Tuesday, 24 August 2010

The MDC has learnt with shock and sadness the untimely death of a true
national hero, National Healing minister Hon Gibson Jama Sibanda who passed
away quietly last night at Mater Dei Hospital in Bulawayo.

Hon Sibanda was a pillar of the struggle for real change, having spent over
40 years in the trenches fighting for democracy in the country of his birth.

He started off as a welfare secretary in ZAPU before joining the trade union
movement where he made his mark as the conscience of the worker’s struggle
for peace, democracy and real freedom.

He was the spirit behind the MDC in its formative years, having spent
sleepless nights together with President Morgan Tsvangirai and other
democrats in laying the founding stone of this great edifice we now call the
MDC. He dies with undoubted paternity rights to this our sordid struggle for
a new Zimbabwe and a new beginning.

Hon Sibanda was a father, patriot, a democrat, a founding pillar and the
cornerstone of the people’s struggle for real change. His name shall remain
an indelible imprint in the sad narrative of our determined and brave march
towards a new Zimbabwe and a new beginning. His soft but wise quietude, his
frankness and honesty were the running thread of his patriotic exactitude.

He died as he lived, in the quietness of his general deportment. As he lies
in the soft requiem of death, we in the MDC derive comfort in that even his
grave shall dismally fail to entomb his rich and brave legacy.

He died in the trenches, fighting for peace in his motherland. We remember
him for his passion and quest for justice and national healing as the only
solution to the tempest of political violence. We remember his final prayer
exactly a month ago; his impassioned plea for peace, justice and national
healing at the all-party indaba held at the Rainbow Towers on that historic
afternoon of Wednesday, 21 July 2010.As a nation, we must fulfill his dream
by creating a violence-free society characterized by peace and tolerance.

We in the MDC join our colleagues in the broad democratic movement, the
Sibanda family and the people of Zimbabwe in mourning this great son of the
soil. He spent over 40 years in the trenches. He survived torture, detention
and violence. Cancer has finally succeeded where the turbulence of
repression and violence dismally failed.

We shall forever cherish his rich legacy and his lasting commitment to peace
and democracy in Zimbabwe. He bequeathed to the people of Zimbabwe the
culture of stoic fortitude and unstinting patriotism in his quest for real
change.

May his soul rest in eternal peace.

Constitution Watch Content Series 3/2010 - 21st August [DevolutionPart II]

Devolution Part II

In Part I of this discussion on devolution we outlined the provisions of the current constitution, as well as those of the "Kariba Draft" and the NCA draft constitution, which would devolve the central government's powers to provinces and local authorities.  We also discussed the advantages and disadvantages of devolution.

In this Part we shall deal with some of the issues which must be settled before devolution of power can take place.  It is not enough for the constitutional outreach exercise to conclude [if it does] that most people want devolution:  the constitution-makers will have to tackle these issues if devolution of power is to become a reality in Zimbabwe.

Issues to be Considered

1.  How many provinces should there be?

This basic question is not easy to answer.  The present Constitution is surprisingly ambiguous.  In section 113 it defines the word "province" in such a way as to allow an Act of Parliament to fix the number and boundaries of provinces, while in section 34(1)(a) it suggests that (for electoral purposes at least) there should be 10 provinces.  The Kariba Draft provides for 10 provinces whose boundaries are to be set out in an Act of Parliament, while the NCA draft constitution limits the number to five with their boundaries set out in a Schedule to the draft.

Obviously, if real power is to be given to provinces their number must be stated clearly in the Constitution, particularly if some members of Parliament are to be elected on a provincial basis.  There is probably no need for provincial boundaries to be fixed in the Constitution, so long as the central government is not able to change the boundaries at will - in other words, boundary changes should require the consent of the provinces concerned.

2.  Should the provinces form the basis of a federal structure?

There is no clear dividing line between a unitary State which has devolved powers to provinces and local authorities, and a federal State composed of semi-autonomous provinces.  The answer to this question therefore depends largely on the extent of the powers that are devolved to the provinces (which is the next question).  It may be noted, however, that the South African constitution gives a nod to federalism by allowing the provincial legislatures to adopt their own constitutions.

Veritas Constitution Watch - Content Series 2/2010 - 19th August [Devolution Part I]

Devolution Part I

Introduction

Devolution of power to the provinces [provincialisation] has been debated at some length in the press recently, and the constitutional outreach programme has revealed how strongly people feel about the issue.  In Matabeleland, for example, there will probably be little support for a new constitution, whatever its merits, if it does not confer a considerable measure of autonomy upon the western provinces.  And this feeling is not confined to Matabeleland:  the further one gets from Harare, it seems, the stronger is the desire for autonomy.

The desire is easy to understand in the light of the country's history.  Zimbabwe has always been a centralised state and its governments, both before and after Independence, have tended to be authoritarian.  The present Constitution gives barely a nod to the provinces:  section 111A allows governors to be appointed for "any areas" [though only provincial governors have been appointed] but these governors are appointees of the central government and their main function is to enforce the ruling party's control over the provinces.  Local authorities are mentioned hardly at all in the Constitution.

The demand for devolution is probably a reaction to the over-centralisation of the past and the excesses resulting from it.  The new constitution must go some way towards meeting this demand if it is to be acceptable to the majority of Zimbabweans.  But how far should it go?  What are the advantages and drawbacks of devolution and, particularly, of provincialisation?  What are the problems that are likely to be encountered if power is devolved to the provinces?

Before trying to answer these questions, let us (Veritas) see how provincialisation has been tackled in two draft constitutions that have been put forward in recent years.

The Constitutional Select Committee (COPAC) has today, 17 August, launched its website, copac.org.zw. This important website is designed to offer an immediate opportunity for Zimbabweans near and far to contribute their ideas to our nation's constitutional process and to interact actively with the COPAC team.

The website provides information on the constitution-making process including thematic briefs, talking points, and details on progress so far.

We welcome and urge all Zimbabweans to communicate your priorities, concerns, ideas and suggestions relating to constitutional content and processes to the COPAC team.