Which people, what people’s views?

The debate over the new constitution – particularly its contents – has become quite annoying to the extent that political parties are ostensibly and deliberately hiding behind the buffer of the phrase “people’s views” as they desperately try to induce into the nation a guarantee that what they came up with in form of a draft document is a copy of what was put together during the outreach process, even though they are aware that the people themselves are going to disappoint them sooner than later.

I say this ignited by the recent political events orchestrated by Zanu-PF which literally cleaved the Constitution and Parliamentary Select Committee (COPAC) draft document by making raft changes, despite the fact that it was well represented by its Politburo members Munyaradzi Paul Mangwana, Patrick Chinamasa and Nicholas Goche during the drafting phase of the text in question.

What makes it much more interesting – unfortunately this is not a light matter as is the case with a Hollywood movie – is the fact that even Zanu-PF which has already opened amendments to the document before it has been to the people who stand out to be important and final arbitrators over the matter, is claiming to be conducting a panel beating exercise to align the draft in line with the views of the people.

Well, I made this important fact before, evenly, but it is always good to say it again for purposes of emphasis, in as much as thunder might try to impress, it is lighting that does the job. Period!

Observably, parties have gone on an overdrive as they try to make us believe that so much percent of people “unequivocally” said they wanted a unitary state with some form of decentralised powers or to say over so much provinces clearly stated that they wanted devolution adding that all this is contained in the national report of the outreach process.

Everything is now about the people said this during the outreach programme and in the guise that they are trying to protect these views and above all the wishes of the people.

Which people are these parties referring to and what views are they talking about? Are they talking about the same people who were consulted during the outreach process or it’s now a case of different set of people existing in their imaginations?

If political parties and some politicians – dressed as analysts only the Devil knows why – are really telling the truth, why can’t they release the national report and let it speak for the people as their genuine spokesperson? What are they afraid of, is it a diplomatic confirmation of saying we threw away your views and perhaps retained the Kariba draft or what?

Only time will tell and the lighting strikes way after the harmless noise of the thunder!

What is quite certain and about to happen is that though political parties, particularly Zanu-PF through its politburo have had their time and made changes to the draft document for whatever reasons, the people will conclude everything by making a precision finish.

It is somehow disturbing to note that this process which was given the tag “people driven constitution” from the onset has become a programme by and for three parties that are in the inclusive government.

Although, it is true that making of a new constitution is a political process by definition, it is not right or moral for the three political parties to start advancing their positions ahead of anything especially everything that was gathered during the outreach process.

In other words, what is now chancing surrounding the new constitution could mean that the millions and millions of dollars that were used during the outreach process went down the drain? In a similar gush, ZAPU secretary for legal affairs Stephen Nkiwane accuse politicians of undermining the authority of the people.

He said: “I wish to call these parties, the exclusive government. They have shown us that they are more autocratic than Zanu. And for them to start negotiating the constitution is as good as saying the people are not important and what they said during the outreach process was useless.

“But, but, the people of Zimbabwe are not zombies and when their time comes, this exclusive government will be exposed,” said Nkiwane.

Now that Zanu-PF through its “independent analysts” is claiming that the COPAC draft is miles away from the views of the people, it is time Zimbabweans from all corners with the aid of progressive forces speak with one voice and demand accountability over this process by requesting publishing of the national report.

Maybe this stalemate might be defused.

Apparently, Zanu-PF COPAC co-chairperson Paul Mangwana has resorted to shedding crocodile tears by making reports that the committee deviated from the people’s views.

“My conscience was telling me that we should not negotiate on the people’s views, but the MDCs would argue that this is a modern world, let’s use the best practice,” said Cde Mangwana.

“If the people of Zimbabwe chose that they wanted mono-citizenship, we should respect that but I participated in the illegal thing of negotiating the Constitution thereby compromising what the people said.”

Interestingly, he is saying all this after Zanu-PF the party he represented as the co-chair in COPAC has amended the document.

Should he be taken serious? What motives is Mangwana pushing is such a critical moment when most people are gearing for the referendum?

Well, propaganda is good and it is common knowledge that political parties thrive on it, but Mangwana should be careful about what he says for there is no amount of confession which can sanitise his party’s amendments to the draft.

It is also important to point that what Zanu-PF has done through its politburo is to plunge the country into a crisis based on the fact that everything pertaining to the remaining phases of process of brewing a new constitution have come to halt after it tabled outrageous amendments in the sheer pretext of safeguarding the people’s views.

MDC President Welshman Ncube recently said Zimbabwe is suffering from the politics of diversionary at the expense of the real policies.

What the people want is a document hinged on their views only written in constitutional language and jargon not what political parties think is good and suitable for the people.

So sad, but it cannot continue happening this way!!