1 zimbabwe election support network [zesn] - Nehanda Radio

None of the changes made by the Act will have much effect on the functioning of the
Commission unless the Commission’s members are perceived to be politically independent,
efficient and dedicated to ensuring that elections are held in accordance with the law. The
importance of the impartiality, all-inclusiveness, competence and accountability of the
Commission is emphasized. The method of appointment of Commissioners should be changed
to reassure political parties and the electorate that Commissioners will be impartial. ZEC should
be appointed with the participation of opposition parties and key stakeholders. The selection
process of commissioners should be transparent and engender confidence in all stakeholders.
These selection processes should also ensure that gender marginalized and special needs
groups and youth participation or representation is achieved.
Adequate, competent and qualified personnel should also staff ZEC. It is necessary to ensure
the independence of the ZEC including financial autonomy. Commissioners could each be
given areas of responsibility to enhance accountability. The law could require the
commissioners to divide among themselves responsibility for the Commission’s different
activities so that each commissioner would be responsible for a particular activity and in this
way promote equal participation by all Commissioners. An alternative way of distributing
functions between Commissioners would be to give each Commissioner the responsibility for a
particular province.
Electoral Framework
Elections in Zimbabwe have since independence been conducted within the first past the post
[FPTP] electoral system, a practice that was inherited from the Westminster-type plurality or
single member district [SMD] system, in which the candidate with the highest number of votes
wins. Implied in this framework is that a winner with less than 51 percent of voters in
constituency may be elected. However, the growing perception is that such “winner-take-all” or
“zero sum” electoral frameworks are no longer consistent with the unfolding political and
leadership challenges. This exclusionary approach generates tension in an environment. The
solution to the political stalemate in Zimbabwe lies in an electoral paradigmatic shift to more
inclusive, accommodating, win-win electoral systems based on proportional representation [ for
the Senate] and mixed electoral systems [for the parliament].
While in past elections a presidential candidate with the highest number of votes, even if below
50% of the electorate would be eligible for presidency, in the 29 March Election, for a
presidential candidate to be eligible, he/she had to garner not only the traditional majority vote,
but also a stipulated 50% + 1 vote. In the event of failure to meet the requirement, the Act
provided for a run-off. However, the system remains winner-take all.
Amendments to relevant pieces of legislation such as the Public Order and Security Act
[POSA], Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act [AIPPA] and the Broadcasting Act
have also added a competitive edge to the electoral environment. However these amendments
were rather piecemeal and also lacking in citizen input. Furthermore, there was a reversal to
some of the reforms made on the eve of the 29 March Election through a presidential
proclamation. A case in point was the reversal of the reform requiring police officers to be
stationed 100ms from polling stations. Compliance has also been on the low side as MDC
“Freedom Marches” on 23 January 2008 were cancelled.
22