ZANU PF AMENDMENTS TO THE COPAC DRAFT: MANAGING SUCCESSION POLITICS
As is widely known, ZANU PF submitted a long list of proposed amendments to the draft Constitution produced by Copac (hereafter “the Copac Draft”). A striking feature of the set of proposed changes is the strengthening almost to authoritarian levels, of the office of the Executive President and the weakening, almost to irrelevance, of Parliament. We shall assess and demonstrate this over the coming weeks.
One of the changes that has been made affects succession in the event of a sitting President’s death, resignation or incapacitation. The proposed changes are interesting in the way they reveal a persistent internal struggle to deal with the succession issue in ZANU PF. But the proposed changes are also undemocratic and their legitimacy is flawed.
Under the ZANU PF model, the Vice Presidents are appointed by the President. This is a departure from the Copac draft which provides that Vice Presidents are elected by the people as running mates of the Presidential candidate. Therefore, the ZANU PF model is no different from the system under the current Constitution. It means the President has the power to appoint and remove the VPs, as he or she pleases; a scenario that would be difficult where the VPs are elected. The aim is simple: to reserve all authority in the office of the Executive President and avoid the inconvenience of elected VPs.
On succession, if the sitting President dies, resigns or becomes incapacitated ZANU PF proposes that the political party of the former President chooses his or her successor. (This is similar to the provision in the GPA which was written for political expediency given the delicate balance of power in the GNU arrangement). ZANU PF’s proposal is a departure from the Copac draft provisions on succession where the person who is the first Vice President automatically succeeds the former President upon his death, resignation or incapacitation.
First, the Copac model is clear and chaos-free. It is known well in advance who takes over should the office of the President become vacant. On the other hand, the ZANU PF model is a recipe for chaos as candidates within the party are likely to jostle to succeed the President. This is not a pleasant scenario considering the panic, confusion and uncertainty that attends the circumstance of death, resignation or incapacitation of a President. The uncertainty could easily lead to internal conflict as factions within a political party vie for the Presidency. Far better is a system that tells well in advance the person who would succeed the President.
The argument that the Copac model is dangerous because it gives an incentive for the Vice President to oust the sitting President has no merit for the simple reason that this risk is not unique to this particular model. Whatever model is used there are always ambitious people serving under the President and if they want to oust the President, they will do so, knowing that they will outmuscle their competitors within the party to land the highest post.
Second, the ZANU PF model is also undemocratic and lacks legitimacy. In the first place, the Vice President who succeeds the former President would be a mere appointee. This is different from the Copac draft’s provisions where the Vice President is an elected person. An elected person has greater legitimacy to succeed the President than a mere Presidential appointee.
Furthermore, the ZANU PF model essentially prescribes that a single party has the right to choose the President for everyone yet the President is voted for in his or her individual capacity. For practical purposes, he or she may be the leader of a political party but the presidential election is not for a party but for an individual. In other words, the presidential election is for legal purposes an individual contest, not a party contest. It is different from a system where voters vote for a party or where the party with the majority of seats in Parliament selects a President. There is, therefore, no justification for giving a political party the power to choose a successor should the office of the President become vacant. In fact, the ZANU PF succession provisions would not work in the case where the President is an independent at the time of his death, resignation or incapacitation because practically he has no party which can nominate his successor. The model in the Copac draft has better credibility and legitimacy because the succeeding Vice President would be an elected person.
However, the model presented by ZANU PF sheds light into the internal power struggles and machinations over the issue of succeeding President Mugabe. The Copac model would have forced his hand to anoint a successor before the next election because whomever he would have chosen as his first running mate would be his first VP who would then automatically take over if a vacancy arises. This would have given him a hand in choosing a successor. The ZANU PF model takes that away since it is his party which makes the choice after the event and in the event of death he would naturally not have a role at all. Therefore, the ZANU PF model shifts the weight of responsibility on Mugabe of having to anoint a successor.
There is also the fear of upsetting the delicate balance of power within the party. ZANU PF has operated a dual vice presidency since the 1987 Unity Accord, which was transplanted onto the national scene. The two vice presidents are considered equal but the Copac model would have forced ZANU PF to rank the VPs since whoever got the first Vice Presidency would automatically succeed Mugabe and this would have raised the stakes. Traditionally, the vice presidency has been shared between the former PF ZAPU and the old ZANU PF. Choosing a person from the former PF ZAPU as first VP would give that candidate the upper hand in the succession race, providing the prospect of the first President from the Matabeleland region.
On the other hand choosing a person from the old ZANU PF as first VP would give that candidate an advantage maintaining the old ZANU PF’s political dominance but this would come with the risk of increasing the frustration among the former PF ZAPU leaders and their support base and the feeling of marginalization is already palpable. So the Copac model comes with the risk of causing serious disharmony and possibly splitting the party, which probably explains the rejection. Disharmony or a split over succession going into a crucial election is the least favoured scenario especially given the “Bhora Musango” tactics that are likely to be employed by the disgruntled factions. The rejection of the Copac draft model is therefore an exercise in political management by expediency.
In my view, the Copac model is better because it provides for a clear, certain and chaos-free succession process. A constitution must provide for clear and straightforward processes rather than leave things to the lottery of the moment. The ZANU PF model carries the risk of uncertainty and chaos and this is made worse by the conditions of panic, uncertainty and confusion that often attend upon the death of a President. Apart from that, the proposal is undemocratic and lacks legitimacy as it allows for an appointee to take over as President and not only that but gives exclusive power to one political party to choose a President for the whole country. In my view, the Copac model, where the VP is elected alongside the President is more democratic, sound and legitimate.
wamagaisa (2012)
Ah, now we know. Mugabe wants to keep on playing Munangagwa against Mujuru (Mrs). The COPAC draft forces him to come out into the open, as to who he prefers. It leaves him with fewer Machiavellian options, and weakens him. No more lying to each one separately, privately. Ah, so.