Gravitas
Volume 1. Issue 6: Independence Edition
Reflections
on the National Question: Land, Transformation and Progress? Dr Toendepi
Shonhe*
As Zimbabwe celebrates 37 years
of independence and as the country marks 16 years after the land reform, is it
time to reflect on power, transformation and progress? The nexus of power,
transformation and progress cannot be effective without bringing the national
question into the debate in Zimbabwe. In their 2011 book, Reclaiming the Nation the Return of the National Question in Africa,
Asia and Latin America, Moyo and Yeros asserted that fractured states (such
as Zimbabwe), perhaps not failed, have the inseparable twin burden of
struggling to obtain political independence and economic liberation despite
having won freedom from the Empires as integral dimensions of the national
question. The land question - the plenary being the national question - having
been the root cause of the liberation war, remains central to the economic and
social disarticulation manifesting today. A structural analysis of Zimbabwe’s
circumstances 37 years after independence is opportune, beyond the liberties
and non-substantive democracy outcries.
Zimbabwe inherited a
disarticulated white settler economy in 1980, producing and exporting
raw-material from mining and agriculture. This was perpetuated under the
Lancaster House constitution, whose badly negotiated provisions promoted the
retention of the status quo. Zimbabwe’s political economy was characterized by
what Guy Mhone called the ‘enclave economy’ meaning a small modern sector
imposed on a largely non-capitalist social structure. This debate has been
extended by Dr G Kanyenze and researchers at LEDRIZ where they have argued that
Zimbabwe must go ‘beyond the enclave’. Others such as de Janvry have
characterised this as functional dualism; where a dialectical relationship
between the traditional and modern economy exist congenially and often within
the same spaces. Under a functional dualistic economy the peasant is exploited
by the capital from the modern world and is left poorer.
Fig.
1.0 Zimbabwe’s Economy: Now Dominated by Vendors and Informality
The subsequent land reform of
2000 should be seen as an inevitable effort to correct the past injustices of
colonialism and a redistributive effort towards democratising land ownership by
the majority. Inevitably, the 2013 Constitution acknowledges the
irreversibility of the 2000 land reform process. The questions of methodology
and effectiveness of outcome are legitimate and so is the challenge on the
chaotic nature of the process. The purpose of this article is to situate the
land and agrarian reform in the power and transformation matrix as we mark 37
years of political independence. The failure by the ruling Zanu PF in the
second decade (following the lapse of the Lancaster House restrictions) to deal
with mass demand for land and wealth redistribution led to mass discontent,
leading to an outward search for alternative
leadership as the 1997-2000 developments confirmed. However, the failure to
comprehend the broad ideological debate about the land question gave the ruling
elite an advantage over the newly formed opposition from 2000.
Mass
Discontent: the rise and ‘decline’ of the MDC?
Rather than aligning with the
war veterans who pushed for land repossession, the MDC was co-opted into a ‘neo-liberal’
agenda focusing mainly on democracy and liberties, in spite of their initial
more radical position on land repossession than ZANU PF and pronouncements in
the 2000 MDC Manifesto. One war veteran involved in the formation of the MDC
and in development of initial policies confirmed that some proponents of
radical redistributive politics were left behind in the Zimbabwe Congress of
Trade Unions (ZCTU) leading to hijacking of policy direction. Evidently,
contradiction between capital and workers led to fragmentations and eventual
loss of political muscle, prospects of rejuvenation are remote and perhaps a figment
of imagination without re-thinking how social justice issues are married to
political liberties. The axing of Munyaradzi Gwisai after making radical
contributions on land in parliament sent contradictory signals to the landless
movement in Zimbabwe. The slippery position of the MDC was captured by Bond and
Manyanya who stated the ideological contradictions of the movement perhaps
constituted a ‘false start’. The resettled farmers, part of the 4.5 million
registered voters as recently noted Dr Philani Zamchiya, have not received a
clear and unambiguous message from the opposition contingent regarding their
newly acquired asset (land) and seem to find comfort in retaining the ruling
party as ‘security of tenure’.
New
Class Formations and Power Matrices?
Consequently, in my recent study
in Hwedza district, I observed that many plot owners are ‘secure’ and have not
received any threat of evictions in the last 15 years. Instead, the farmers
worry about funding and markets for their produce. Many are moving above the
poverty datum line. All these variables point to a changing dynamic where
solutions are fast escaping the ‘modernity’ paradigm that had dominated
political and economic discourses in the 1990s and early 2000 and have shifted
mainly to non-urban based political formations
which have been captured by Zanu PF.
1.2
Class Formations : Will the New Farmers Accumulate Beyond Subsistence ?
More penetrating analysis of the
collap4se of the modern economy have been observed by Brian Raftopoulos who has
argued that the post-2013 terrain portray a ‘reconfigured political economy’
especially marked by the demise of working class power as a result of de-industrialisation.
In some interesting retreats the government recently removed a requirement that
farmers without ‘tax certificates’ must surrender 10% to ZIMRA; the party-state
made a hasty retreat and quickly rescinded the notice. This is the second time
that the government has made a hasty retreat; when farmers protested wanting to
have access to their cash, the government gave notice that the farmers can
access up to US$1000 in the bank. This amount is almost 400% of what the
ordinary citizen can access in cash if lucky. That the government has been
making haste decisions in favour of the ‘new farmers’ is evidence of a shift in
political and social power which must not escape our notice. In the 1990s when
Zimbabwe still had a significant industrial base it was the ZCTU which
confronted the party-state relying on its social and political power as a working class organization. Effectively meaning
the methods and tactics of organizing which accompanied the rise of MDC
anchored in working class power have been superseded by a more fluid political
economy dominated by these new social classes found in the re-configured
economy (New Farmers, Cross-Border Traders, Amakorokoza, Vendors among many
others).
Transition
Terrain Now Shifted Back to ZANU PF?
Sadly, rather than rejuvenating
opposition politics, the new order identifies a possible future within
succession politics. Within this framework, some of the opposition sympathisers
are bidding for a preferred succession outcome within Zanu PF. We are in a new
era where paradoxically, hope has gone back to failing Zanu PF, catastrophic as
it may. The opposition eluded the national question: the land question and
attendant unequal economic relations and lost the plot. The contours of
transition and power reconfiguration now rests in Zanu PF, where ED Mnangagwa
has been whitewashed of his past and repackaged as a reformist in contrast to
G40’s dynastic ambitions. What the long-term future holds regarding
opportunities for power configuration is not easily apparent given the fluidity
of ZANU PF’s succession matrix, and possibly a ‘wild card’ from the the
opposition camp, but the short-term seems clearly painted. Yet ED lacks clarity
on policy options. On one hand, he is inclined on pushing a failed neo-liberal
agenda that places business at the centre of development, on another hand he is
pushing for a developmental autocratic state under a ‘command economy’ with
command agriculture as the flagship. Will this bring about economic progress,
power reconfiguration and transformation in Zimbabwe? This is the material
question connected to the National question, identified by Moyo and Yeros in
2011.
But, to an extent, does an ED
leadership signify power reconfigurations? In other words, will command
agriculture bring about food sovereignty, supply inputs to industry and create
jobs, generate exports? Will command agriculture generate wealth and will
farmers accumulate adequately to propel upward mobility and economic growth?
Will command infrastructure development be sustainable ? Will these new
policies adequately drive transformation in Zimbabwe? Obviously, the scope of
this paper does not permit for a comprehensive response to all these questions,
suffice to say, at the least, national politics is being redefined from within
Zanu PF and with the power matrix influenced by the realities of the
reconfigured political economy.
Fig
1.4 Warring Over Command Agriculture: Truce ?
To the extent that the
opposition movement are not engaged in these debates, choosing to concentrate
on electoral reforms instead and yet Jonathan Moyo has already spilled the
thinking in ZANU PF that they cannot reform themselves out of power. This means
as they over concentrate on civil and political liberties concerns at the
expense of broader structural political economy questions, they will misson
providing solutions to the daily struggles of the people or making them their
priority. Instead, opportunities to take state power becomes the primary
concern of the opposition. What will happen is that little will be achieved by
way of reforms and sympathy may continue to shift back to the failed and
fractured Zanu PF, leading to another augh moment, come 2018. Maybe, Zimbabwe’s
opposition may take cue from Dr Magure’s work, “Land, indigenisation and
empowerment narratives that made a difference in the 2013 Elections” or civil
society can learn from Chirimambowa and Chimedza’s reflection on its
historically contested role in the 2013 elections. Both articles point to the
limited nature of over-investing in the liberal rights discourse at the expense
of addressing the structural political economy questions around land and
economy.
I have avoided delving into the
coalition debate and its attendant pros and cons deliberately because the
hegemonic historical bloc signified by the dominance of the ZANU PF octopus
like machinery puts paid alternative effort in the absence of a comprehensive
counter-hegemonic formations with superior governmental infrastructural
presence and hold to the electoral system. A ‘grand’ coalition is a drop in the
ocean. In any case, this article is about power and transformation’s connection
with the land question, the national question being the plenary, within a fluid
political economy. The role of organic intellectuals is to paint pictures for
actors to venerate!
I rest my case.
Dr Toendeipi
Shonhe, is a Research Associate of the Sam
Moyo Agrarian Institute and has a
PhD from the University of KwaZulu Natal.
War
Veterans: Liberation & Zimbabwe’s Post-Independence Transformation
Tamuka
C. Chirimambowa and Tinashe L. Chimedza*
War
Veterans: Coming from The Cold ?
Recently, the war veterans
gathered again and issued some very high sounding statements which are worth
analyzing to understand what this means for Zimbabwe’s quick sand political
terrain. At the meeting the War Vets
declared that they were opposed to a ‘dynasty’ meaning that they will oppose
any attempt to make Grace Mugabe the next president of Zimbabwe. Amongst many
other things the War Vets also put it clearly that they ‘are returning to the
people’ and they want Zimbabwe to be governed as a democracy because, they
stated, this is what ‘we fought for’. The War Vets Association had to get a
High Court Order to have their meeting after police, as usual and routine, had
stated that the meeting was ‘unsanctioned’ and would not be allowed to go to
ahead. The contradiction was not lost
that the War Vets had to get an order from the the same bench where judges
cowered, shivered and locked the doors in their chambers when Hitler Hunzvi was
bent on some disciplining of his own. These events raise fundamental questions
of the democratisation of the polity and have been one of the key areas of
contestation in independent Zimbabwe. So
the paradox here is not lost since the War Vets had to resort to the same
courts that civil society and Zimbabwe’s fragmented opposition have been saying
must be independent.
The question which arises is: if
the war veterans are coming in and ‘coming in from the cold’ what is the
political impact of all these contestations especially considering that
Zimbabwe has entered a period of dangerous fluidity. In that flux, the
contestations even within the ruling elites, are becoming sharpened and
everyday these conflicts boil over as evidenced by the demonstrations against
Sandi Moyo and even Saviour Kasukuwere.
We gather, however, that these things only happen at the instigation of
the ‘palace’ because, as we know, otherwise the black-boots would have been
swooping and stomping on some necks. The fissures are threatening to swallow
the whole court and the jesters and we pray that the junior officers keep their
heads cool and no ‘gunpowder and bayonets’ are used to settle the matter. Yet
we are also aware that these moments of flux when party-state power is at stake
adventurists are abound and those with Bonaparte's inclinations of marching to the palace with some tanks and
machine guns are watching with salivating glands.
Manifestos:
the ghost of Mgagao and Zimbabwe’s
Future
The war vets fired the first salvo in which they openly
challenged the palace and criticized what they called ‘the systematic
entrenchment of dictatorial tendencies, personified by the President and his
cohorts’ and further that this has resulted in a collapsed economy, rampant
corruption and suffering of people’. Considering that the last such robust
statement last came in the mid-1970s when the guerillas, gathered at Mgagao, and
supported the rise of Robert Mugabe , the declaration was quickly labelled a
Mgagao Number 2. While the party-state
apparatus went ballistic and accused the War Vets of ‘treason’ civil society
and the opposition lauded the statement as a welcome breadth of fresh air from
a social bloc which has always been seen as too much imbricated in the
party-state apparatus of rule. The party-state apparatus was roused into action
and the War Vets were denounced as ‘rogue’, ‘counter-revolutionaries’ and attempts were made to quickly gather them at
the Harare Sports centre and the dear leader being foisted on the agenda. That
was a phyrric victory because attempts to topple Chris Mutsvangwa, the
Chair and his Executive proved an
impossible feat and the oligarchy was checkmated.
1.5
Dzinashe Machingura: formed the Zimbabwe
Liberators Platform
On some level the declarations
by the War Vets are welcome because they seem to broaden the array of social
forces that want a democratic post-colonial polity. However, we must engage this with ‘one eye
open’ because the War Vets must also be willing to understand that the same
democratic statutes they support must protect the citizens from a party-state
electoral process which is railroaded with a pre-determined outcome. The
essence of democracy is such that the contestation for political office must be
open and and any citizen must feel free
to participate without the risk of what Professor Masipula Sithole called the
‘margin of terror’.
Liberating
the War Vets from the Clutches of the Party-State
In the 1990s a group of war vets assembled under
the Zimbabwe Liberators Platform (ZLP), led by the legendary ZIPA Commander, Dzinashe
Machingura, and his appeal was that
Zimbabwe’s War Vets must act above political parties. For that attempt he
provoked the state propaganda, was bitterly opposed and when he died many of
his former comrades stayed away from his funeral because they feared the
reprisal that would follow. Under the present circumstances, it seems the
current War Vets Executive is actively mobilizing the War Vets but they are
driving the same into a cul de sac of supporting a Mnangagwa Presidency. Effectively
they are being sucked into a factional battle within the party-state apparatus.
Unless the War Vets stand outside and above the factional battle-lines it seems
the trust from citizens will remain remote.
Fig 1.6 War
Vets: How far will they ‘democratize’ ?
National liberation was also a struggle for
democratization and those that lead that process cannot re-mobilize the people
only to hand them over to a new Stalin and use that new support to bargain for
their own seat at the table rather than for a genuinely people oriented
developmental project. Yesterday’s Stalin was delivered to Zimbabwe via a
personality cult that was built on the legitimacy of the liberation project and
we as Zimbabweans must reject that another Stalin be delivered to us on the
basis of a narrow conception of the liberation narrative. That we must refuse
and the War Vets have to get this loud and very clear.
Post-Colonial
Movements: Liberation as a Continuum
It is not lost that the efforts of the War Veterans
to revile personality cult and dynastic politics is not different to the
struggles that opposition political formations and civil society have been
fighting against ever since independence. It is our contention that efforts by Zimbabwe’s
civil society in grappling with the question of how to build broader platforms
of participation with enough social and political power to defend the ordinary
citizen from state excesses and ideally entrench a more democratic polity is a
pursuit of the ideals of the liberation struggle. Therefore, whether it is #ThisFlag, #Tajamuka, Lawyers at Abameli,
Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions, Combined
Harare Residents Association, Zimbabwe Liberator’s Platform, Bulawayo Agenda,
the protests by Vendors organisations, #OccupyAfricaUnitySquare
and of late the War Veterans, it is the puruit of the unfinished business of
independence that informs their demands.
The current political shifts and turns in our
polity point to two important questions that have to be interrogated and
comprehended; firstly, how does the contemporary civil society frame its
political contestation without breaking with
history? That is to say how does the present generation ‘fulfil its mission’
without burying history and with it the trajectory of the promises of
liberation and decolonisation? Secondly what can civil society learn from the
historical development both of the liberation movement as it mobilised against
colonialism and settlerism and how did the post-colonial civil society frame
its political trajectory with the realities of an independent Zimbabwe in which
the promise of liberation was collapsing. However, this unity should see beyond
Mugabe the person and chart a transformative agenda that seeks to complete the
unfinished liberation struggle of the independence. Brian Kagoro’s wisdom at a
Crisis in Zimbabwe national convergence meeting pointly offers a way out as he
characterised the post-liberation generation struggles as equally heroic to the
War Veterans. For Kagoro, the women’s fight for the Legal Age of Majority Act
and the demands by labour, students and churches to democratise the state and
economy were a continuation of the liberation project. In short, we call for
any discussions on a post-Mugabe order to centre around the national question
in typical Fanon style where the unfinished business of independence is taken
to its logical conclusion. This means creating a counter-hegemonic narrative
that practically addresses the questions of Land, Indigenisation, Citizenship
and Governance, which then becomes a basis of building a counter-power of
citizenship activism.
The adopted
2013 constitution offers a way out of the contentious question of land,
indigenisation, citizenship, nature of the state and governance. It is our view
that a return to the constitution may assist in establishing a framework of
engagement that recognises history and at the same does not get stuck in it but
provides solutions to the present and tomorrow.
*Tamuka C.
Chirimambowa and Tinashe L. Chimedza are the Co-Editors of Gravitas. Tamuka is
a PhD fellow at the University of Johannesburg and Tinashe Chimedza studied Social
Inquiry.
Women and Politics in Zimbabwe: Beyond the New Constitution
Paidamwoyo
Mukumbiri*
37 years of independence: counting the gains and loses
As Zimbabwe is
celebrating its 37 years of independence, it is good to reflect on how
independence has changed the status of women.
The legal framework has indeed improved the legal position of women :
starting with the Legal Age of Majority Act which recognised women as majors
and therefore giving them an opportunity
to contract without the assistance of a guardian. The 2013 constitution
provides for equality between men and women in social, political and economic opportunities.
Harmful cultural practices such as child marriages and pledging of girls that
results in discrimination and oppression of women have been outlawed by the
Domestic Violence Act. Women are now
independent when it comes to selection of spouses without entering into forced
marriages. They are also eligible for appointment as legal guardians to their
minor children. While the developments
in law might appear to paint a bright picture, the social and political lives
of women are still stagnant. In the political circles women are still considered
as the ‘other’ and men as the natural ‘leaders’. Independence for women has not
improved their economic and political position. Discrimination in still rampant
in the world of politics and women have not been able to be recognised,
especially their full capacity as political leaders. As we reflect on the gains
of independence, we should not forget that there is a still a glass ceiling as
statistics for women. The economic and political spaces are being controlled by
men at the exclusion of women.
The Morning After the Feast
As we are now in
the morning after the feast of the 8th
of March 2017 where the International Women’s Day theme ‘be bold
for change’ was meant to inspire women we still realise patriarchy is still
deeply enterenched in Zimbabwean society. The lived experiences of women in
Zimbabwe narrates a story where the progressive realisation of gender equality
is still pitted against some depressing
statistics: 1 in 3 women between the
ages of 15-19 is reported to have been subjected to sexual violence; women are
dying at child birth; of the 57 companies listed on the ZSE few are headed by women; of a cabinet of
31 ministers only 4 are women. These catastrophic statistics persist despite
Zimbabwe having one of the most liberal constitution which has specific
protections of women’s rights. A report by the Research and Advocacy Unit (RAU,
2011) recorded horrifying stories of women being raped, abused and sexually
violated for holding differing political views, a very disturbing trend. These
are the stark realities that one has to contend with when the gender debate is
put on a continuum after the pleasantries, food and wine of the International
Women’s Day and soon to be 18th of April 2017 Independence
Celebrations.
Fig 1.7 Women in politics: Are they just Pawns ?
The reforming of
the Constitution and legal framework alone is no panacea to resolving the
gender inequalities in the Zimbabwean society but are part of the many
progressive steps to be taken until women achieve true liberation. I therefore, argue that the solution of
making these laws and policies effective lies in women becoming more engaged
citizens especially in the political and economic arena. It is from the
political arena that the exclusion of women, the abuse of their dignity and
discrimination radiates to the rest of the society including in economics. Access to political power is still influenced
by social, cultural, economic and even religious factors which negatively
stigmatize politically active women and this reduces effective participation by
women. Zimbabwe’s electoral politics and the contestation for state power has
been often very violent, dominated by men and in certain cases women have been
targets of electoral violence. In
essence the environment of politics has been a dog eat dog, rendering most
women vulnerable and victims of the ‘macho’ logic of patriarchy, and what this
entails is the need for women to be not only bold but also be united and tap in
their demographic numerical advantage standing at 53% in relation to men.
Maybe, some ideas of sistahood (sisterhood)
calling for women to women solidarity advanced by Katswe may be the magic
bullet that women need as they hold the numbers game.
Not yet Uhuru: So Near But So Far!
When women have
successfully overcome the burden at parliamentary election and get elected as
members of Parliament, they again face exclusion from appointment in key
decision making positions such as cabinet ministers. Currently, women constitute 11% of cabinet ministers with only
4 women in cabinet. History has shown that no woman has been appointed to head
ministry of Finance, Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Home Affairs. The
general trend has been to allocate ministries such as Gender and Community
Development and the Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprises to women. In
Zimbabwe’s history, there has never been any known appointed woman Minister of
Defence, Finance, Foreign Affairs, Home Affairs and Mining which are considered
to be key or hard power segments of government. At the Reserve Bank, the best
highest position women have occupied is Deputy Governor despite holding
superior qualifications than their male bosses.
As a matter of fact, recently retired and appointed
Deputy Reserve Bank Governors, Charity Dhliwayo and Jesimen Tarisai Chipika,
respectively hold superior and earned PhD qualifications in relevant fields.
The Big Question begs: under what circumstances will Zimbabwe have a Female
Reserve Bank Governor. On the other hand, in the cabinet the following few
women head these ministries: Honorable Nyasha Chikwinya who is the Minister of Women Affairs, Gender and
Community Development; Oppah
Muchinguri
who is the Minister for Environment,
Water and Climate change; Honorable Sithembiso Nyoni heads
the Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprises Cooperative Development and
Priscilla Mupfumira is the Minister of Labour, Public Services and Social services. The lack of
women in powerful state positions is a general reflection of how Zimbabwe’s
political terrain is skewed in favour of male leaders and this might be a
remnant of feudal thinking when the ancient kingdoms of Africa were dominated
by men rather than women.
When Greenwood Can Burn, Whither Drywood?
The challenge of
gender inequality pervades across political divide and is not only a problem in
government and the ruling party. This attests to the thesis that gender
disparities are a society-centric problem rather than a single entity of
society. The issue of aligning oneself to the powerful faction becomes a
necessity. All the top leadership of ZANU PF is male. The president and the two
vice presidents are men. This is a similar position at Movement for Democratic
Change where a constitutional amendment had to be enacted retrospectively to
dwarf Madam Thokozani Khupe with an extra two male vice, even though the party
president is already a male. However, without even going for a single election
already, ZIMPF ruptured as there was discontent, strife and lack of respect for
Dr Joice Mujuru’s leadership. Some of the ZIMPF male counterparts, claimed
Joice Mujuru belonged to the kitchen and bedroom, thus has no place in
leadership because she is a woman, a thinking that cannot be permissible in a
modern world.
All this is happening against a backdrop of a very
progressive Constitution that provides for gender equality as one of the
national objectives and founding values of Zimbabwe. Section
56(2) provides that women and men have the right to equal treatment, including
the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social
spheres. Section 80 further protects women’s participation in politics. It
provides that ‘every woman has full
and equal dignity of the person with men and this includes equal opportunities
in political, economic and social activities.’ However, as presented in
this article, it is clear that even in the so-called expected enlightened
segments of society, women are still to smash the glass ceilings prompting
observe that: if Greenwood can burn
with ease, whither the Drywood.
Power: What Power Beyond the Husbands?
Dr Joice Mujuru
was married to the late General Mujuru who was well respected within ZANU PF
and the military. Dr Amai Grace Mugabe is also proving to be a force to reckon
in Zimbabwe’s political landscape. Her
rallies command a lot of people including the most powerful members of the
ruling party. She leaves no stone
unturned and there is no sacred cow that cannot be touched in her
speeches. What needs to be interrogated
is the question on whether these two women would have achieved so much without
being related to powerful men.
Fig 1.8 Joice Mujuru: Used and Discarded ?
If Dr Amai
Mugabe was just a secretary of ZANU PF women’s league without being the
President’s wife would she have managed
to command power within ZANU PF enormously as she is doing or it would
have been the reported case of dragging her in the tar (kuzvuzvurudzwa mutara).
Dr Joice Mujuru’s case after the death of
General Solomon Mujuru clearly gives credence to the thesis that without
alliance to male relationships, women struggle to make it in politics.
Miles Tendi in
his 2016 work State Intelligence and the Politics of Zimbabwe’s Presidential
Succession observes how gendered dimensions of surveillance reinforced
patriarchal notions of politics as revealed in the first lady’s revelation that
Joice was busy plotting the downfall of Mugabe semi-naked in a miniskirt, a
generally reviled dressing in patriarchal Zimbabwe. Mujuru’s leadership of the
Zimbabwe Peoples’ First party was short lived and she had to form the National
People’s Party.The failure to address power imbalances certainly detracts the
progressive nature of the Constitution. It should be borne in mind that the law
does not operate in isolation.
Religious, social and economic factors negatively impact the
implementation of the law. In some
cases, these factors collude and inhibit women’s participation from politics
and decision making. What is also clear
is that patriarchy as an institution is strongly embedded in the political
structures of Zimbabwe. Thus, integration of women in political structures is
rather viewed as a necessary evil simply to comply with various regional and
international human rights instruments that the country is part of. Examples of these human instruments include
the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women
(CEDAW) and the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on
the Rights of Women in Africa. These human rights instruments mandate states to
promote and protect women’s participation in politics and decision making.
While these international protocols and the laws are progressive, women
Beyond ‘Canon Fodder’: Women’s Leaders in Political
Parties and State Institutions
In order to
realise the actual implementation of the Constitution, the issue of power,
regardless of its forms need to be confronted head on, as appointment of women
to key positions in government should not be a privilege but a right which
should be enforced. Women should demand for it and lobby the President to
consider qualified women for such appointments.
Women should also support fellow women and stop being patriarchal
vanguards. Women’s participation need to
move away from dancing kongonya and
ululating for men to setting the agenda. They should bring to the table key
issues that improve the general welfare of women first and everyone. The struggle for gender equality needs to
move from the logic of privilege to rights as women also equally fought in the
liberation war for independence. Names such as the Late Freedom Nyamubaya,
Joice Mujuru, Margaret Dongo, Fay Chung and the legendary Mbuya Nehanda, always
remind us of the heroic contribution of women in the fight against colonialism
and domination. Participation of women should be both quantitative and
qualitative. The qualitative participation includes involvement in key decision
making structures and not generally concerned about numbers. Qualitative
participation involves the power to make key decisions without rubber stamping
notions that you do not subscribe to. But at the end of the day, women need
to make the new constitution and
independence a lived reality by active citizenship.
*Paidamwoyo
Mukumbiri is a Lawyer & Lectures at Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University.
