Pf allotment and the chiefs’ council.

For one reason or another Zanu PF thinks it is likely to fare better in by elections than it did in the harmonised elections.

It is widely believed that the reason for the overconfidence flowing in Zanu PF is that the Party believes it can deploy its violent election machinery more effectively in limited constituencies and bludgeon voters into voting it to restore its majority party status of years.

The presidential decree on national healing and reconciliation issued by the President covering the period 24-26 July 2008 is widely seen as a smokescreen for keeping the political competitors from other parties comfortable that the agreement on filling of vacancies in the Legislative assemblies will be upheld as long as the vacancies occurred in the 12 months period following the signing of the GPA.

The MDC-M has with that in mind swiftly moved to weed out MP’s it calls enemies from within hoping it will have the chance to nominate replacements who will only be contested by the expelled MPs as independents and other challengers from minor parties thus guaranteeing it retention of the seats and strengthening it.

Party secretary General Prof Welshman Ncube put up a brave face and declared that come what may his mediocre faction of the MDC will emerge stronger without the association with the expelled MPs.

But it is his attempt to justify prolonged breaches of electoral laws by the coalition government’s failure to stage by elections within the 30 day limitation that is instructive of the impunity developing in the coalition government that must be exposed.

This is the same sense of invincibility that led Zanu PF to transform from Liberation heroes to villains.

Prof Ncube displays an abundance of the arrogance in Zanu PF wherever he has been assigned.

That is why JOMIC has become a moribund institution that nobody really cares about notwithstanding the critical role it was established to fulfil in the implementation of the GPA.

Prof Ncube who co-chairs JOMIC is comfortable with the breach of the electoral laws concerning the holding of by elections to the same extent he appears contented with the comfort that the GPA provisions on the filling of electoral vacancies will prevail.

To that end he believes that it is proper that the by elections are delayed sine die as long as the Parliamentary Standing Rules and Orders Committee (PSROC) - where he is a member does not have anyone to push it to comply with electoral rules by notifying the Electoral commission that it must appoint in the first place to start the by elections process.

Prof Ncube says the GPA disallows subscribing parties from contesting each other in legislative vacancies that occur within 12 months of the signing of the agreement and thus the fears about such contests are misplaced.

Indeed the agreement does but by elections will not be staged in terms of the GPA clauses but in terms of the constitutional provisions as read with the Electoral Act.
Unfortunately these Laws do not have the GPA clause averred to by Prof Ncube to allay fears that the parties will contest each other after the 15 September 2009 deadline of the moratorium between the parties.

In any event Prof Ncube’s interpretation of clause 21.1 of the GPA is not immune to different interpretation which will justify parties contesting each other in by elections outside the prescribed 12 months following signing of the GPA.

The agreement says “Parties hereby agree that for a period of 12 months from the date of signing of this agreement, should any electoral vacancy arise in respect of a local authority or parliamentary seat, for whatever reason, only the party holding that seat prior to the vacancy occurring shall be entitled to nominate and field a candidate to fill the seat subject to that party complying with the rules governing its internal democracy.”

This can be interpreted to mean that any vacancy that occurs in the coalition over a 12 month period following the signing of the GPA cannot be filled by any candidate representing parties to the agreement other than the one that held the seat at the time of signing the GPA.

This is Prof Moyo’s interpretation. However the same clause can equally be interpreted to mean that for 12 months after the signing of the GPA subscriber parties undertook not to contest each other in any by election to fill the vacancy but thereafter open contests will be in conformity with the agreement regardless of whether the vacancy to be contested occurred during or after the prescribed 12 month period following signing of the GPA.

This is the argument that Zanu PF will advance and urge their President who also is the National president with powers to order by elections to be guided by.

The MDC-T seems unperturbed about what Zanu PF will do after the expiry of the initial 12 months of the signing of the GPA in respect of legislative vacancies.

The party seems more worried about the judicial persecution strategy directed against its MPs more than the prospect of contesting any willing contestant in by elections that are held in a transparent and credible manner.

The MDC-T fear is not contesting Zanu PF or any other party in by elections but rather that impunity and violence that epitomised previous contests will be resuscitated to give Zanu PF an advantage.

There is nothing the MDC-T likes more than contesting Zanu PF in all seats in the
Local authorities, Parliament, Senate and the Presidency provided the election is held in a credible free and fair environment for the party is confident Zanu PF will be walloped in such contests.

On that basis it may be unwitting for Zanu PF to believe that it will prevail in by elections if the MDC-T involvement in organising the by elections will guarantee credible contests.

Zanu PF confidence seems premised on the knowledge that it will not be dissuaded from employing violent electioneering tactics to improve its chances of forcing a win.

Other than that its representation will be reduced further in by elections.

Professor Ncube must not rely on an illegality to justify why by elections have been illegally delayed as he does when he says the by elections cannot be staged because the country does not have a legitimate Electoral Commission to run the by elections.

Being an officer of PSROC that is mandated to recommend the incumbents of the Electoral Commission to the President his excuse is an insult to the electorate.

Why has he not caused PSROC to move with speed in the fundamental task of putting together a legitimate Electoral Commission from 15 September when the GPA was signed to date?

The fact that he is comfortable with the absence of a legitimate electoral commission has everything to do with the fact that this JOMIC co-chairman is afraid of elections which will result in his party loosing further seats and would rather live with the false sense of security that his hopeless party thrives on.

That must be stopped and the PSROC must move with speed to recommend those to be appointed onto the Electoral commission and forthwith correct the anomaly before it becomes an acceptable impunity by the coalition government.

The dangers of hoping to achieve excellence with outdated tools

Premier Tsvangirai pensive but is he watching his back


The danger s associated with trying to reinvent the wheel have been widely cautioned yet despite such documented warnings we always fall into the pitfalls.

It is not easy to teach old dogs new tricks, goes the old adage. Maybe it should have been worded it is possible to teach new tricks to old dogs but they will also pass their old treachery onto the trainer.

The transfer of new tricks becomes much harder in tandem with the age of the trainee. When the outmoded training methods and blunted tools are employed to demonstrate desired behaviours in the training situation the outcome is sure to be further off the mark than would otherwise be the case if desired behaviour is modelled by current best practice experts.

When the Premier achieved a hybrid government

There can be no denying the fact that Premier Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC party performed a political feat that was beyond imagination after being denied enjoyment of the electoral victory they achieved in the landmark March 2008 harmonised elections.

Indeed they fell short of reclaiming the deserved victory but they nevertheless gained access to government levers of power and have been working hard to make a difference in a system that had festered under unbridled Zanu PF corruption and impunity for decades.

It has not been easy but the achievements of the MDC Cabinet contingent in the hybrid coalition government have been nothing short of miraculous if one takes stock of where the country was on 31 December 2008 and where it is today politically, economically and socially.

But even those miraculous achievements fall far short of the expectations of the nation that has been under siege for nearly two decades for the government to relax and feel comfortable it has the situation under control.

There is no illusion among the MDC that the GPA that opened doors for its entry in government also brought with it the liability of having to accommodate election losers and detested Zanu PF and MDC-M opportunists.

It was a liability the MDC-T accepted with a pinch of salt but nonetheless the party could not avoid given the insurmountable obstacle to its ascendancy to power presented by the evil axis that JOC was, is and will forever be remembered as.

Add to that SADC and AU complicity and you will understand the extent of the obstacles the MDC-T had to move to get into government corridors and even more to have its way of governance accepted.

No matter how mediocre the achievements may appear to others for the MDC-T they are milestones never before fathomed in the country without Zanu PF and President Mugabe being pushed over the hill.

The MDC-T quest for power has not been made any easier by the lethargic failure to exploit opportunities when they arose.

The failure to claim victory after the 29 March 2008 has been correctly described by the party’s national organising secretary Elias Mudzuri as its worst political blunder and he is right.

All the sweating and pleadings before the SADC, the AU, the UN whoever else cared to listen could have been avoided if the party had used its grassroots structures to pour out on the streets in wild celebrations of the electoral victory and not calmed them to avoid confrontation with armed forces thereby allowing Zanu PF to regroup behind the cover of the security forces and steal the victory from under the MDC noses.

The Premier is aware of this blight on the leadership of the party and is trying his outmost best to salvage the pieces and prepare the party for the ultimate and undisputed final victory.

The problem though is that Zanu PF has been severely wounded and is ever on the defensive to hold onto the remains of its decimated power base.

It thus serves their cause when the Premier unwittingly allows the old government bureaucracy order to remain intact and hope that he will charm it by undue praises.

The decision to retain all the Zanu PF nominated Permanent secretaries has already started to cause tremors in the fragile coalition which must be closely watched if the MDC intends to avoid tables being turned against it come the next election.

JOMIC trivialisation

According to Constitutional amendment No 19 the Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC) has the crucial responsibility of monitoring compliance with implementation of agreed upon clauses that anchor the coalition government.
For all intends and purposes it should be the most conspicuous institution in the country at present given the number of issues from the Global Political Agreement (GPA) that are being violated and or half heartedly implemented.

If the truth be said JOMIC has turned out to be a big yawn. Its muted silence on the delayed swearing in of Roy Bennett breach is evidence of what has happened to the institution that had shown so much promise when it silenced the vitriolic Nathaniel Manheru column in the Herald and recommended the sharing of Provincial Governors by the parties based on electoral performances of the parties in the 10 provinces.

That is all JOMIC will be remembered for in terms of achievements. These are trivialised by its failure to cause the Principals to stop persecution of political opponents of Zanu PF through a Zanu PF controlled Attorney General’s office and Justice Ministry supported by a Zanu PF Police Commissioner General.

And there is the Roy Bennett swearing in omission that has been put on ice since February when he became eligible as deputy Agriculture Minister but for Mugabe’s refusal to perform a mandatory function conferred upon his office on frivolous and vexatious grounds that are not in the agreement as grounds for him to refuse or fail to perform the swear in task.

Then there is the issue of the permanent Secretaries which JOMIC advised should be left as is on spurious reasoning that the incumbents were professional when they are known to be Zanu PF political appointees.

The Premier has none other to blame on that one but himself for taking advice he knew was outrageously inaccurate both in content and philosophical grounding as they were all proposed by Zanu PF controlled institutions which require to be overhauled to be aligned with the new order.

It was and still remains a political blunder of the proportions worse than even the decision to leave Mugabe as President after the June 28 fiasco presented as a presidential runoff election.

Premier Tsvangirai did not need help on this one because all the help he needed is in the GPA and JOMIC but he decided against falling back on that.

And with that JOMIC was immobilised and the bureaucracy was strengthened as it became apparent all positions in government were safe for incumbents from Zanu PF as long as they remained firmly behind President Mugabe which signal they did not miss.

Manheru was reincarnated, the media onslaught on the MDC was revived, the persecution of MDC MPs and activists is now in fast track mode with convictions being handed down like confetti as the agreed moratorium period on by elections nears its expiration on 15 September 2008 in terms of Constitutional amendment No19.

Only the MDC leadership does not see that the bureaucracy it endorsed is working on a well planned strategy to restore Zanu PF’s lost Parliamentary majority and relegate MDC to the opposition benches it has warmed up for the past decade with limited impact on the way the country was being governed.

President Mugabe will announce by elections for all vacant Legislative seats at the end of September in terms of the powers conferred upon his office by Constitutional amendment No 19 whether or not the other coalition principals are in agreement with him and will be acting constitutionally in doing so.

His Zanu PF Party is already deploying the youth militia in preparation of the by elections while the MDC is grappling with the economic crisis. They will field candidates in each and every constituency to be contested through the by elections and no amount of protest from MDC will stop that as the moratorium will have expired without the MDC taking advantage of it.

JOMIC which is supposed to see to it that constitutional provisions are implemented at all times is silent about this because it is dominated by Zanu PF’s chief strategists who are working behind closed doors with the bureaucracy to surprise the MDC.
The bureaucracy is outperforming Ministers

It does not require rocket science to deduce that the bureaucracy has the MDC where it wants them to be –against the wall with its hands full of political waste from the courts and an over expectant electorate.

There were opportunities to dilute the Zanu PF hegemony on the bureaucracy that have slipped through the open palm.

For the Premier to stand up and openly declare that the bureaucracy was left as is because principals vetted incumbents and found them to be adequately qualified and professionally competent to execute their mandates is political blunder the Premier will live to regret.

Constantine Chiwenga, Augustine Chihuri, Happyton Bonyongwe, Paradzayi Zimondi and Justice George Chiweshe are integral parts of the bureaucracy. The Premier cannot convince anyone that these are professional than they are Zanu PF zealots. That is an undeniable fact.

The reason why the MDC capitulated on Permanent Secretaries and other bureaucracy appointments other than the Reserve Bank Governor and Attorney general is because the appointments were made prior to the signing of the GPA and any attempt to reverse them without similar action being taken in the military command would have severely exposed the powerlessness of the MDC in matters relating to the military.

It was a wise move but a tricky one to defend because the military supremos now have the brains in ministries to sustain their onslaught on the Premier and his think tank.

That is why they are now hanging in there at Chiadzwa and the torture bases are re-emerging countrywide.

There is an imperative need for the informal JOC meetings to be reigned into line before they come up with a devastating counterstrategy for the MDC-T political momentum.

Jonathan Moyo and mid-term fiscal policy review horror

The professor's nightmare as he watches his media hegemony begin to crumble


The political momentum that the MDC is gaining from involvement with the coalition government is evident from the reaction coming from Zanu PF to the mid-year fiscal policies unveiled by Finance Minister (FM) Tendai Biti.

When he accepted appointment as the coalition government’s FM, Tendai Biti made it clear that he was not going into government as a junior partner to anyone and would give as much as he takes from anyone entertaining such foolish thoughts.

Professor Jonathan Moyo was not impressed. Suddenly he has emerged as the seasoned Zanu PF financial analyst on anything concerning the Reserve Bank and or the Ministry of Finance.

He has tried everything and anything to discredit the FM but his chequered past is proving a major obstacle and projecting him as a nuisance unworthy of any audience.


From the date the MDC nominated Hon Biti as the FM of the coalition government, Prof Moyo took great exception and projected that the FM’s term in office will yield the same results as the terms of Zanu PF failures Enos Nkala and Simbarashe Mumbengegwi.

He has gone further and tried to hang the FM to dry under the blaze of the Civil Servants US$100 stipend payments, the tenure of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) Governor Gideon Gono, the downward revision of the 2009 budget, the hosting of the ministerial bonding retreat in Victoria Falls, the Multi-Donor Trust Funds and the Premier’s Western nations official visit without any measure of success.

He has taken it upon himself to go on a reckless crusade against anything MDC-T superintended be it in Parliament, Cabinet or at any material level of governance.
He has been assigned unlimited support of the State media and the Attorney General in his demoniac crusade yet all he is managing to do is further alienate Zanu PF with the ordinary voters and increase MDC-T political momentum.

Each time his attempted besmirch of the MDC-T has hit a brick wall he has been forced to eat humble pie and try and spin the successes in Zanu PF’s favour.

The nation has not forgotten how he teamed up with Zanu PF propagandists in concerted efforts to credit the success in taming hyper inflation to Zanu PF’s Dr Gono and Patrick Chinamasa’s January 2009 budget which never saw the light of the day in parliament.

After that shameless volte farce when he saw that the US stipends had condemned Zanu PF to the political dungeon the populace watched in amusement as the Tsholotsho MP roped in 2 MDC-M MP’s to join him in a High court action aimed at nullifying the election of MDC-T’s Lovemore Moyo notwithstanding that none of applicants had contested for the position and the loosing contestant Paul Themba Nyathi has refused to be enjoined in the suit.

Now Prof Moyo is leading a crusade aimed at trivialising the FM’s mid-year fiscal policy review and revision as an MDC-T political stunt that will not yield any good for the country.

Prof Moyo does not get it. Anything he opposes is viewed as being in the best interest of the nation by the majority of the populace which has not forgiven him for his disastrous sojourn as spokesman of the defeated 2000 Constitution Commission that attempted to entrench one party rule under a Presidency with draconian powers followed by his tenure as Zanu PF Information and Publicity Minister.

Most Zimbabweans are questioning in whose interest Prof Moyo is acting if not Zanu PF’s.

For all his obsession with electoral procedures in the election of the Parliament Speaker the general populace cannot reconcile his determination to nullify this institutional election but has not shown the same concern with the stolen Presidential Parliamentary and Presidential elections since 2000 but rather defended the more serious and glaring irregularities.

Closer to the election he is obsessed with reversing, the general populace is questioning why Prof Moyo did not find it a serious enough irregularity that President Mugabe withheld Presidential election results for 35 days after the election was held and reconstituted a dissolved Cabinet to legislate Electoral law changes that justified his out of time demand for a Presidential runoff election following heavy defeat at the hands of Tsvangirai in the initial contest.

They also question why, if Prof Moyo’s motivation is purely based on the entrenched belief in maintaining the reputation of Parliament, he has not complained about the election of Zanu PF’s Edna Madzongwe as Senate President by irregularly and unilaterally appointed Senators by a President whose legitimacy was in dispute at the time he made the appointments.

With reference to the Professor’s discomfort with the midyear fiscal statement recently presented to Parliament by the FM which he has decided to debate outside Parliament through postings on various Zimbabwe related news websites, Zimbabweans are chuckling their hearts out.

Prof Moyo is miffed that FM Biti has decided to abolish a phenomenal 40% import duty slapped on foreign newspapers retailing in the country that was introduced in June 2008 at the height of the sham June 27 presidential runoff election campaign.

His argument is that by removing the punitive duty the FM was preparing communication channels for his MDC Party to use in the next electoral campaign that should foreclose the coalition government tenure of office.

Assuming for once that the Professor is right, where does that leave the decision by the previous Zanu PF finance Minister to impose the punitive duty on foreign publications Prof Moyo falsely accuses as enemies of the state.

The logical conclusion from Prof Moyo’s tirade on the abolition of the duty on imported publications is that the duty was imposed for political reasons in the first instance otherwise there is no logic why a duty imposed for economic reasons would result in negative political outcomes on its removal instead of negative economic results it was imposed to mitigate.

And Prof Moyo disingenuously concedes that fact when he concludes that the FM scrapped the duty to benefit the “Prime Minister’s controversial Newsletter, and The Zimbabwean, an MDC-T-affiliated newspaper which is published in Britain by sworn enemies of Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle and nationalist interests.”

In typical fashion he goes further to threaten that because the Minister has politicised the media duty, “It now remains to be seen what the rest of us will do.”

Many people are saying we will buy the cheaper publications but Zanu PF supporters are saying we will burn the publications.

Prof Moyo must be arrested if that happens because he is clearly behind the Zanu PF intention to deny people access to government approved information sources.

He should never be allowed to get away with the vindictive acts by Zanu PF zealots he is campaigning for as he did when he ordered the total silencing of the Daily News leading to the bombing of its Printing Press where no one has been arrested to date.

Prof Moyo must further explain why if it was not for political reasons the duty was imposed at a time when President Mugabe rolled out his vicious runoff campaign that barred publication of any MDC-T election campaigns by the State broadcaster and media houses and why he says the Zimbabwean is an MDC publication.

Professor Moyo must also be put to task to explain why the publications with a Zimbabwean market large enough to constitute a national threat are exporting their publications from outside the country borders and why he as a patriotic MP does not move legislation in Parliament authorising any broadcaster or media house wishing to access the Zimbabwean market must be allowed freedom to operate within the country without harassment from the State.

Prof Moyo must be told that Hon Biti meant every word when he said he would give as much as he takes from any politician who felt he was coming into the coalition as a junior parter to anyone.

It is because of the draconian laws that Prof Moyo legislated during his tenure as Zanu PF Minister of Information and Publicity that the country no longer has a media industry to talk about other than the one controlled by the State which has a reputation of misrepresenting facts in support of Zanu PF.

Instead of whingeing about the scrapping of a politically motivated duty on media imports Prof Moyo would serve the nation well if he leads a crusade to reform the country’s iron fisted control on the media and thereafter demand punitive duties to be imposed against imported publications to protect and nurture the local industry he unwittingly destroyed.

Prof Moyo’s complaint about the FM’s “backdoor attempt to assign the communication function to the ICT Ministry is outrageous coming from him as an MP elected to monitor Executive excesses on behalf of the people.

Was he instructed by the President to complain for and on his behalf or does Prof Moyo think he is the Presidential advisor and spokesman?

George Charamba will keep silent for now but Prof Moyo must never delude himself that he has had the last word on this one and his fingers will be burnt.

Prof Moyo sadly believes that the President has discretionary powers to instruct Parliament what to legislate for and not in a given period.

To the contrary parliamentarians have the people’s mandate to seek regulation of areas of people’s concerns through parliamentary statutes that the President has no power to veto.

By waiting for Presidential directives on what to legislate or not Prof Moyo proves what most Zimbabweans have known about him that he is all hot air but brainless. How does a president decide what should be legislated on or not if the MP’s do not raise the areas of concern through Parliamentary motions and discussions with portfolio Ministers.

If the FM does not have powers to demarcate Ministerial Portfolio responsibilities Prof Moyo as an MP would be even further placed to determine which Ministry is responsible for which function in the absence of a Presidential proclamation to that effect as is the case with coalition government ministerial portfolios at present.

The over enthusiasm of professor Moyo to create nonexistent conflict between the FM, Premier and ICT minister is nothing new but it does not licence him to lie about MDC-T conflicts.

Where are Strive Masiyiwa, Chadehumba and Sibotshiwe whom the Professor alleged were calling the shots in MDC policy formulation in preparation for roles in government?

Finally, the professor must know that the GPA is an annexure of the Constitution of Zimbabwe and under it Executive power in the country is shared between Cabinet Ministers, The Prime Minister and the President.

As FM, Hon Biti holds key responsibilities of advising not just the Presidency and the Premiership but also Parliament, the Judiciary and the Bureaucracy on financial fundamentals that impact positively and negatively on the economy.

The days when the advisory role was usurped by Dr Gono are in the past and Prof Moyo must come to terms with that reality.

Childish arguments on semantics of terminology to be used by the FM when presenting national statements are stereotypes that will not get the country anywhere.

Hon Biti must never allow himself to be hamstrung by outmoded stereotypes that inhibit himself from articulating people’s problems in language they understand.

Prof Moyo has no chance in hell of discrediting the FM and he will sooner rather than later realise that his desire to see information dissemination in the country monopolised by Zanu PF controlled State Media will be circumvented if the country does not wake up to the reality that access to information and dissemination thereof is a fundamental right that must be respected by politicians and citizens alike.

CABS charges epitomise Zimbabwe’s hostile investment climate

Inflation creator Gideon Gono and buster Hon Tendai Biti must address the theft of depositor funds by uninnovative banks in the country if they want to attract deposists from zimbabwe exiles.

Recently the coalition government hosted an investment conference where it appealed for foreign investors to consider joining it in efforts to resuscitate the country’s ailing economy.

This was immediately preceded by whirlwind mission by the Premier Morgan Tsvangirai wherein he took time off his pressing programme to meet with Zimbabweans in the diaspora and implored them to return back to their home country and join him in tackling the massive reconstruction programme faced by the coalition government.

From an individual point of view the decision to go back to Zimbabwe hinges on several factors not least among them the political climate, the economic environment and the availability of services that would support resettlement and economic welfare of the individual concerned.
A cursory glance of the banking system in the country will surely put off any intending Zimbabwean exile considering immediate return to his/her home country.
CABS is by far the largest building society in the country and enjoys over 60% of the individual savings market.
A visit to its website shows the lack of banking innovativeness exiles will have to put up with on returning to their home country.
Any funds they will repatriate to their home country will not be guaranteed any interest rate.
But what they will surely expect is a shocking array of money fleecing measures put in place by the Zimbabwe banking sector.
Detailed below are some of the charges they will expect from CABS and these mirror what the banking sector in the country has to offer or is it fleece from them.
FCA's - TRANSACTION & SERVICE FEES with effect from 13/05/09 New Rates
Transaction charges at the CABS Banking Halls (Tellers)
Transfers done at the Teller counter $0.15
Cheque Withdrawals $30.00
Cash Withdrawal - Easy Bank, Blue, icabs, $2.00
Cash Withdrawal - Gold $2.00
Cash Withdrawals above the maximum (maximum currently $200 per day) 1%
Minimum amount to open New Account $10.00
Minimum amount to open New Account - EasyBank $10.00
ZETSS or RTGS $0.25
Monthly Service Fee
Platinum $1.00
Gold, Blue, icabs, Easybank Accounts $1.00
Additional Service Charges
Overdrawn Accounts $5.00
Recalled Salaries $1.00
Lost /Faulty/Damanged Cards $2.50
Forgotten Pin $2.50
Returned Cheque/Debit Order TBA
Photocopies (per item) $1.00
Stop Payments TBA
Bill Payments $0.30
Account Statements (historical records max 2 pages) $1.00
Debit Orders TBA
Unpaid Debit Orders TBA
Old Mutual Deposits (per deposit) TBA
Pledges/Cessions TBA
Mis-post/Retrieval of funds $1.00
Paynet per transaction/per debit order TBA
Certificate Of Balance $1.00
Stop Orders TBA
Electronic Transaction charges at CABS Delivery Channels (POS, ATM, Internet Banking, Telebanking)
POS
Any POS purchase (incl. tax) $0.15
POS Cash Back $0.15
CABS EasyBank Clients (incl. tax) $0.15
ATM
ATM Cash Withdrawal (incl. tax) $1.00
CABS EasyBank Clients (incl. tax) $1.00
ATM Cash Withdrawal - Gold Clients (incl. Stamp Duty) $1.00
Buddy Re-charge TBA
CABS Internet Banking
Bill Payments $0.30
Internet RTGS $0.25
Telebanking
Telebanking (per transaction) TBA
Cellphone Services
Balance, Statement enquiry $0.25
Buddy Top-up Re-Charge (paid by Econet) 3%
Our Mortgage Fees with effect from 13/05/09
Arrear Charges
High Density TBA
Low Density TBA
Commercial/Industrial TBA
Other Mortgage Charges
Visits to sites - low density TBA
Visits to sites - high density TBA
Visit for property management TBA
Visit to sites on properties >$25 million TBA
Photocopies (title deeds/mortgage bonds) $1.00
Application Fee TBA
Valuation Fees
Residential Properties - Ordinary 1%
Residential Properties - Building 2%
Non-Residential Properties - Ordinary 2%
Non-Residential Properties - Building 3%
Re-Valuation Fees TBA
Dormant Fee
Service Fees on Collection of Title Deeds $25.00
MINIMUM BALANCES (CABS CARDS)
Gold Card $5.00
Gold Card (Pensioners) $5.00
Blue Card/Easy Bank/icabs $5.00
MINIMUM BALANCE (CABS PRODUCTS)
Interest Plus Account TBA
Term Deposit Account $100.00
Mortgages (Minimum Loan) $10 000.00
Mortgages (Minimum Installment) TBA
MINIMUMS ON CABS SERVICES
Debit Order TBA
Stop Order TBA
Min. Cheque Amount (Banking Halls) TBA
MINIMUM & MAXIMUM WITHDRAWALS
Minimum Withdrawal Amount $10.00
Maximum Withdrawal Amount $200.00

Those coming from the UK will have to forgo the Nationwide Building Society services partially listed here under which Zimbabwean institutions are refusing to adapt to their system.

It is really not worth it after years of losing money to these same institutions through hyper inflation.

Why do Zimbabwe banks find it proper to charge their customers for withdrawing their incomes which would have been deposited after government taxation?

If the withdrawal is made in a banking hall it will attract between US$2.00 and US$30.00 if a cheque withdrawal has to be made.

Assuming one makes 4 cash withdrawals and a cheque withdrawal per month he will be US$38.00 worse off than if he had not banked his wages with CABS.

And that is not all as the bank will still hit him with a US$1.00 monthly service fee. It is not clear what services these will be other than cost of depositing funds with the bank given that all withdrawals and payments through the bank attract separate transaction based instant charges.

But perhaps it is the charge for drawing above the daily maximum limit of US$200 that is nothing less than criminal at 1%of the excess amount.

These amounts will not be an extension of overdraft to the customer but will be out of actual amounts standing to the depositor’s credit at the time of withdrawal and it is beyond imagination why they should attract a mandatory 1% tax.

Take for example a person wishing to purchase a motor vehicle valued at US$2000 where the seller demands payment in cash.

The buyer will have to fork out and additional US$18 to the US$2 that the bank charges per transaction.

ATM charges of US$0.15 per transaction including tax are equally deplorable as the tax is tantamount to double taxation and the machines were bought and paid for by depositor funds to improve services delivery rather than increase depositor liabilities to the bank.

Point of sale charges should not be transferred to the depositors as they should be costs between the bank and its corporate clients that collect funds through this system.

The same argument extends to the use of the RTGS transfer system which should be a bank to bank transaction that does not pass expenses to the depositors.

And I wonder what justifies internet transaction charges as well as direct debits or stop orders, which are arranged between the bank and the corporate clients for a commission to the bank.

Finance Minister and the so called genius RBZ governor Gideon Gono must be taken to task over these unscrupulous charges levied by banks from unsuspecting depositors as they discourage depositors from the banks.

Banks must pay depositors interests not tax them for depositing funds with them.

Investors are attracted by return on investment and not costs of investing.



anyone who withdraws

InvestDirect
The postal account you can run from home.
Effective from:01/03/2009 £1 - £2,000,000 0.20 n/a 0.20 0.16 More infoApply now
Instant Access ISA
A passbook account that gives you tax-free returns.
Effective from:01/04/2009 £1 - £9,999 0.25 n/a 0.25 n/a More infoApply in branch
£10,000 - £24,999 0.35 n/a 0.35 n/a
£25,000+ 0.50 n/a 0.50 n/a
Regular Savings
Flexible, instant access regular savings account managed via LINK cash machines or online that lets you save up to £1,000 a month.
Effective from:01/04/2009 £1 - £99* 0.10 n/a 0.10 0.08 More infoApply now
£100 - £199* 1.35 n/a 1.35 1.08
£200 - £499* 1.85 n/a 1.85 1.48
£500 - £1,000* 2.50 n/a 2.50 2.00
*Monthly increase in balance. We guarantee that the interest rates (AER) on Regular Savings will track changes in the Bank of England Base Rate until 1 January 2010. Changes to Regular Savings account rates will be made within one month of a Bank of England Base Rate announcement.
CashBuilder Card
Instant access account with cash card.
Effective from:01/01/2009 £1 - £2,000,000 0.10 n/a 0.10 0.08 More infoApply now
CashBuilder Book
Instant access account with passbook.
Effective from:01/01/2009 £1 - £2,000,000 0.10 n/a 0.10 0.08

No wonder why the exiles in the UK heckled the Premier when he said all was well for their return to the country.

Not that he was politically out of step but he was not aware that the investment climate in the country is far from ideal for the exiles used to benefits from banking as opposed to taxation for banking with an institution.
.

Is the current obsession with Constitutional reforms the panacea to our political quagmire?

Who exactly is in charge of the country the top three or the bottom

The disruption of the first Constitution reform all stakeholders conference confirms earlier observations on this portal that Constitutional reform has become the single most critical national agenda on the table of the coalition government.

Saviour Kasukuwere, Patrick Zhuwawo and Joseph Chinotimba led Zanu PF supporters in song and dance meant to provoke chaos and order in the Constitution reform process leading to suspension of the business of the first day of the conference at the Rainbow Towers Hotel Conference Centre on Monday 13 July 2008.

If the disorderly behaviour that ensued had been instigated and led by an MDC politician as the compromised State media would like us to believe, we would be by now reading or hearing that the ring leader has been arrested and brought before the courts for breaching the law codification clause on maintenance of other people’s rights to peace and order.


But I digress. The issue is why are the Zanu PF supporters against the Constitution reform initiative if at all they are? Alternatively why did the Zanu PF protesters disrupt the Conference that their party leader endorsed in the GPA on 15 September 2008 that legitimised his hitherto disputed Presidency of the country?

President Mugabe must bear the brunt of criticism over what happened at the first stakeholders’ conference. His statement that the Parliamentary Select Committee spearheading the constitution reform process must anchor its processes on the Kariba draft sent the wrong cue for his supporters’ behaviour towards the process.

They now believe that the process is not necessary since the Kariba draft is already in existence and what is required is to initiate the process to formalise its adoption as the country’s constitution.

His party structures are mobilising grassroots supporters that the stakeholders’ conferences are joint MDC-T and NGO’s initiatives to oust President Mugabe from power using donor funds with the sole purpose of writing a new constitution that would reverse the land reforms that have seen them access vast swathes of fertile agricultural land that they are unable to economically exploit due to sanctions.

This of course is a total fabrication of the facts as the reason for the new constitutional order has and will always be to prescribe how the nation’s rulers should exercise power on behalf of the people in an accountable manner.

There is no proven scientific formula that can be used to formulate National Constitutions. It was therefore irresponsible of the President to state that Constitution making has never been a mob exercise but rather an exclusive government prerogative when history behind that thinking clearly informs the nation that politicians will manipulate constitution making processes to advance sectarian party political agendas rather than regulate accountable national governance.

But are Zanu PF supporters so ignorant that they would buy into a false fear of their leadership that a Constitution can be used to dethrone Mugabe when it is them that are on record as stating that the ballot cannot prevail over the bullet in matters of determining who rules the country?

How could they suddenly believe that the current Constitution processes will lead to President Mugabe’s ouster from power and a reversal of their ill-gotten farmlands ownership when he will remain Commander in Chief of the bullet wielding security forces?

The Zanu PF grassroots have been really hurt by the current economic policies of the coalition government that have closed many of the avenues they had become accustomed to plunder and pillage the economy while the majority languished in abject poverty and debilitating scarcity of goods and services they used to easily access through their party.

It is that sense of loss that drives them to the edge as they yearn for the glorious days of free everything from their party.

It is beyond their imagination that there is life after Mugabe. They are not stupid.
They are just real. The physical and psychological pain suffered by none Zanu PF adherents in the past decade is what the adherents are experiencing at a time when those that have gone through the worst of Zanu PF misrule are experiencing a change for the better in their economic wellbeing.

The Zanu PF supporters realise that at present they are covered against their criminality which may very well be revisited in the likely event that Zanu PF looses the envisaged elections that must follow the end of the Constitution reform initiative.

But that is only part of the problem. The real fear is how the beneficiaries of the well documented impunity that characterised land reforms will explain away their wealth accumulation in a government environment where laws are applied without reference to political party affiliation.

That is why the Zanu PF supporters are prepared to do anything in the name of President Mugabe for they are under no illusion as to the shielding powers he has over their crimes.

Indeed they like all else crave for a home grown constitution as long as that constitution will not allow any other party than Zanu PF to preside over national affairs.

All the Zanu PF supporters want is a constitution that allows them leeway to keep Mugabe in power through established rigging methods and or violence.

The Kariba draft appears to favour that position in terms of the Presidential powers therein and that office for now is occupied by a Zanu PF nominee who will use the powers to guarantee its retention by the party no matter what the ballots will say.
Why has it been possible for the Zanu PF party to retain power after obvious electoral losses?

During 1999-2000, the Zanu PF dominated government capitulated to national demands for a home grown constitution to replace the politically necessitated 1979 Lancaster House constitution.

The outcome failed the ultimate test when it was put to referendum and the nays exceeded the ayes.

The government was embarrassingly left stuck with a Constitution it had condemned as dysfunctional.

The Zanu PF government refused to revisit the process after it was followed by the “defeat” of Zanu PF in the March 2000 parliamentary elections that came immediately after the referendum.

The assertion that Zanu PF was defeated at the March 2000 Parliamentary polls yet it remained in charge of the governance of the country does not make sense unless one examines how this was achieved.

The country’s constitution allowed overlapping Legislative and Presidential terms such that defeat of a party in Legislative contests did not automatically deprive it of executive authority vested in the Presidency if the Presidency was held by its candidate.

In addition to that the electoral process was managed by the Presidency through an Electoral Commission staffed by his loyal appointees who were widely criticised for rigging the process in favour of the President’s party.

The Presidency wielded draconian powers from a Constitution that allowed him to rule by decree and avoid checks and balances that would normally be expected to come from the Legislature and Judiciary pillars of governance in a Constitutional democracy.

To illustrate the extent of the Constitutional powers bestowed on the President and how they were used to circumvent the electoral processes and outcomes it is pertinent to note that the President;
 had the right to appoint all heads of national commissions tasked with management of national affairs and recommending principal officers to serve in key government positions such as Permanent Secretaries of Ministries, Commanders of Security establishments, Chief Executives of Parastatals, Reserve Bank Governor, Attorney General and Chief Elections officers;
 was the Commander in Chief of the Defence Forces;
 had the power to reject appointments of recommended Judges and Justices, Permanent Secretaries, Ambassadors, Board Members and Chief Executives of National Institutions and Parastatals;
 had powers to make binding decrees through use of emergency powers that would be legally binding for six months without reference to anyone
 had sole powers to appoint and disappoint Cabinet ministers and their deputies as well as Provincial Governors;
 had powers to dissolve Parliament at any time ;
 had sole powers to declare war and peace and
 had powers to elect 30 of the 150 Legislators in Parliament by way of direct appointment of persons of his choice.

These powers devolved from the Lancaster House constitution as amended by successive Zanu Pf governments since 1980.

In addition to their constitutional grounding the powers were backed by a strong armed enforcement backup which the President could fall back on if anyone decided to refuse to abide by the country’s laws and decrees he would have issued.

These are the very powers President Mugabe relied on to deny MDC the 2000 electoral victory it had scored against Zanu PF. That precedent was to be extended to the 2001 Presidential elections and was perfected over the years to deny the MDC electoral space and possible victory in the 2005 Elections whose results were used to re-introduce the discarded Senate.

Attempts by President Mugabe to manipulate the Constitution by amending it to defer Presidential elections due in 2008 to 2010 to harmonise the Presidential term with the legislative term were strongly resisted by the opposition political Parties and within Zanu PF where party leadership succession battles have been raging for nearly a decade following the party’s 2000 constitutional referendum defeat.

Rather than satisfy the national quest for a home grown constitution, the numerous amendments the successive Zanu PF governments made to the Lancaster House constitution only served to increase the appetite for a substitute constitution.

A collapsed economy from mismanagement, impunity and measures taken to bar Zanu PF leadership from enjoying free global travel to mitigate effects of the collapsed economy resulted in Zanu PF’s defeat in the March 2008 elections the president had been forced to stage through internal pressures augmented by SADC intervention in the country’s political impasse emerging from previous disputed elections dating back to 2000.

Again as had been the norm from 2000 Zanu PF refused to be pushed out of the government arguing that the ballot could not prevail over the bullet in determining who should preside over national affairs.

The refusal by Zanu PF to accept the 2008 election results that went against it and its Presidential candidate pushed the Constitutional reform agenda to the forefront of the political dispute in the country leading to the Global Political Agreement (GPA) on 15 September 2008 wherein the two dominant political parties were joined by an insignificant political faction to form a coalition government whose term is hinged on the Constitutional reform initiative.

There is widespread belief in the country and throughout the region that the politics of the country can be sorted out if the feuding parties address the issues they believe are central to the impasse gripping the country and hindering economic progress.

But sadly though events on the ground seem to suggest that unless complimentary reforms are instituted in military operations in the country the Constitution reforms will count for nothing other than international sympathy with the downtrodden Zimbabwe electorate.

The fact that after the disturbances at the all stakeholders’ conference none other than MDC supporters were taken into custody when clearly the rowdy deviants were Zanu PF supporters speaks volumes about what will happen in the event Zanu PF refuses to abide by the new constitution regardless of how well meaning its clauses will be.

Simply put a good constitution without committed political and military enforcement will count for nothing.

If the MDC hopes to topple Mugabe from the presidency through the Constitution it will be surprised when the time comes and the free and fair elections are won but Zanu PF again refuses to vacate government seats of power.

As the constitution reform moves forward the MDC must make some painful decisions about how it will have to deal with such a possibility.

Unless the party can devise means with which to enforce the new constitution the likelihood of a long overdue change in regimes will not materialise in practice.

The MDC can win as many so called free and fair elections as it likes under any constitutional order but it will not dislodge Zanu PF unless the military command is reformed and reoriented to be a national rather than party loyal force.
Such reorientation of necessity demands that current command structures be dismantled and new leadership of the forces be appointed to serve the nation and not Zanu PF alone.

The silence on this issue is not healthy at all. The positions held by Constantine Chiwenga, Perence Shiri, Paradzayi Zimondi, Happyton Bonyongwe and Augustine Chihuri must now be discussed by the government and agreement reached as to how they will be eased out of the government and replaced by other professionals willing to distance themselves from partisan political party dogma in support of national ethos that will be encapsulated in the new constitution order.

By avoiding discussion of these key players in upholding our constitutional democracy, the government is not doing the nation any favours.

It only serves to show the nation that the government does not have control over its law enforcement and security wing which raises fears that the government may actually be a puppet of the military establishment.

In which case the constitution will be not worth the paper on which it will be written.

Professor Arthur Guseni Oliver Mutambara and the American suit conundrum

DPM Arthur Mutambara the egocentric Zimbabwe deputy premier with an unrivalled superiority complex.

'Don't quote me!'
Article By: Maureen Isaacson
Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:20

Arthur Guseni Oliver “Ago” Mutambara, Zimbabwe’s deputy prime minister, fiddles with his Che Guevara-style black Kangol cap, moving it around his head throughout our interview.

“Today I am incognito,” he says. Actually, he is the most conspicuous person in the sizeable Sandton hotel lounge and is, in fact, approached by a young woman who congratulates him on his new position.

“I’ve a country to run,” he says. Two bodyguards wait outside –
at least he says there are only two.
Ten days after the swearing in of the government of national unity, he says that he has no job description yet, nor does he have an idea of the perks of the job. “I don’t need them.”

He is erratic; alternately angry and entertaining, he ticks me off for “being late” although I was dead on time. He thinks on the hoof, changing his mind as he speaks, saying often, “Don’t quote me; don’t quote me!”

Which aspect, I wonder, should I keep under wraps? The previous day, at a seminar on youth, intellectuals and politics at the University of Johannesburg (UJ), students ridiculed him, warning that he may follow in the footsteps of Robert Mugabe.

When I remind him of this, he says, “That is a good point. Yes, I could become a dictator. No one should trust me or take me at my word. We have systems, we have valid institutions and we depend on those. Until 1980, you would be slaughtered for criticising Mugabe before he was crowned. Don’t ever be dependent on personalities!”

Mutambara is a work in progress.

He wants feedback about his on-stage performance at UJ, which was dramatic, in the mould of the holy roller televangelist. Sweeping movements accompanied his political preaching. I tell him he should borrow Kwame Nkrumah’s nickname of “Showboy”.

“I am just a Zimbabwean; I am very passionate about my views; if I come across very strongly, I am someone who is very determined but a strong democrat. I believe in rational disputation. I love a good debate.”

For a rocket scientist ranked among Africa’s top scientists, his approach to politics is curiously unscientific.

“I’m a very different kind of politician. I don’t suffer fools. You understand that? I might have to do so in politics.

I don’t suffer fools

But I don’t suffer fools. I am an independent thinker; I challenge conventional wisdom.
That is why you find me against Morgan [Tsvangirai] on television. You foolish media people think Morgan is a saint. If Morgan makes mistakes, I don’t cover for him.

We are getting on very well. Now is the time to deliver, time to work, we are working very closely together.”

Since creating the breakaway Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), running against Tsvangirai’s MDC, Mutambara has flip-flopped and swerved.

Once, he was against Mugabe, then he was against Tsvangirai, then he supported Simba Makoni when he could have been joining hands with Tsvangirai against Zanu-PF in the March 2008 election.
This obduracy led to the failure of the MDC to win sole control of Parliament. But now Mutambara has said he is for Tsvangirai – although he is widely perceived to be for Mugabe.

He says: “Many people still loved Mugabe in 1988. I hate it when people say I am pro-Mugabe. It is not true. I fought Mugabe! I am for Zimbabwe. It is a very cheap manifestation of intellectual laziness to say that anyone critical of the West is a supporter of Mugabe.”

He stresses the “complementarity” in the government of national unity, implying that both Zanu-PF and the MDC should shoulder equal responsibility for the state of Zimbabwe, but he is unwilling to provide empirical evidence for this.

An ardent anti-imperialist, he quotes Otto von Bismarck, the 19th century imperialist German chancellor and prime minister, who said, “Politics is the art of the possible”. Arthur Mutambara was born on 25 May 1966. His curriculum vitae reveals that he is a high technology expert and leader, a global strategy specialist and an entrepreneur.

He was the author of three engineering books, he is a Rhodes Scholar, with an MSc (computer engineering) and a PhD (robotics and mechatronics) from Oxford University, and a BSc (Hons) (electrical engineering) from the University of Zimbabwe.

He was also a research scientist and professor of robotics and mechatronics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and at NASA. He says his parents (Philemon was a Fort Hare graduate and his mother, Effie, a primary schoolteacher) spawned four PhD graduates.

“Whoever came back from school who was not first in class was scorned.”

Che Guevara is the ultimate human being who ever lived."

If you had not kept up the divisions between yourself and Morgan Tsvangirai, the MDC would probably have succeeded in ousting Mugabe.

I have no appetite for discussing this now. Everything I have done is consistent. There is a method to the madness.

If you follow my activities from 1989 – on 4 October when I was arrested for the first time and Morgan’s first arrest came on 6 October – you will see that I am part of the foundation of the struggle.

I would say we have worked together for a long time. And make sure you understand that I have been working in the trenches for more than 20 years.
You have said the government of national unity has been a compromise – what would it take for you to opt out?

At this point we are not entertaining any form of defeat. We have spent so much time negotiating and working on this compromise. The agenda is very simple. I think we can achieve it by resolving humanitarian crises in our country, national healing, and economic recovery and transformation.

As a former militant student leader, you spoke at UJ of MIT and Oxford University, not of the conditions faced by Zimbabwean students – why?

I was trying to motivate the students that the sky is the limit. I am not impressed by an activist who fails in an examination.

You go to the streets, you are locked up. I want twinning of academic excellence and social adaptability.

How could the MDC allow Mugabe to have seven extra cabinet members in addition to the 14 agreed on at the swearing-in ceremony?

I go to Parliament where we have 184 MPs – 184 in agreement. In senate, 72 out of 72. I am calling this unprecedented unanimity. There is some clarity on a need for this thing.
As I have said before, it is a compromise document.

It is the only workable arrangement in our country and we know the limitations and flaws and challenges; how do we come up with a mitigation plan?

Your critics are asking how you came into this high position considering the fact that you do not have an electorate.

Why not ask Tsvangirai and Mugabe? Surely they don’t just throw things away.

What is your view of the amnesty Zanu-PF has allegedly requested the MDC to sign?

It will allegedly wipe a clean slate from 1980. It is nonsense. There is no basis for this story. It is fiction created by careless talkers.

Do you think national healing can take place without people confronting their past?

We want restorative justice, we want to break the cycle of impunity. We want accountability. The truth must be known so we can lay a foundation that says never again will Zimbabweans kill each other over political affiliation. Retribution and revenge are not our tactics. We don’t intend revenge, we intend to heal.

Do you intend to remain in Zimbabwe?

I don’t need to leave the country. I have been there, done that. I got a PhD, wrote books and I am a better person because of it. I had exposure and I am not sorry I went away. I can make a better contribution. I am here to stay and to run the country.

Is there any significance in your Che Guevara beret?
Che Guevara and Malcolm X are my heroes. Che Guevara is the ultimate human being who ever lived. He stands for sacrifice, intellectual prowess, dedication to the collective, high morals, high principles, standing up for what is right. And Malcolm – I love Malcolm X!”

What is your relationship with Cuba?

I was talking about people of heroic stature like Guevara. It has nothing to do with Cuba, but what he stood for. We look north, south, east and west for opportunities. North, south, west, China’s best… Not for us; we look everywhere for opportunities. We don’t look at the usual suspects – no, we want to diversify.

Are you a social democrat?

I am for social democratic arrangement underpinned by economic values that leverage the market – enlightened self-interest within the human rights democratic dispensation. We must try to resolve these challenges in a holistic manner, appreciating the interconnectedness of global challenges. We are revolutionaries who understand that Africa cannot survive as a commodity-based economy. We, the Zimbabweans, are not content to survive on economic support. We want to be masters of our own destiny.

Are you an Africanist?

I am a social democrat, a Zimbabwean, an Africanist, a global citizen, that is why I go to Davos.

Are you angry that the Southern African Development Community was unable to steer Zimbabwe out of crisis?

My view about African institutions is that we must support them. If we don’t like their work, we reform them and defend them and this does not mean that they don’t reform. Whatever reservations we have, we must work on improving them.

At the UJ seminar, you said: “I have fought Mugabe for 25 years, as a student leader, and now I am fighting him at close range!” How do you intend to do this? I said it publicly so I cannot take it back. I don’t make up stuff about people. What else do you want to know?

Where did you buy your suit?

In the States. What does it matter?
Well done Maureen, you got him there-Zimsentinel