As for intelligent criticism, zero — especially when the opposition is led by one Morgan Tsvangirai.
If anything, the opposition is guilty of simply opposing for the sake of opposing.
Tichaona Zindoga
Zimbabwe’s opposition, whose face is the Movement for Democratic Change led by Morgan Tsvangirai, is pretty useless in a number of respects.
They have just lost elections — that is number one — and are ever diminished when the year 2008 presented them with the golden opportunity of initiative when they commanded a slim majority over Zanu-PF.
It had somehow gone according to book that MDC-T would “force” Zanu-PF to the negotiating table and then “capture power from within”.
But after five years in Government in which MDC-T and another MDC faction were a joint parliamentary majority, they came unstuck.
In 2013, the opposition surrendered the majority in a fashion that ensured that Zanu-PF got more than the two-thirds it needs to do whatever it wants, so to speak.
The “kingmaker” in the other MDC faction, Welshman Ncube is no more a factor in the body politic.
The second reason that the opposition in Zimbabwe is a useless bunch is contained in the regret that was held by former US Ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell who decried its lack of talent and unity.
He said that with a different cast in the opposition leadership, the country would have seen regime change, which of course is what the US and its allies desired.
The third reason why the Zimbabwean opposition in its current configuration is not worth its salt lies in its qualitative nature.
It will be useful to highlight what an ideal opposition is like and what roles it should play, to understand the vacuity of the MDC-T.
On October 27, 1949 a Canadian lawmaker John G Diefenbaker presented a paper entitled “The Role of The Opposition in Parliament” outlining the ideal functions of opposition.
“When it properly discharges them the preservation of our freedom is assured. The reading of history proves that freedom always dies when criticism ends. It upholds and maintains the rights of minorities against majorities. It must be vigilant against oppression and unjust invasions by the Cabinet of the rights of the people. It should supervise all expenditures and prevent over expenditure by exposing to the light of public opinion wasteful expenditures or worse.
“It finds fault; it suggests amendments; it asks questions and elicits information; it arouses, educates and molds public opinion by voice and vote. It must scrutinise every action by the government and in doing so prevent the short-cuts through democratic procedure that governments like to make.”
He said the opposition that discharges its responsibilities “becomes the responsible outlet of intelligent criticism”. There is a caveat.
“The opposition cannot oppose without reason. Its alternative policies must be responsible and practicable for it has a responsibility to the King to provide the alternative government to the one in power.”
An analysis of Zimbabwe’s opposition today in light of the above reflects badly on the politicians.
It is worse in light of the call by MDC-T to join Zanu-PF for another ruling coalition where it has shown more of a desire to jump into the gravy train rather than hold out and play credible opposition and alternative government.
Today, with all the sleaze and reports of malfeasance flying around, the opposition has not taken the initiative. It is as if the country does not have an opposition, a strong one, which people thought the MDCs were.
It has refused the lifeline thrown to it. It will not show the nation it will constitute better rule, free from corruption and cronyism and patronage.
Zimbabwean opposition has not been able to educate the populace, as prescribed above, or taken ownership of any compelling national discourse or governing ideas. Maybe aside of the drive for a new constitution, which initiative it today cannot claim for title to anyway, the opposition cannot say it has really done anything since 1999.
As for intelligent criticism, zero — especially when the opposition is led by one Morgan Tsvangirai.
If anything, the opposition is guilty of simply opposing for the sake of opposing. That is why, for example, they will pigheadedly deny the existence of sanctions against Zimbabwe when there is a whole law enforcing the embargo in the form of Zidera among other declared and undeclared punitive instruments.
The heckling and other forms of disorderly conduct that the nation has witnessed in the opposition tell of an opposition without cause.
Given the above, the only way Zimbabwe may migrate from misgovernance and other ill-practices is through the reform of the ruling party by and of itself. It is a tricky call.
But it also presents an opportunity for Zanu-PF to self-introspect and reform, to show that it is serious about serving the people and not corrupt officials. The people will be watching; expectant.
The opposition is in a limbo.
And like one member of the UK Parliament would have said, “It is not a long step… (from) a complete (opposition) dictatorship.”
If anything, the opposition is guilty of simply opposing for the sake of opposing.
 |
| Face of opposition...Morgan Tsvangirai |
Tichaona Zindoga
Zimbabwe’s opposition, whose face is the Movement for Democratic Change led by Morgan Tsvangirai, is pretty useless in a number of respects.
They have just lost elections — that is number one — and are ever diminished when the year 2008 presented them with the golden opportunity of initiative when they commanded a slim majority over Zanu-PF.
It had somehow gone according to book that MDC-T would “force” Zanu-PF to the negotiating table and then “capture power from within”.
But after five years in Government in which MDC-T and another MDC faction were a joint parliamentary majority, they came unstuck.
In 2013, the opposition surrendered the majority in a fashion that ensured that Zanu-PF got more than the two-thirds it needs to do whatever it wants, so to speak.
The “kingmaker” in the other MDC faction, Welshman Ncube is no more a factor in the body politic.
The second reason that the opposition in Zimbabwe is a useless bunch is contained in the regret that was held by former US Ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell who decried its lack of talent and unity.
He said that with a different cast in the opposition leadership, the country would have seen regime change, which of course is what the US and its allies desired.
The third reason why the Zimbabwean opposition in its current configuration is not worth its salt lies in its qualitative nature.
It will be useful to highlight what an ideal opposition is like and what roles it should play, to understand the vacuity of the MDC-T.
On October 27, 1949 a Canadian lawmaker John G Diefenbaker presented a paper entitled “The Role of The Opposition in Parliament” outlining the ideal functions of opposition.
“When it properly discharges them the preservation of our freedom is assured. The reading of history proves that freedom always dies when criticism ends. It upholds and maintains the rights of minorities against majorities. It must be vigilant against oppression and unjust invasions by the Cabinet of the rights of the people. It should supervise all expenditures and prevent over expenditure by exposing to the light of public opinion wasteful expenditures or worse.
“It finds fault; it suggests amendments; it asks questions and elicits information; it arouses, educates and molds public opinion by voice and vote. It must scrutinise every action by the government and in doing so prevent the short-cuts through democratic procedure that governments like to make.”
He said the opposition that discharges its responsibilities “becomes the responsible outlet of intelligent criticism”. There is a caveat.
“The opposition cannot oppose without reason. Its alternative policies must be responsible and practicable for it has a responsibility to the King to provide the alternative government to the one in power.”
An analysis of Zimbabwe’s opposition today in light of the above reflects badly on the politicians.
It is worse in light of the call by MDC-T to join Zanu-PF for another ruling coalition where it has shown more of a desire to jump into the gravy train rather than hold out and play credible opposition and alternative government.
Today, with all the sleaze and reports of malfeasance flying around, the opposition has not taken the initiative. It is as if the country does not have an opposition, a strong one, which people thought the MDCs were.
It has refused the lifeline thrown to it. It will not show the nation it will constitute better rule, free from corruption and cronyism and patronage.
Zimbabwean opposition has not been able to educate the populace, as prescribed above, or taken ownership of any compelling national discourse or governing ideas. Maybe aside of the drive for a new constitution, which initiative it today cannot claim for title to anyway, the opposition cannot say it has really done anything since 1999.
As for intelligent criticism, zero — especially when the opposition is led by one Morgan Tsvangirai.
If anything, the opposition is guilty of simply opposing for the sake of opposing. That is why, for example, they will pigheadedly deny the existence of sanctions against Zimbabwe when there is a whole law enforcing the embargo in the form of Zidera among other declared and undeclared punitive instruments.
The heckling and other forms of disorderly conduct that the nation has witnessed in the opposition tell of an opposition without cause.
Given the above, the only way Zimbabwe may migrate from misgovernance and other ill-practices is through the reform of the ruling party by and of itself. It is a tricky call.
But it also presents an opportunity for Zanu-PF to self-introspect and reform, to show that it is serious about serving the people and not corrupt officials. The people will be watching; expectant.
The opposition is in a limbo.
And like one member of the UK Parliament would have said, “It is not a long step… (from) a complete (opposition) dictatorship.”
No comments:
Post a Comment