The political landscape in Zimbabwe is currently facing a crisis of democratic discourse following the August 2023 harmonized elections, which saw the ruling Zanu PF party claim a near-total victory over the main opposition, Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC). This shift is raising concerns among political analysts and commentators about Zimbabwe’s move towards becoming a one-party state.
Following the elections, Zanu PF has continued to strengthen its hold on power, significantly influencing subsequent by-elections, such as those in Harare East and Mt Pleasant. These elections further diminished the presence of opposition in the parliament, aiding Zanu PF in securing a two-thirds majority. The political turmoil was exacerbated by the actions of the self-appointed CCC interim secretary-general Sengezo Tshabangu, whose decisions to recall more than 20 opposition legislators played into the hands of the ruling party.
The Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN) noted a marked apathy among voters, with turnouts as low as 15.2% in Harare East and 11.6% in Mount Pleasant. This voter apathy is symptomatic of a broader disillusionment with the political process among the Zimbabwean public, who are encouraged to exercise their civil and political rights more fully.
Analysts point to a worrying trend where the political dynamics in Zimbabwe are increasingly mirroring the post-Unity Accord period of 1988 to 1999, a time characterized by a de facto one-party system. Eldred Masunungure, director of the Mass Public Opinion Institute, described the current situation as a regression that threatens the fabric of democratic governance in Zimbabwe. According to Masunungure, the existence of a “pliant opposition” does not bode well for democratic practices, as it leads to a legislature that lacks robust debate and instead, rubber-stamps decisions.
Professor Stephen Chan of the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies echoed these sentiments, comparing Zimbabwe’s situation to the Singapore model, where a dominant party maintains a facade of democracy. Chan is pessimistic about the prospects of any significant opposition resurgence in the near to medium term, attributing the opposition’s ineffectiveness to faulty elections and judicial interference.
Despite the bleak outlook, some voices remain hopeful. Political analyst Rejoice Ngwenya referred to the opposition not just as an institutional or personal phenomenon but as a “national collective ethos” among progressive Zimbabweans. He expressed hope that the spirit of opposition would reemerge, although he cautioned against potential violence.
In response to the current political challenges, CCC spokesperson Promise Mkwananzi vowed that the opposition would not allow Zimbabwe to devolve into a one-party state. He outlined plans for a series of actions aimed at restoring legitimacy and promoting a competitive multiparty democracy in Zimbabwe.
On the other side, Zanu PF’s director for information, Farai Marapira, defended the political developments, claiming that Zimbabwean democracy is healthier than ever. He argued that the electoral outcomes reflect a mature electorate voting based on substantive politics rather than opposition-driven hatred.
The differing perspectives in Zimbabwe’s political discourse indicate deep divisions among its people. As the country moves forward, both local stakeholders and the international community are closely monitoring its progress. The crucial question is whether Zimbabwe can establish a genuinely inclusive and competitive political environment or if it will continue on a path towards decreased democratic governance. The future of Zimbabwe’s democracy is at a critical turning point, and its outcome will have significant implications for the nation and its citizens.
Source: Newsday
