The Zimbabwe Power Sharing Agreement

pic. Sadc Mediator and Former RSA President Thabo Mbeki
On 11 September 2008 three Political Party Presidents endorsed a political settlement aimed at rescuing Zimbabwe out of the Social, Political and economic quagmire.

Only the leaders of political formations that managed to win more than one parliamentary seat during the 29 march 2008 elections were considered representative enough to qualify as signatories to the agreement.

The negotiations were necessitated by a hugely unpopular decision by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission to declare Morgan Tsvangirai winner of the 29 march 2008 presidential election but without an absolute majority to be declared duly elected president.

A Presidential runoff election was ordered instead. Not only was the runoff ordered out of time but it was ordered in circumstances where the outcome announced was seriously in doubt and verification was rendered impossible as the electoral Commission displayed all signs it had lost control of the electoral process to the Joint Operations commission and Zanu PF.

Concerned about the challenges the country had faced and the multiple threats to the well-being of the people the UN, AU and SADC resolved that settlement be through mediation led by South Africa President Thabo Mbeki to permanently resolve these challenges.

So it was that the three political parties that won Legislative seats were invited to enter into dialogue aimed at resolving the disputed Presidency of the country after the electoral process that led to the 27 June 2008 “re-election” of Mugabe in a solo contest after leading contender Morgan Tsvangirai had withdrawn his candidacy citing violence and conditions unfit to hold a credible election.

The negotiations over a five week period from 23 July 2008 culminated in the signing of the Power Sharing Deal between the Parties by their Presidents on 11 September 2008.

Initially negotiations had been planned to last two weeks but serious disputes emerged over the powers each signatory would realize from the political deal and in particular between Morgan Tsvangirai and Robert Mugabe thereby prolonging the negotiations up to 11 September 2008 when the framework of the agreement was signed and even then the finer details still remain to be thrashed out.

An analysis of the agreements reached reveals that;

ARTICLE I
The "Agreement" was signed by the representatives of ZANU-PF and the MDC, in its two formations led by Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara respectively ("the Parties") in fulfillment of the material mandate handed down by the SADC Extraordinary Summit on 29th March 2007 in Lusaka, Zambia and adopted by the African Union Summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.

The agreement was on the new Government to be set up in terms of this Agreement.

COMENT

Clearly the agreement does not derive any legitimacy from the Zimbabwe laws. Rather it was forced down the throats of Zimbabwean political leaders by SADC without reference to the legal requirements of the Country’s supreme law prescriptions when such disputes arise.

The Sadc resolution was unprecedented in its membership but closely follows on a similar solution for the Kenya disputed Presidency. It can be safe to concluded that the deal has no legal basis but is politically binding and enforceable not in terms of Zimbabwean laws but in terms of SADC security, defense and politics protocols.

This is a critical element underpinning this agreement. Zimbabwe security and law enforcement agents have no role to play in influencing the outputs of this agreement and should they decide to mutiny or revolt against it they will be revolting against SADC, AU and the UN.
It is highly unlikely the Zimbabwe Security forces would want to engage in a war with SADC forces that can simply close the landlocked country’s borders and leave the security forces the daunting task of dealing with the disenchanted populace.

ARTICLE II

The Parties hereby declared and agreed to work together to create a genuine, viable, permanent, sustainable and nationally acceptable solution to the Zimbabwe situation and in particular to implement the following agreement with the aims of resolving once and for all the current political and economic situations and charting a new political direction for the country.

COMENT

It is not clear what this clause implies because it is pregnant with high sounding rhetoric but empty in meaning. What is a genuine, viable, permanent, sustainable and nationally acceptable solution to the Zimbabwe situation?

What does “implement the following agreement with the aims of resolving once and for all the current political and economic situations and charting a new political direction for the country,” mean in real terms?

These sweeping statements are difficult to hold parties to account and for the generality of the people worthless.

Does haggling for a particular ministry by any of the parties constitute a nationally acceptable solution?

Does the nation want to be permanently governed by SADC negotiated governments or do they want to elect their own government.

This section is not very smart and is difficult to evaluate performance there on based to determine levels of success.

ARTICLE III

The Parties agree to:

(a) Give priority to the restoration of economic stability and growth in Zimbabwe through the Government leading the process of developing and implementation of an economic recovery strategy and plan. The parties committed themselves to work together on a full and comprehensive economic programme to resuscitate Zimbabwe's economy, which will urgently address the issues of production, food security, poverty and unemployment and the challenges of high inflation, interest rates and the exchange rate.

(b) Create conditions that would ensure that the 2008/2009 agricultural season is productive.

(c) Establish a National Economic Council composed of representatives of the Parties and of the following sectors:
(i) Manufacturing
(ii) Agriculture
(iii) Mining
(iv) Tourism
(v) Commerce
(vi) Financial
(vii) Labour
(viii) Academia; and
(ix) Other relevant sectors

(d) Make the terms of reference of the Council include giving advice to Government, formulating economic plans and programmes for approval by government and such other functions as are assigned to the Council by the Government.

(e) Endorse the SADC resolution on the economy.

COMENT

The parties basically agreed that the economy of the country will henceforth be driven by the policies formulated by the National Economic Council.

The government however still retained the prerogative to assign the Council functions which is no different to how the consecutive Zanu PF regimes have been working with the National Economic Consultative Forum (NECF).

It is unlikely there will be significant changes to the economic misfortunes of the country unless there is a significant paradigm shift in Government’s top/bottom approach to economic management.

The SADC resolution on the economy is not known to the people of Zimbabwe and therefore will not be owned and driven by them.

This government will not address the economic malaise in the country by upholding high sounding SADC economic rhetoric instead of agreeing to heed the concerns of its Nationals and modeling its economic programmes around those concerns.

ARTICLE IV

Parties recognized and acknowledged that some sections of the international community have since 2000 imposed various sanctions and measures against Zimbabwe, which have included targeted sanctions.

The Parties further noted the present economic and political isolation of Zimbabwe by the United Kingdom, European Union, United States of America and other sections of the International Community was over and around issues of disputed elections, governance and differences over the land reform programme.

In particular parties acknowledged sanctions and measures imposed on Zimbabwe that:

(a) enactment of the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act by the United States of America Congress which outlawed Zimbabwe's right to access credit from International Financial Institutions in which the United States Government is represented or has a stake;

(b) suspension of Zimbabwe's voting and related rights, suspension of balance of payment support, declaration of ineligibility to borrow Fund resources and suspension of technical assistance to Zimbabwe by the International Monetary Fund;

(c) suspension of grants and infrastructural development support to Zimbabwe by The World Bank; and

(d) imposition of targeted travel bans against current Government and some business leaders.

Parties noted that international isolation has over the years created a negative international perception of Zimbabwe and thereby resulting in the further isolation of the country by the non-availing of lines of credit to Zimbabwe by some sections of the international community.

Parties acknowledged the consequent contribution of this isolation to the further decline of the economy.

Parties then expressed the desire and commitment to bring to an end the resultant fall in the standards of living of the people by agreeing to;
(a) endorse the SADC resolution on sanctions concerning Zimbabwe;

(b) have all forms of measures and sanctions against Zimbabwe be lifted in order to facilitate a sustainable solution to the challenges that are currently facing Zimbabwe; and

(c) commit themselves to working together in re-engaging the international community with a view to bringing to an end the country's international isolation.

COMMENT

The SADC resolution on sanctions is that the punitive measures imposed against Zanu PF must be lifted as they are causing undue economic hardships in the country.

Having accurately identified the reasons why the sanctions were imposed the negotiators disappointed by prescribing a narrow solution which is outside their span of control to implement.

It the sanctions were imposed over issues of disputed elections, governance and differences over the land reform programme, which is an accurate assessment, how will endorsement of a SADC resolution calling for their lifting achieve that desirable end?

The agreement ought to have spelt out tacitly that the endorsement of the call to have sanctions lifted will be supported by deliberate action on the part of the New Government to;
• ensure transparency in electoral processes by allowing whoever doubted the process freedom to monitor the elections
• uphold and respect electoral outcomes within the shortest possible period from the date they are held
• adhere to legislated electoral provisions without recourse to illegal gerrymandering with the system to achieve a desired outcome that may not have been endorsed by the electorate
• uphold human rights to the letter of all ratified conventions and the country’s Constitutional provisions
• desist from selective application of the country’s laws on the grounds of race, colour, creed, political affiliation, sex and religion
• correct the disputed issues that discredited the noble objectives land reform programme and ensure ownership rights in title to whatever government legitimately desired to expropriate are compensated for at fair market values at the time of expropriation and in the case of delayed compensation in the land reforms in the country there will be retroactive compensation from the State and
• ensure expropriated land will be transparently allocated to the needy and profitably used to guarantee the country’s food self sufficiency.

Unless these drivers of sanctions are addressed, agreement to call for the lifting of punitive measures before addressing the motive behind the measures will not change anything.

As it turns out the noble cause to have the sanctions lifted is being sabotaged by the rhetoric of President Mugabe at the signing ceremony that fails to inspire confidence in the changes necessary to persuade the lifting of the sanctions.

ARTICLE V

Parties recognised that colonial racist land ownership patterns established during the colonial conquest of Zimbabwe and largely maintained in the post independence period were not only unsustainable, but against the national interest, equity and justice.

They noted that in addition to the primary objective of the liberation struggle to win one man one vote democracy and justice, the land question, namely the need for the re-distribution of land to the majority indigenous people of Zimbabwe was at the core of the liberation struggle.

Parties accepted the inevitability and desirability of a comprehensive land reform programme in Zimbabwe that redresses the issues of historical imbalances and injustices in order to address the issues of equity, productivity, and justice.
They acknowledged their differences on the methodology of acquisition and redistribution that took place from the year 2000.

Despite those differences parties accepted the irreversibility of the said land acquisitions and redistribution.

Parties further noted that in the current Constitution of Zimbabwe and further in the Draft Constitution agreed to by the parties the primary obligation of compensating former land owners for land acquired rests on the former colonial power.

Further and in recognition of the need to ensure that all land is used productively in the interests of all the people of Zimbabwe as well as the special need for women to access and control independent land ownership the Parties agreed to;

• conduct a comprehensive, transparent and non-partisan land audit, during the tenure of the Seventh Parliament of Zimbabwe, for the purpose of establishing accountability and eliminating multiple farm ownerships;
• ensure that all Zimbabweans who are eligible to be allocated land and who apply for it shall be considered for allocation of land irrespective of race, gender, religion, ethnicity or political affiliation;
• ensure security of tenure to all land holders;
• call upon the United Kingdom government to accept the primary responsibility to pay compensation for land acquired from former land owners for resettlement;
• work together to secure international support and finance for the land reform programme in terms of compensation for the former land owners and support for new farmers and;
• work together for the restoration of full productivity on all agricultural land.

COMMENT

The agreement by the Parties herein is tacit and allows for no ambiguity in its interpretation and purpose.

Having agreed that the primary responsibility to compensate the dispossessed colonial owners of the land albeit based on content of a draft Constitution of the Parties that is yet to be made public, approved and adopted and which draws heavily from a controversial amendment to the current Constitution it is not clear how the obligation for the New Government to secure international support land reforms compensation arises.

Clearly the government attempt to abdicate on responsibilities to uphold land ownership rights enshrined in the current Constitution which the amendment to allow for arbitrary land repossession without compensation dismally failed to pass onto the British in the period it has been on our statutes will not work because of the number of times it has been repeated.

The pragmatic action in this regard which is in the control of the New government is to audit the land allocation that has hitherto taken place and ensure it is equitable and just and inclusive of needy women.

In addition to that it is heart warming to know that Parties agreed that security of tenure would be extended to legitimate beneficiaries of the land distribution that took place from 2000 provided that the owners are using the land productively for the benefit of the country.

The marshalling of compensation funds for former owners and support for new farmers will be made easier if the beneficiaries are deemed to be legitimate and needy and their commitment to productive commercial usage of the land is not in question.

To that end it is imperative for the new government not to waste any more time than has already been to secure funding for the next agricultural season that is no more than a month from now if agricultural productive capacity of the nation is to be restored forthwith.

But we are witnessing political dithering on the part of the Parties to set up the Cabinet that will drive this important initiative forward and can be excused for thinking that the lack of political will to set up the agreed upon Government is indicative of the extent to which the agreement will fail.

ARTICLE VI

In the agreement Parties Acknowledged that it is the fundamental right and duty of the Zimbabwean people to make a constitution by themselves and for themselves and in that awareness they must not only drive the process but inclusively and democratically own it as well.

Parties recognised 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.

They acknowledged the existence of the draft Constitution that the Parties signed and agreed to in Kariba on the 30th of September 2007, which was supposed to be annexed to the agreement under scrutiny marked Annexure "B" but is not yet in the public domain to date.

Guided by their determination to create conditions conducive for people to write the constitution for themselves and mmindful 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, the Parties hereby agreed that;

- they shall set up a Select Committee of Parliament composed of representatives of the Parties
- they shall mandate the Select Committee 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 it in performing its mandate herein;
- the Select Committee holds 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;
- the Select Committee convenes 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;
- the Select Committee tables its draft Constitution at a 2nd All Stakeholders Conference and
- reports to Parliament on its recommendations over the content of a New Constitution for Zimbabwe.

The Parties further agreed that the draft Constitution recommended by the Select Committee shall be submitted to a referendum and that for implementation of the agreement on Constitution making the specific timeframe shall be;

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 after 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 such 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 Bill 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.

COMMENT

The detailed Constitution making process in the agreement is a welcome departure from the brevity that characterised many failed attempts to re-write our Constitution in the past.

What however must raise eyebrows is the reference to a Kariba draft Constitution agreed upon by the Parties which Zimbabweans in their majority are not familiar with.

What is the purpose of that draft if it will not be revealed to the All Stakeholders Conference and how will variations from that document emerging from the All Stakeholders Conference draft Constitution impact on the agreement between the Parties?

On the whole the programmed steps towards Constitution re-writing are a welcome development that must be implemented forthwith.

ARTICLE VII

The Parties agreed that the new Government:
 will ensure equal treatment of all regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, place of origin and will work towards equal access to development for all;
 will ensure equal and fair development of all regions of the country and in particular to correct historical imbalances in the development of regions;
 shall give consideration to the setting up of a mechanism to properly advise on what measures might be necessary and practicable to achieve national healing, cohesion and unity in respect of victims of pre and post independence political conflicts and;
 will strive to create an environment of tolerance and respect among Zimbabweans and that all citizens are treated with dignity and decency irrespective of age, gender, race, ethnicity, place of origin or political affiliation;
 will formulate policies and put measures in place to attract the return and repatriation of all Zimbabweans in the Diaspora and in particular will work towards the return of all skilled personnel.

COMMENT

A cursory glance at the Bill of rights in the current Zimbabwe Constitution shows that there is no variation between what Parties agreed upon and what is already provided for therein.

The only significant variation is the special provision directed at encouraging the return to the country by Zimbabweans displaced into the Diaspora.

The agreement ought to have answered why the same entrenched rights in the current Constitution were not being upheld to the extent of necessitating their re-statement in this latest agreement?

Agreement should thus have been focussed on reining into line those law enforcement agencies that have disallowed the upholding of these fundamental rights.

Citizenship and Electoral laws that criminalises dual citizenship and disenfranchises Zimbabweans resident outside the country’s borders should have been identified as the major cause why citizens feel unfairly treated by their government and therefore needing redress to make the country an attractive place of residence for all its citizens.

ARTICLE VIII


In the interests of forging a common vision for our country, the Parties agreed:

• on the necessity of all Zimbabweans regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation and religion to respect and observe Zimbabwe's national institutions, symbols, national programmes and events and;
• that all Zimbabweans regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation and religion have the right to benefit from and participate in all national programmes and events without let or hindrance.

COMMENT

Why Parties in their wisdom or lack of it felt it desirerable to agree on fundamentally basic identity issues such as National institutions, symbols, national programmes and events beats imagination.

The problem with this section of the agreement is the undertones it carries. Zimbabwe has institutionalized Party political slogans, Party flags, political office and political Party historical landmarks and Congresses to National emblems and symbols that determine one’s patriotism and consequently freedoms that can accrue or punishment that can be meted out to none compliant citizens.

Laws that deny citizens the right to publicly discuss the failures of their national leadership as if they were Gods and talking bad about them is blasphemous are the motive behind this agreement.

When ruling parties monopolise National events to their ownership the events lose weight and deserve to be criticized by all right thinking Zimbabweans.

The office of the President, Prime Minister and any other political office for that matter is a public office and incumbents must be thoroughly subjected to private and public life scrutiny by those they lead to curtail power delinquency in holders.

Holidays like Unity day, Heroes Day, Defense Forces day are too politicized to the extent that they engender a feeling of resentment by those citizens they exclude for political reasons.

When one political formation uses these occasions to reward people that have no regard for human rights they infuriate victims of the system and alienate them from such events.

No citizens must be compelled by political agreement to celebrate or worship an event that is meaningless to him.

Such level of fundamentalism is counterproductive as it aims at coercing compliance instead of motivating compliance.

ARTICLE IX

The Parties reaffirmed the principle of the United Nations Charter on non-interference in the internal affairs of member countries and agreed:

• that the responsibility of effecting change of government in Zimbabwe vests exclusively on and is the sole prerogative of the people of Zimbabwe through peaceful, democratic and constitutional means;
• to reject any unlawful, violent, undemocratic and unconstitutional means of changing governments and;
• that no outsiders have a right to call or campaign for regime change in Zimbabwe.

Clearly this clause was necessitated by the deeply held belief in one political formation that it was being vilified by the citizens incited by foreign nations interests in the country.

The cynical underlying assumption appears to be that Zimbabweans will never out of their own volition desire political leadership change in their country which is outrageous.

The Zimbabweans are not subjected to any more external pressures than any other developing country and the citizens are literate enough to realise when a regime is no longer serving its purpose.
Zimbabwe has external interests of its own that it promotes through acceptable advocacy means and vice versa for countries with interests in its borders.

Parties are not sincere in this agreement. They want international help to prop up internal governance projects but do not want the helpers to object to internal miss-governance when it occurs in the country despite having ratified the international conventions used to back-up such criticism.

Any political agreement that aims at restricting citizens from demanding change in governance practice and players is undemocratic and must be dismissed with the contempt it deserves.

People of Zimbabwe must be free to choose their government yes but they equally must be allowed to learn from the best practices globally and one such practice severely missing in Zimbabwe is regime change.

The agreement should have addressed why people will be persuaded to consider regime change if they are happy with their government and agreed measures to counter such poisonous influences rather than defend the right to life incumbency of public office by labelling any disagreements with that foreign persuasion.

ARTICLE X

In the agreement Parties recognised that the right to canvass and freely mobilise for political support is the cornerstone of any multi-party democratic system and in turn have agreed that there should be free political activity throughout Zimbabwe within the ambit of the law in which all political parties are able to propagate their views and canvass for support, free of harassment and intimidation.

COMMENT

Once again it’s not as if this clause is novel to this agreement. If anything it is a fundamental right in the current Zimbabwe Constitution that needs no new agreement.

The agreement on this section fell short of expectations of many who are denied to freely assemble and discuss politics by the State.

What should have been agreed is how the State institutions currently being used to deny people realization of this fundamental right must be forced to uphold it.

A good starting point would have been to agree that the right to political assembly must never be authorized by anyone but rather triggered by the political issue uniting nationals in debate.

To that law enforcement presence must always be guaranteed for any peaceful political assembly at the shortest of notice even if it means expanding policing institutions to have a standby unit for the eruption of spontaneous political demonstrations.

ARTICLE XI

The Parties herein agreed that it is the duty of all political parties and individuals to:

• respect and uphold the Constitution and other laws of the land;
• adhere to the principles of the Rule of Law.

COMMENT

While agreeing to be bound by this agreement in Constituting a new Government it never crossed the minds of the Parties that this entire agreement is in itself a classical example of failure on their part to respect the Constitution and other laws and adhere to the principle of the rule of law by one or all the parties to the negotiations.

The only reason why government formation became the subject of political Party negotiation instead of an electoral mandate is because the same Parties subscribing to this clause had refused and or failed to uphold the country’s electoral laws.

Such is the deceit in politics that politicians get plaudits for breaching the very essence of the concept they are preaching.

To my mind this was the most ludicrous component of the agreement. Why agree on something that has long been agreed upon and set aside at implementation? What guarantees are there that this agreement will not be overlooked as has happened in this instant?

It can’t be the involvement of SADC and AU in underwriting this agreement because the same institutions have binding conventions that were breached by the refusal to live by the Zimbabwe electoral laws by the same Parties that it did not invoke in this instant.

A bit of political honesty will not harm anyone.

ARTICLE XII

In recognition of the importance of the freedoms of assembly and association in a multi-party democracy and noting that public meetings have to be conducted in a free, peaceful and democratic manner in accordance with the law, the Parties have agreed:
• to work together in a manner which guarantees the full implementation and realisation of the right to freedom of association and assembly and;
• that the Government shall undertake training programmes, workshops and meetings for the police and other enforcement agencies directed at the appreciation of the right of freedom of assembly and association and the proper interpretation, understanding and application of the provisions of security legislation.

COMMENT

Granted at the time negotiations were entered into emotions were running high after the traumatic experience the country had witnessed post the March 29 elections and could have clouded the open thinking of the Parties.

The agreement in Article X is no different to the issues in this Article. The addition that the New Government will undertake training programs, workshops and meetings for the police and other enforcement agencies directed at the appreciation of the right of freedom of assembly and association and the proper interpretation, understanding and application of the provisions of security legislation is to say the least naïve.

The law enforcement and security agents in the country are thoroughly conversant with best practice application of the same legislation the agreement wants to waste resources in addressing in the manner envisaged above which will not achieve the desired result.

The problem in law enforcement agencies is not the lack of knowledge about how the laws must apply but rather entrenched political mischief by the forces motivated by benefits that accrue to their top leadership out of patronage to a corrupt system of governance in place.

A paradigm shift from those values in the security ministries that motivate them to deliberately miss-apply laws selectively can only be achieved if the commanders are held accountable for the inconsistent actions of their subordinates that vitiate fundamental human rights.

No amount of training or talk shops will correct the misdemeanours in security ministries unless the code of their conduct is strictly enforced from top to bottom including dismissing culprits summarily if they do not tow the line.

That is what should have been agreed upon rather than waste resources training political malcontents leading the forces.

ARTICLE XIII

Parties correctly noted that State organs and institutions do not belong to any political party and should be impartial in the discharge of their duties.

For the purposes of ensuring that all state organs and institutions perform their duties ethically and professionally in conformity with the principles and requirements of a multi-party democratic system in which all parties are treated equally, the Parties have agreed that the following steps be taken:

• that there be inclusion in the training curriculum of members of the uniformed forces of the subjects on human rights, international humanitarian law and statute law so that there is greater understanding and full appreciation of their roles and duties in a multi-party democratic system;
• ensuring that all state organs and institutions strictly observe the principles of the Rule of Law and remain non-partisan and impartial;
• laws and regulations governing state organs and institutions are strictly adhered to and those violating them be penalised without fear or favour and;
• recruitment policies and practices be conducted in a manner that ensures that no political or other form of favouritism is practiced.

COMMENT

This Article is a further expansion of Articles X and XII. Security Commanders that declare political interest in their conduct will not be debriefed and re-oriented by some training program to practice fair recruitment and uphold human rights that are at variance with their ingrained political beliefs.

They will only respond positively to disciplinary measures and or political sanction. After rumbling around the issues the Parties finally got to the crux of the matter when they agreed to ensure laws and regulations governing state organs and institutions are strictly adhered to and those violating them be penalised without fear or favour

In that statement lays the solution to the mischief the Security Commanders have displayed hitherto.

ARTICLE XIV

Recognising and acknowledging that traditional leaders are community leaders with equal responsibilities and obligations to all members of their communities regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, race, religion and political affiliation, the Parties agreed to:-

 commit themselves to ensuring the political neutrality of traditional leaders and;
 call upon traditional leaders not to engage in partisan political activities at national level as well as in their communities.

COMMENT

The Chiefs are not partisan out of choice but because of the political system under which they serve that dolls numerous incentives for them to behave as they do.

An opportunity was lost to address the problem by addressing the actors instead of the principals that order traditional leaders to act as they do.

Their presence in the Senate should have been revisited and in particular the voting rights they carry in that house despite that they are not democratically elected to represent the electorate in that House. Their presence in debate is not an issue but their persuasion to vote along with the ruling party is what must be addressed and the surest way is to withdraw their voting rights so that they will be forced to truly and honestly represent their subjects and not seek favours with the ruling elite.




ARTICLE XV

Recognising the desirability of a national youth training programme which inculcates the values of patriotism, discipline, tolerance, non-violence, openness, democracy, equality, justice and respect and;

Determined to ensure that the National Youth Training Programme raises awareness of the HIV and AIDS pandemic, engenders a spirit of community service, skills development and a commitment to the development of Zimbabwe Parties agreed that:

 all youths regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion and political affiliation are eligible to participate in national youth training programmes;
 the National Youth Training Programme must be run in a non-partisan manner and shall not include partisan political material advancing the cause of any political party and;
 while recognising that youths undergoing training at national youth training centres have a right to hold political opinions, they shall not, during the period of their training, collectively and as part of a scheme of the training centre be used or deployed for partisan political work.

COMMENT

The agreement in this section is couched in dishonest political jargon. The Youths trained in these institutions have been fingered in numerous heinous crimes against humanity and the Training needs to be abolished.

ARTICLE XVI

Parties accurately observed that in times of need, every Zimbabwean regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation and religion is entitled to request and receive humanitarian and food assistance from the State and further that;

It is the primary responsibility of the State to ensure that every Zimbabwean who needs humanitarian and food assistance receives it.

Non-Governmental Organisations involved in giving humanitarian and food assistance do so without discrimination on the grounds of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation and religion and in doing so, shall not promote or advance the interests of any political party or cause and agreed that;

• in the fulfillment of its obligations above, the Government and all State Institutions and quasi State Institutions shall render humanitarian and food assistance without discrimination on the grounds of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation or religion;
• humanitarian interventions rendered by Non-Governmental Organisations, shall be provided without discrimination on the grounds of race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation and religion.
• all displaced persons shall be entitled to humanitarian and food assistance to enable them to return and settle in their original homes and that social welfare organisations shall be allowed to render such assistance as might be required.
• all NGO's rendering humanitarian and food assistance must operate within the confines of the laws of Zimbabwe.

COMMENT

Food is a fundamental prerequisite for livelihood and must never be allowed to be used for political ends.

The agreement should have noted that when people are starved by any regime they will revolt and demand regime change with or without external influence to demand for that kind of change.

ARTICLE XVII

The Parties agreed that:
 the legislative agenda will be prioritized in order to reflect the letter and spirit of this agreement;
 the Government will discuss and agree on further legislative measures which may become necessary to implement the Government's agreed policies and in particular, with a view to entrenching democratic values and practices.

COMMENT

Given that the Parties were negotiating formation of an institution of governance that is outside the confines of the country’s Constitution because of legal and Constitutional paralysis that had gripped the country due to disputed electoral results it is surprising that the parties did not find it proper to set a timeframe in which the legislature would regularise the agreement.

As it turns out the lack of a legal framework to regularise the formation of a government in line with the agreement is now proving to be a critical stumbling block in moving the process forward.

ARTICLE XVIII

Noting the easy resort to violence by political parties, State actors, Non-State actors and others in order to resolve political differences and achieve political ends;

Gravely concerned by the displacement of scores of people after the election of March 29, 2008 as a result of politically motivated violence;

Recognising that violence dehumanises and engenders feelings of hatred and polarisation within the country;

Further recognising that violence undermines our collective independence as a people and our capacity to exercise our free will in making political choices, the Parties agreed;

 to promote the values and practices of tolerance, respect, non-violence and dialogue as means of resolving political differences;
 to renounce and desist from the promotion and use of violence, under whatever name called, as a means of attaining political ends;
 that the Government shall apply the laws of the country fully and impartially in bringing all perpetrators of politically motivated violence to book;
 that all political parties, other organisations and their leaders shall commit themselves to do everything to stop and prevent all forms of political violence, including by non-State actors and shall consistently appeal to their members to desist from violence;
 to take all measures necessary to ensure that the structures and institutions they control are not engaged in the perpetration of violence.
 that all civil society organisations of whatever description whether affiliated to a political party or not shall not promote or advocate for or use violence or any other form of intimidation or coercion to canvass or mobilise for or oppose any political party or to achieve any political end;
 to work together to ensure the security of all persons and property;
 to work together to ensure the safety of any displaced persons, their safe return home and their enjoyment of the full protection of the law;
 to refrain from using abusive language that may incite hostility, political intolerance and ethnic hatred or unfairly undermine each other.
 that while having due regard to the Constitution of Zimbabwe and the principles of the rule of law, the prosecuting authorities will expedite the determination as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to warrant the prosecution or keeping on remand of all persons accused of politically related offences arising out of or connected with the March and June 2008 elections.

COMMENT

If all these issues were not being addressed to the extent of them needing to be incorporated in an agreement between political Parties then what sort of a regime was at the helm of our National management and did it not deserve to be changed without any external influences.

Were all these misdemeanors permissible in the past to warrant them being visited in a power sharing agreement?

If not what is required to ensure causes that led to their manifestation will be kept in check? That is what should have been agreed upon and not what is herein contained.

All these vices have long been outlawed but some people get away with them because of political affiliation. That is the reason why punishing law enforcement authorities who ignore breaches were most imperative as it addresses the continuation of these political malpractices.

ARTICLE XIX

Freedom of Expression and Communication

Parties recognised the importance of the right to freedom of expression and the role of the media in a multi-party democracy.

They noted that while the provisions of the Broadcasting Services Act permit the issuance of licences, no licences other than to the public broadcaster have been issued.

The Parties are aware of the emergence of foreign based radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe, some of which are funded by foreign governments.

They were concerned that the failure to issue licences under the Broadcasting Services Act to alternative broadcasters might have given rise to external radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe.
Further concerned that foreign government funded external radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe are not in Zimbabwe's national interest.

Parties expressed desire to ensure the opening up of the air waves and ensuring the operation of as many media houses as possible and agreed:
 that the government shall ensure the immediate processing by the appropriate authorities of all applications for re-registration and registration in terms of both the Broadcasting Services Act as well as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act;
 that all Zimbabwean nationals including those currently working for or running external radio stations be encouraged to make applications for broadcasting licences, in Zimbabwe, in terms of the law;
 that in recognition of the open media environment anticipated by this Agreement, the Parties thereby:-
(i) called upon the governments that are hosting and/or funding external radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe to cease such hosting and funding;
(ii) encouraged the Zimbabweans running or working for external radio stations broadcasting into Zimbabwe to return to Zimbabwe; and
(d) resolved that steps be taken to ensure that the public media provides balanced and fair coverage to all political parties for their legitimate political activities.
(e) resolved that the public and private media shall refrain from using abusive language that may incite hostility, political intolerance and ethnic hatred or that unfairly undermines political parties and other organisations. To this end, the inclusive government shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken to achieve this objective.

COMMENT

It is disappointing that the Parties remained glued to their past in that what they agreed has been agreed to before but has failed to work.

What they should have agreed with the benefit of hindsight is what to do about the causes of past failure to uphold agreements.
In the March 29 electioneering most of the agreements and resolutions herein held to a large extent. When the outcome became evident to Zanu PF, the rules were set aside and replaced with violent impunity.

That was possible because JOC hijacked the ZEC mandate and the results of post March retribution are there for all to see.

Instead of agreeing on licensing media houses that are externally exiled because of fear of military retribution, agreement should be on how to bar military interference with legal publishing houses in the country to avoid exposing the country to hostile publications from media houses outside the jurisdiction of the country.

As long as there is no action taken against security operatives that haunted the media houses into exile, none will be encouraged to set shop in the country and subject themselves to the vagaries of State agents.


ARTICLE XX

Framework for a new Government

Parties acknowledged that they had an obligation to establish a framework of working together in an inclusive government;

They accepted that the formation of such a government will have to be approached with great sensitivity, flexibility and willingness to compromise;

They further recognised that the formation of such a Government would demonstrate the respect of the Parties for the deeply-felt and immediate hopes and aspirations of the millions of our people.

They expressed determination to carry out sustained work to create the conditions for returning our country to stability and prosperity;

In doing so they acknowledged the need for gender parity, particularly the need to appoint women to strategic Cabinet posts and agreed that:

Executive Powers and Authority

 The Executive Authority of the Inclusive Government shall vest in, and be shared among the President, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, as provided for in this Constitution and legislation.
 The President of the Republic shall exercise executive authority subject to the Constitution and the law.
 The Prime Minister of the Republic shall exercise executive authority subject to the Constitution and the law.
 The Cabinet of the Republic shall exercise executive authority subject to the Constitution and the law.
 In the exercise of executive authority, the President, Vice Presidents, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Ministers, Ministers and Deputy Ministers must have regard to the principles and spirit underlying the formation of the Inclusive Government and accordingly act in a manner that seeks to promote cohesion both inside and outside government.

COMMENT

All very well stated on paper but there are no measures against which exercise of power by the various role players can be measured.

Further to that it is not clear which executive powers the identified positions shall have so we assume it’s all the powers giving rise to the first point of the agreement that is likely to cause future conflict because of its ambiguity.
Evidence of that conflict emerged at the signing ceremony with the PM calling for external help and support and the President vilifying external interference through support aimed at causing regime change.

The President did was oblivious that he had signed a regime change agreement as he remained deeply entrenched n the past glories of his Party.

His beliefs that regime change had not been agreed upon manifested when he a few days after signing pronounced he and his party were still in the driving seat despite losing elections.


In an attempt to address the ambiguity created by assigning Executive power to the Cabinet, Premiership and Presidency the parties agreed on the roles each would play as follows:-

The Cabinet

 shall have the responsibility to evaluate and adopt all government policies and the consequential programmes;
 shall, subject to approval by Parliament, allocate the financial resources for the implementation of such policies and programmes;
 shall have the responsibility to prepare and present to Parliament, all such legislation and other instruments as may be necessary to implement the policies and programmes of the National Executive;
 shall, except where the Constitution requires ratification by Parliament, or action by the President, approve all international agreements;
 shall ensure that the state organs, including the Ministries and Departments, have sufficient financial and other resources and appropriate operational capacity to carry out their functions effectively;
 shall take decisions by consensus, and take collective responsibility for all Cabinet decisions, including those originally initiated individually by any member of Cabinet.
 The President and the Prime Minister will agree on the allocation of Ministries between them for the purpose of day-to-day supervision.

COMMENT

It is not clear from this section where the policies and consequential programmes to be evaluated and adopted by Cabinet will come from. One has to read the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers’ roles to gain a clear insight into this.

Allocation of financial resources for implementation of policies and programmes by the Cabinet will be subject to Parliamentary approval which is most welcome.

Where the National Executive- (presumably this means the Presidency) directs Cabinet to implement policies and programmes Cabinet shall prepare and present legislative motions to Parliament necessary to regulate implementation which is as it should be.

Cabinet will approve all international agreements that are not constitutionally prescribed or that do not require Parliamentary ratification.

The responsibility for ensuring adequate funding for projects and programmes rest with the Cabinet Portfolio Ministries they fall under and will as indicated be subject to Parliamentary approval.

Cabinet decisions will be subjected to the principle of collective responsibility.

It is not clear how the allocation of Cabinet Ministries between the Prime Minister and President for supervision arose in this section but it appears there was agreement that the President and the Prime Minister will have agreed sets of Ministers reporting directly to each of them subject to the division of the portfolios they reach between them.


The President

In terms of the agreement the role of the President will be;
 chairs Cabinet;
 exercises executive authority;
 shall exercise his/her powers subject to the provisions of the Constitution;
 can, subject to the Constitution, declare war and make peace;
 can, subject to the Constitution, proclaim and terminate martial law;
 confers honours and precedence, on the advice of Cabinet;
 grants pardons, respites, substitutes less severe punishment and suspends or remits sentences, on the advice of Cabinet;
 chairs the National Security Council;
 formally appoints the Vice Presidents;
 shall, pursuant to this Agreement, appoint the Prime Minister pending the enactment of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment no.19 as agreed by the Parties;
 formally appoints Deputy Prime Ministers, Ministers and Deputy Ministers in accordance with this agreement;
 after consultation with the Vice Presidents, the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Ministers, allocates Ministerial portfolios in accordance with this Agreement;
 accredits, receives and recognizes diplomatic agents and consular officers;
 appoints independent Constitutional Commissions in terms of the Constitution;
 appoints service/executive Commissions in terms of the Constitution and in consultation with the Prime Minister;
 in consultation with the Prime Minister, makes key appointments the President is required to make under and in terms of the Constitution or any Act of Parliament;
 may, acting in consultation with the Prime Minister, dissolve Parliament;
 must be kept fully informed by the Prime Minister on the general conduct of the government business and;
 shall be furnished with such information as he/she may request in respect of any particular matter relating to the government, and may advise the Prime Minister and Cabinet in this regard.

COMMENT

Prior to this agreement the President used to exercise these powers at his sole discretion but now is required to consult with the Minister, Vice Presidents and Deputy Prime Ministers.

It would be irresponsible not to slam the bloated top echelons of power that have been expanded by the addition of accommodative positions of Vice Presidents and Deputy Prime Ministers.

As Head of State most of The President’s powers rightly devolve from the Constitution but his exercise of those powers has now to be checked by the VP’s, PM and DPM’s which positive development on paper, must translate into action.

For the first time in his lengthy stay as Head of State President Mugabe will have to consult someone before making key statutory appointments and may not dissolve parliament unless he has consulted the PM and acting in the spirit of the consensus between him and the PM.

President Mugabe as already failed his first sincerity test in the agreement as was largely expected to happen.

His first job was to formally appoint the Prime Minister pending the enactment of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment no.19 as agreed by the Parties and formally appoints Deputy Prime Ministers, Ministers and Deputy Ministers in accordance with this agreement.

He has done none such requirement and instead chosen to abdicate responsibility for attending to the fixing of the National crisis as agreed preferring rather to attend the UN talk show where he will get nothing other than international derision.

His ally President Mbeki facing serious domestic political unrest has resigned and South Africa did not send a deputy Head of State to the UN meeting as they realized the importance of solving their home crisis ahead of posturing at the UN meeting in America.


The Prime Minister
According to the agreement the PM’s role is defined as;
 chairs the Council of Ministers and is the Deputy Chairperson of Cabinet;
 exercises executive authority;
 shall oversee the formulation of government policies by the Cabinet;
 shall ensure that the policies so formulated are implemented by the entirety of government;
 shall ensure that the Ministers develop appropriate implementation plans to give effect to the policies decided by Cabinet: in this regard, the Ministers will report to the Prime Minister on all issues relating to the implementation of such policies and plans;
 shall ensure that the legislation necessary to enable the government to carry out its functions is in place: in this regard, he/she shall have the responsibility to discharge the functions of the Leader of Government Business in Parliament;
 shall be a member of the National Security Council;
 may be assigned such additional functions as are necessary further to enhance the work of the Inclusive Government;
 shall, to ensure the effective execution of these tasks, be assisted by Deputy Prime Ministers;
 shall report regularly to the President and Parliament.

COMMENT

Either both SADC and AU were either naive to allow the signing of the agreement to pass without overseeing the swearing in of the PM, VP’s and DPM’s immediately after the signing in ceremony or they had misplaced trust in Mugabe adhering to the agreement.

Alternatively they wanted to pave the way for Mugabe’s recognition and legitimisation and leave other Parties to the agreement the onerous task of pushing for their dues which would be violently resisted by Zanu PF and Mugabe.

The MDC Parties were more culpable in this regard as they should have made that demand a precondition to the signing ceremony which they did not and are paying heavily for it.

Be that as it may when eventually President Mugabe will find it convenient to abide by the agreement or when Parliament reconvenes and take the bull by its horns and move a motion for the enactment of Constitutional Amendment No 19 paving the way for Tsvangirai, Mutambara and Khupe to become legitimate PM and DPM’s respectively, the PM will officially assume the responsibilities herein.

He will oversee policy formulation by the Cabinet and ensure policy implementation by the entire government and not the President as was the case.

All ministers will report to him on matters related to policy implementation and therein lays his overall power to make a difference on how the government will operate.

He will, as Leader of Government business in Parliament, ensure that before any policies projects and programmes are implemented that enabling legislation is in place or the programme, projects and policies will not take off.

He will become a member of the National Security Council that will replace JOC and influence decisions in that body which hitherto has been reserved for President Mugabe to direct and influence. If he fails it is not because he is denied access but because his ideas are not nationally palatable for the rest of the powerful body currently credited with propping President Mugabe’s overstay in power.

It is not clear who will assign him the additional functions as are necessary further to enhance the work of the Inclusive Government but clearly it is safe to deduce that since his role will be constitutionally provide for his assignments will devolve from Parliament.

In executing his functions he shall be assisted by Deputy Prime Ministers and shall report regularly to the President and Parliament.

The President will thus be the ultimate reporting point for all government programmes but he will not have his way in vetoing the Prime Minister and his team given the Parliamentary checks and balances in place and the role requirements in his own position.

Council of Ministers

To ensure that the Prime Minister properly discharges his responsibility to oversee the implementation of the work of government, the agreement set up a Council of Ministers consisting of all the Cabinet Ministers, chaired by the Prime Minister, whose functions shall be:-

 to assess the implementation of Cabinet decisions;
 to assist the Prime Minister to attend to matters of coordination in the government;
 to enable the Prime Minister to receive briefings from the Cabinet Committees;
 to make progress reports to Cabinet on matters of implementation of Cabinet decisions;
 to receive and consider reports from the Committee responsible for the periodic review mechanism; and
 to make progress reports to Cabinet on matters related to the periodic review mechanism.

COMMENT

This is the body that clearly wields overall Executive power as it assesses the operations of Cabinet and provides periodic performance feedback through evaluation of Cabinet operations.

Composition of the Executive

It was agreed between the Parties that the National Executive shall be set up as below.

1. There shall be a President, which Office shall continue to be occupied by President Robert Gabriel Mugabe.
2. There shall be two (2) Vice Presidents, who will be nominated by the President and/or Zanu-PF.
3. There shall be a Prime Minister, which Office shall be occupied by Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai.
4. There shall be two (2) Deputy Prime Ministers, one (1) from MDC-T and one (1) from the MDC-M.
5. There shall be thirty-one (31) Ministers, with fifteen (15) nominated by ZANU PF, thirteen (13) by MDC-T and three (3) by MDC-M. Of the 31 Ministers, three (3) one each per Party, may be appointed from outside the members of Parliament. The three (3) Ministers so appointed shall become members of the House of Assembly and shall have the right to sit, speak and debate in Parliament, but shall not be entitled to vote.
6. There shall be fifteen (15) Deputy Ministers, with (eight) 8 nominated by ZANU PF, six (6) by MDC-T and one (1) by MDC-M.
7. Ministers and Deputy Ministers may be relieved of their duties only after consultation among the leaders of all the political parties participating in the Inclusive Government.

COMMENT

This is a massive executive for a country gripped by the worst economic turmoil in the world at present.

The allocation of Cabinet portfolios was based on the ratio of political formation support garnered on 29 March 2008 elections except for the positions of President, Prime Minister, Vice President, and Deputy Prime Ministers where the results of military coercion were upheld.

This is a dangerous precedent for SADC and AU democracy dispute resolution that must be condemned in the strongest terms possible.

Democracy conflict must be resolved politically with resolutions upholding the wishes of the electorate and nothing should replace that.

Senate

The Parties agreed that;

 The President shall, in his discretion, appoint five (5) persons to the existing positions of Presidential senatorial appointments as was provided in Constitutional Amendment No 18.
 There shall be created an additional nine (9) appointed senatorial posts, which shall be filled by persons appointed by the President, of whom, 3 will be nominated by ZANU-PF, 3 by MDC-T and 3 by MDC-M.

COMMENT

There was absolutely no basis upon which it was agreed that Parties create a further 9 Senate seats other than to accommodate electoral losers which is total disrespect of the electorate.

Even then it is not clear why one Party has benefited eight unelected positions in the Senate while others got only three.

Why these unelected positions were not aggregated and apportioned using the March 29 overall electoral results as was the case with Cabinet posts is indicative of the opportunism by the movers of this section of the agreement?

Filling of vacancies

In the event of any vacancy arising in respect of posts referred to in clauses 20.1.6 and 20.1.7 of the agreement, such vacancy shall be filled by a nominee of the Party which held that position prior to the vacancy arising.

COMMENT

Since all these positions are a result of political negotiation how else was it envisaged they would be filled if not by appointment by the Party that cut the deal?

Electoral Vacancies

Parties were 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

They recognised the need to give people of Zimbabwe some breathing space and a healing period;

The Parties thereby 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.

COMMENT

While the motive behind this article is understandable and noble it leaves room for bye elections to be held in respect of positions that fell vacant prior to 11 September 2008 and that must be addressed in further negotiations.

Such glaring inconsistencies could have been avoided had the negotiations been held in a transparent forum where the affected people were allowed to input their views prior to the agreement.

But then this is Zimbabwe where it is acceptable for amendments become necessary before the principal agreement is put in operation.

Implementation mechanisms

To ensure full and proper implementation of the letter and spirit of this Agreement, the Parties constituted a Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee ("JOMIC") to be composed of four senior members from ZANU-PF and four senior members from each of the two MDC Formations. Gender consideration must be taken into account in relation to the composition of JOMIC.

The committee shall be co-chaired by persons from the Parties.

The committee shall have the following functions:-

 to ensure the implementation in letter and spirit of this Agreement;
 to assess the implementation of this Agreement from time to time and consider steps which might need to be taken to ensure the speedy and full implementation of this Agreement in its entirety;
 to receive reports and complaints in respect of any issue related to the implementation, enforcement and execution of this Agreement;
 to serve as catalyst in creating and promoting an atmosphere of mutual trust and understanding between the parties; and
 to promote continuing dialogue between the Parties.

JOMIC shall be the principal body dealing with the issues of compliance and monitoring of this Agreement and to that end, the Parties hereby undertake to channel all complaints, grievances, concerns and issues relating to compliance with this Agreement through JOMIC and to refrain from any conduct which might undermine the spirit of co-operation necessary for the fulfillment of this Agreement.

The new Government shall ensure that steps are taken to make the security forces conversant with the Constitution of Zimbabwe and other laws of Zimbabwe including laws relating to public order and security.

The implementation of this agreement shall be guaranteed and underwritten by the Facilitator, SADC and the AU.

The Parties and the new Government shall seek the support and assistance of SADC and the AU in mobilizing the international community to support the new Government's economic recovery plans and programmes together with the lifting of sanctions taken against Zimbabwe and some of its leaders.

The Parties agree that they shall cause Parliament to amend any legislation to the extent necessary to bring this agreement into full force.

COMMENT

Since the Parties have already agreed that they will support legislation in Parliament to allow the agreement to have legal force under Zimbabwean laws, why does the Speaker not bring forward the reconvening date of Parliament to attend to this urgent business given that none of the current Executives are legitimate nor have the interest to hasten their departure from office.

Some of these negotiated clauses need to be pushed through by those that believe in their value for the nation.

Hesitancy to do so can be misconstrued to mean the new order is far from ready to govern.

It was naive for the Parties to leave implementation in the hands of the facilitator without provision as to what happens in the event he became incapacitated to carry out the responsibility for whatever reason. As it stands the agreement is in trouble over the resignation of the facilitator.
Periodic review mechanism

Having regard to the Objectives and Priorities of the New Government as set out in this Agreement, the Parties agreed that:
 they shall constitute a committee composed of 2 representatives each to review on an annual basis progress on the implementation and achievement of the priorities and objectives set out in this Agreement, namely: Economic (restoration of economic stability and growth, sanctions, land question) Political (new constitution, promotion of equality, national healing and cohesion and unity, external interference, free political activity, rule of law, state organs and institutions, legislative agenda and priorities) Security (security of persons and prevention of violence) and Communication (media and external radio stations); and
 the committee shall make recommendations to the Parties and the new government on any matters relating to this Agreement, more particularly on measures and programmes that may be necessary to take and make to realise full implementation of this Agreement.
 this Agreement and the relationship agreed to hereunder will be reviewed at the conclusion of the constitution-making process.
 The Parties will continually review the effectiveness and any other matter relating to the functioning of the Inclusive Government established by the Constitution in consultation with the Guarantors.

COMMENT

When and how will this review committee be established if it was not agreed during negotiations. As it is there is more to review and correct than is going right with this agreement.

Interim Constitutional amendments

The Parties agreed:-

 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;
 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).

COMMENT

Why were the relevant chapters and sections of the secretive Kariba Draft Constitution not reproduced in this agreement for analysis by all interested citizens as to their relevance and suitability for inclusion in Constitutional Amendment No 19?

This arrogant way of governing borrowed from Mr Mbeki will in future become entrenched and boomerang to haunt its disciples out of office as has happened to the chief proponent of the quiet diplomacy.

Commencement

This Agreement shall enter into force upon its signature by the Parties.

COMMENT

Really? If that is the case why are the positions it created still dysfunctional? The agreement is not operational and if the final clause is any standard to measure it on it is as good as nonexistent.

The Parties must assert themselves in terms of the final clause and put the agreement on the spot and see how the underwriters will respond to the vicious response it will elicit from the forces that refused to accept the electoral outcome of 29 March 2008.