Implications of opposition snub of by-elections

MDC, like MDC-T has said they will not take part in by-elections proclaimed by the president of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe for June 10 2015. They are calling for electoral reforms before they can take part in any election.

Some of the reforms demanded by the opposition are:

·         Production of a new voters’ roll

·         Recruitment of new impartial staff at the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission

·         The opening of the public media to opposition political parties.

Is the Zimbabwean opposition likely to get these reforms in place before the 2018 elections? That’s very unlikely. So a crucial question has to be asked: Does the protest by the opposition serve any purpose?

We all protest on a daily basis for a variety of reasons. We are reasonable in our protest: We consider what is at stake. We also consider what we will do if the person/institution we are protesting against calls our bluff and refuses to budge. An apt example: When feeling naughty and not in hurry one can decide to protest against traffic police by parking by the side of the road, switching off engine and taking out a novel to read until the issue of an illegal spot fine is resolved. But in this kind of protest, not much is at stake: You are not rushing to an important meeting and if the police officers call your bluff, you can always laugh about it and give them a negotiated bribe.

The by-election boycott by the opposition does not make sense because too much is at stake and the institution they are protesting against will obviously call their bluff; the by-elections will happen without reforms, without the opposition and a lot would have been lost:

The parliamentary seats likely to be lost to ZANU-PF are:

1.      Harare East  

2.      Kambuzuma

3.      Kuwadzana

4.      Glen View South

5.      Luveve

6.      Dzivarasekwa

7.      Pelandaba-Mpopoma

8.      Highfield West

9.      Pumula

10.  Lobengula

11.  Mbizo

12.  Makokoba

13.  Dangamvura-Chikanga

14.  Tsholotsho North

With the exception of Tsholotsho North, this is crucial urban territory that traditionally belongs to the opposition and they have put it on the line because of a meaningless protest: I say the protest is meaningless because it will achieve nothing whilst relinquishing political ground that will never be regained. So I need educating here: Why is the opposition giving up these seats in protest over electoral reforms that will not happen? And the absence of these reforms will not prevent them from winning these particular seats?

ZANU-PF might be clueless when it comes to fixing the economy, but they know how to consolidate power: Once they have won these crucial urban seats, they will make resources available to their MPs and the electorate will consider giving ZANU-PF benefit of the doubt come 2018. We haven’t really seen or felt the presence of our urban MPs, have we? We will see the ZANU-PF MPs in these urban constituencies the opposition is willing to throw away.

Doesn’t common sense dictate that if protest action is unlikely to yield any results, the best move would be to abandon that form of protest action? Did grown men have meetings that resulted agreements that can be best be described as nonsense?

The Zimbabwean opposition has decided to betray the masses and they will be recorded in history as a bunch of losers who succeed in denying Zimbabweans an opportunity of achieving democracy.