In the wake of Zimbabwe’s recent elections, President Emmerson Mnangagwa unveiled his new cabinet. However, the announcement has raised more than a few eyebrows.
Critics, notably from the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), have dubbed this cabinet as one of the “worst since Zimbabwe’s independence in 1980”.
The criticism revolves around the argument that the new lineup consists of a mix of “friends, family, loyalists, and the least qualified.”
Among the retained ministers is Mthuli Ncube, now heading the rebranded Finance and Investment Promotion ministry. But it’s the new inclusions that are particularly controversial. The president’s son, Kudakwashe, is set to deputise Ncube, and his nephew, Tongai, has been appointed as the Tourism deputy minister. Such decisions have led critics to raise questions of nepotism and political favoritism.
The Nelson Chamisa-led CCC party has further contested the legitimacy of the cabinet, referencing the last month’s disputed poll results where Mnangagwa narrowly clinched victory. “The Cabinet, like the just ended election, fails the credibility and legitimacy test,” said CCC spokesperson Promise Mkwananzi.
Moreover, Mnangagwa’s decision to expand the cabinet from 22 to 26 ministries has not gone unnoticed. Such an expansion, especially at a time when many nations are advocating for lean governance, prompts questions about the efficient use of national resources.
Retaining several old guard loyalists, including Monica Mutsvangwa, Sithembiso Nyoni, and Daniel Garwe, while reintroducing others like Christopher Mutsvangwa, casts doubt on the President’s commitment to infusing new, innovative ideas into his administration.
The President’s camp, however, defends the appointments. Information permanent secretary Ndavaningi Mangwana pointed out that professional qualifications and experience are paramount when selecting ministers. The fact that some appointees are related to the President shouldn’t automatically disqualify them.
Meanwhile, certain appointments were revoked as they were not legislators, highlighting another layer of contention regarding Mnangagwa’s choices. This, combined with the decision to appoint more non-parliamentarians to ministerial positions than allowed, shows an administration walking a fine line of governance protocols.
Zimbabweans, never shy to express their opinions, took to social media to voice their disapproval. Many felt that the President was more interested in rewarding loyalty than competence.
Political analysts weighed in too. Romeo Chasara, based at Witwatersrand University, saw Mnangagwa’s appointments as a reflection of his performance in the recent elections and a move to consolidate power. Stephen Chan from the University of London commented on the lack of depth and the tinge of nepotism marring the cabinet.
In conclusion, as Zimbabwe charts its path post-elections, the composition of its cabinet will undoubtedly influence its trajectory. While every leader has the prerogative to choose their team, the choices made always resonate beyond the corridors of power. In this case, President Mnangagwa’s decisions have sparked intense debate about the future direction of Zimbabwe. Only time will tell if these choices are in the best interest of the nation or just a political strategy.
