European partnership for democracy, EPD

Zimbabwe: Next Steps in the Consitutional Reform Process

The visit last weekend of European Commissioner Karel de Gucht (Development and Humanitarian Aid) with the Swedish and Spanish Ministers for International Cooperation might not have changed Europe's attitude towards Zimbabwe's Inclusive Government, but it did show Europe's commitment to, and solidarity with, the transition that is ongoing in the country. During the EPD delegation's stay in Harare in early September, President Zuma of South Africa met with the country's leaders, and the regional body SADC decided to host a special Zimbabwe summit in Maputo. But does all this international attention benefit the internal Zimbabwean dynamics of the ongoing transition?

The EPD delegation in Harare met with a number of key players in the Constitutional reform process, one of the pillars in the Global Political Agreement (GPA) between ZANU-PF, MDC-T and MDC-M. Whilst the GPA celebrated its first birthday on 15 September, coincidentally the UN International Day of Democracy, the Constitutional reform process is in great turmoil.  The GPA empowers parliament to establish a select committee to lead the reform process. The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) was established in April 2009 (meeting the GPA deadline). It is composed of 25 members and has three co-chairs - one from each party. In general the PSC suffers from a lack of funding and donors seem reluctant to meet its needs. To date, most of its activities have been conducted thanks to the support of Zimbabwe Institute (ZI) and the Southern African Parliamentary Support Trust (SAPST).

The next steps in the Constitutional Reform Process, as stipulated in the GPA, include a public consultation period lasting until mid-November 2009, leading up to the second All Stakeholders Conference in mid-February 2010, at which a first Draft Constitution will be presented. Through meetings with the Speaker of the House, the Parliamentary Select Committee, the Clerk of Parliament and the Minister for Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs, the delegation learnt about plans for the official consultation outreach programme.

 

At the first All Stakeholders Conference in July 2009, the major stakeholders agreed to establish 17 thematic sub-committees on a number of issues. The thematic sub-committees will be responsible for coordinating consultations on their topic as well as drafting reports on the consultations and making recommendations to those responsible for drafting the Constitution. The thematic sub-committees are to be chaired by MPs, with representatives of civil society co-chairing each sub-committee. In addition, 70 percent of the members of each thematic sub-committee will be drawn from civil society (the rest being MPs).

Though the major deadlines in the Constitutional Reform Process have so far been met, there is a general feeling that the process is currently deadlocked. This is primarily due to two factors: (i) political wrangling; and (ii) lack of resources.  The lack of clarity at the political level has contributed to donors being reluctant and/or confused about how to finance the process.

 
The lack of clarity about who is driving the process, as well as the confusion about where to channel resources, is resulting in a lack of resources for the reform process. The PSC cannot launch the consultative process until this funding shortfall has been met. Specifically the funds are needed for training for the thematic sub-committees and consultation teams, transport, lodging, per diem for the consultation teams, trainings for both provincial and district administrators, logistical support, pamphlets and other educational/outreach material on the Constitution-making process, hall rental for consultations and recorders and camera equipment to accurately transcribe citizen views.

Due to a lack of clarity over where to channel funds, as well as general mistrust of the inclusive government, donors have so far been reluctant to fund the official reform process. While in Zimbabwe, an editorial in the Herald (state-owned daily) attacked the donor community  for trying to create a competing parallel process by only funding NGOs. It is therefore of critical importance that bridges are built to ensure that the official process and the work done by civil society organisations is complementary.

Civil society and the Constitutional Reform Process

In general, there seem to be few opportunities for civil society to contribute actively to the Constitutional Reform Process. According to the official process, CSO's can actively contribute to elaborating the new Constitution through participation in the thematic sub-committees.

The sub-committees and participation in the All Stakeholders conferences are the only official platforms for civil society to contribute to the process. While many CSOs are happy to take part in the sub-committees (and some have submitted names), there is scepticism over whether they will be able to contribute meaningfully. Many claim that because the sub-committees will be chaired by MPs, politicians will dominate the agendas.

However, there are several problems with this situation. Over the past decade or so, civil society has become increasingly polarized - mirroring political developments. Several organisations have asked the question "which civil society will be represented in the thematic sub-committees?" - citing the War Veterans, the ZFTU and others as part of civil society. Furthermore, the signing of the GPA has created further fault lines within civil society. The GPA (Article Six) made reference to the Kariba Draft (Constitution) as a basis for the new draft Constitution and this has resulted in a number of organisations opposing the current process and promising to campaign for a NO vote. These organisations include the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) and parts of the Zimbabwe National Students Union (ZINASU). These organisations believe there is a need for a genuine "people-driven" Constitution and advocate for an active and wide involvement of Zimbabweans in the process. They believe civil society is being marginalized (civil society is not mentioned in the GPA) and that participation in the sub-committees is merely "window dressing". These organisations plan to campaign for a NO vote. If successful, they will then advocate for a new Constitutional reform process that is truly people-driven and led by an independent Commission - rather than politicians.

While other organisations are sceptical, they view the reform process as an opportunity to contribute to the development of a democratic Constitution for Zimbabwe. Many view participation in the sub-committees as a positive step, but plan to conduct additional activities to complement the process:
Developing posters, pamphlets, conducting civic education campaigns and drafting position papers, critiques, etc. A significant problem for all CSOs that the EPD delegation met is funding. Funds in support of the Constitutional Reform Process are not yet available - and this is hindering plans to conduct meaningful outreach across Zimbabwe whilst the Constitutional reform process is ongoing.

Related Articles:

More details on the EPD's work in Zimbabwe