1 zimbabwe election support network [zesn] - Nehanda Radio

of the election process was compromised, and not free and fair and does not represent the will
of the people of Zimbabwe.
Observations by local, regional and international observers are consistent with the pre and post
election monitoring and observation findings by ZESN. The election outcome does not reflect
the will of Zimbabweans and neither does it meet regional and international standards.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Electoral Architecture
Legal Framework
While some amendments were made to the Electoral Act in the pre 29 March era [for instance,
those requiring posting of election results outside polling stations and constituency tabulation
centers] and other relevant pieces of legislation such as POSA, AIPPA and the Broadcasting
Act- these reforms were however piecemeal rather than comprehensive and also enacted
without much 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. Such
changes to the electoral legal framework through the use of the Presidential Powers
[Temporary Measures] legislation or any other instrument must be discouraged.
Election Systems
While Zimbabwe continues to conduct its elections within the Westminster system of first past
the post [FPTP] based on the “winner- take-all” model, the unfolding political and leadership
challenges in Zimbabwe can hardly be solved through such winner-take all, zero sum
frameworks. Besides being exclusionary, they generate tension in an environment already
pregnant with tension and agitation. The solution to the political stalemate in Zimbabwe lies in
an electoral paradigmatic shift to more inclusive, accomodating, win-win electoral systems
based on proportional representation and mixed electoral systems.
Election Administration
Sound election administration is a critical in building political party confidence in the conduct of
elections. ZEC set up 9232 polling stations and engaged more than 64000 polling officers to
monitor the June 27 presidential run-off and three house of assembly by-election.
However, the delays that accompanied the release of election results, especially presidential
results, do not reflect positively on ZEC’s election management capacity and autonomy. Its
management of the delimitation, nomination, voter education, voter registration and inspection
processes particularly raised concern. Information on the delimitation exercise was not
adequately provided. The public and parliamentarians were not given adequate time to debate
and make inputs in the exercise. Delays in the delimitation of boundaries [constituencies and
wards] saw voter registration and inspections and setting of the nomination date being done
before the finalization of the delimitation exercise.
ZEC also overly depends on the personnel of other government departments to carry out its
electoral processes on polling day. In the run up to the 27 June elections ZEC had reportedly
relied on civil servants especially teachers to carry out these functions. Alleged use of youth
militias and war veterans by ZEC as polling officers and presiding officers in the 27 June
62