Home#ElectionsZWA list of SADC EOM Criticisms and Recommendations on Zim Elections

A list of SADC EOM Criticisms and Recommendations on Zim Elections

A list of SADC EOM Criticisms and Recommendations on Zim Elections #ElectionsZW

Courtesy of Veritas Zimbabwe

Brief Summary of the Missions main Criticisms and Recommendations

The Mission made the following criticisms of the elections:

∙      The delimitation of constituencies, the Mission suggested, was flawed in that constituencies varied by more than the 20 per cent permitted by section 161(6) of the Constitution.

∙      The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission [ZEC] failed to make voters rolls available in good time to contesting parties, violating section 21 of the Electoral Act and the constitutional requirement that elections be transparent and fair.

∙      There were reports that opposition CCC meetings were unreasonably cancelled by the Police.

∙      The “Patriotic Act” amendment to the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act was incompatible with section 61(1) of the Constitution and paragraph 4.1.2 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines.

∙      High nomination fees may have discouraged less well-off people, including women, from standing as candidates, in violation of paragraph 4.1.7 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines.

∙      State media – press and broadcasting – favoured one political party over the others, contrary to the Constitution, the Electoral Act and the SADC Principles and Guidelines.

The Mission made the following recommendations:

∙      ZEC was advised to abide strictly by the Constitution on transparency and access to information, and to avail the voters roll in accordance with the Electoral Act.

∙      Laws requiring State-owned media to be impartial should be implemented.

∙      ZEC was advised to revise the nomination fees.

∙      ZEC was urged to strengthen transparency in the procurement and distribution of voting materials.

∙      Measures to enhance the participation of women as candidates should be put in place quickly by the next Parliament.

All these criticisms and recommendations fall well within the Mission’s mandate which we outlined earlier.

Related Articles

We are not legitimising an illegitimate process, we are only attending Parliament to defend the constitution

‘’Our participation in Parliament does not legitimise a process that was illegitimate, and that was not credible. In political economy, when you are an opposition like us, an alternative movement in a socially dominated framework like ours, when you are fighting one of the most complicated authoritarian regimes, on the continent, you do four things. ‘’First thing you do is you protect zones of autonomy, the second thing you do is you build a credible alternative, the third thing you do is you expose and isolate an opponent, and the fourth thing you do is you stretch your opponent. ‘’I view our participating in this election as protecting a zone of autonomy, that space that we got, those 103 seats that we got we have a right and a duty to protect those zones,’’ he said

Here Are The Roles of Parliamentary Portfolio Committees

Parliaments have three main roles: to make laws, to approve the budget, and to oversee the government. Parliamentary Portfolio Committees are committees that are...

We were elected to deal with garbage and water, not to attend court: Ian Makone

Harare Mayor Ian Makone has bemoaned the time that Councillor Kudzai Kadzomba (Deputy Mayor) will spend at court trying to defend herself, arguing that...

U.S. to prioritise Sudan conflict at the 78th UN General Assembly

“we will continue to push for reforms to the multilateral system – reforms that will make international institutions more effective, inclusive, transparent, accountable, and fit for purpose in this century.”