Ashley Kondo
The just ended MDC Congress resolutions reflect its leader, Nelson Chamisa’s desperate bid to ascend to the National Presidency by any means possible, whether legal or not, more than the party’s vision and strategy for democracy.
It is quiet ironic that the MDC fames itself as a democratic movement that adheres to and abides by tenets of democracy, but its Congress resolutions and machinations do not show for it.
Chamisa has been relentless in his attempts to consolidate power and remain relevant on Zimbabwe’s political turf in the aftermath of the 30 July 2018 harmonised elections.
Observers would agree that, since suffering electoral defeat in 2018, the embattled opposition leader has had nothing new to offer except to incite citizens to revolt and frustrate all efforts by President Mnangagwa’s Administration to rebuild the country.
To that end, over time, Chamisa has notably continued to amplify allegations that last year’s elections were stolen, accusing ZANU PF of rigging in connivance with the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC).
The MDC Congress which was held at Ascot Stadium claims to have taken note of “multiple crises affecting and arresting Zimbabwe which includes crisis of legitimacy, of governance, of lack of confidence, economy disequilibrium, breakdown of the rule of law, corruption and massive closure of political space.”
However, these so called notations are a convenient scapegoat to the MDC cause and future plans to foment civil unrest in the country for selfish political interests of the party leadership.
It may be recalled that while addressing supporter during the party’s 19th Anniversary celebrations at Gwanzura Stadium in October last year, Chamisa vowed to lead massive protests that would force President Mnangagwa to relinquish power and pave way for his ascension to the throne as the “legitimate” heir, hence the party continues to cite alleged crises of legitimacy.
This is despite the international recognition granted to President Mnangagwa across the world.
It is appalling for the opposition to go around making noise about break down of the rule of law and closure of political space when independent international bodies and envoys continue to acknowledge reforms being implemented by Government across the socio-economic and political spectrum.
On the contrary, the Chamisa has grown to be famous for defying and disregarding any legal proclamations that are not in his favour.
History will remind us that Chamisa’s rise to the party leader position after the death of Dr Tsvangirai was heavily contested as unprocedural and resulted in a leadership wrangle between himself and Dr Thokazani Khupe who equally stood the chance to lead the party.
The leadership dispute between Chamisa and Dr Khupe resulted in the fracturing of the party ahead of the 2018 polls leading to the breakaway of the MDC-T Khupe faction.
In September 2018 Chamisa demanded the then Chegutu Mayor, Henry Muchatibaya, and Masvingo Mayor, Advocate Collins Maboke, to resign because they were not his preferred candidates.
Chanisa’s demand drew criticism from many quarters of society who described it as an act of dictatorship and nepotism.
The MDC Congress resolved, among others, to: pursue, “genuine inclusive national dialogue to actualise the reform agenda though an inclusive framework or transitional mechanism” and to “defend and protect the people of Zimbabwe and the constitution though proactive informed processes of engagement that include advocacy and mobilisation, including the exercise of the people’s constitutional right to petition and protest”.
Subsequently, synonymous with the kudira jecha mantra, Chamisa, speaking during the Congress declared that there would be “war” in the country in the coming few days.
It would appear that the resolution for an inclusive framework or transitional mechanism is deliberate and intended at setting the country’s political agenda and planned course of action for the MDC.
While dialogue may be a good thing for Zimbabwe, the opposition does not have onus to detect how it ought to be done and to prescribe the expected outcome is more disappointing.
On the issue of legitimacy, it boggles the mind that after all due processes, including elections and a Constitutional Court hearing where the MDC sought to nullify Mnangagwa’s victory, were followed, to date, defiant Chamisa still refuses to recognise an elected Government.
It appears that for Chamisa, creating a political crisis in the country is the only way that remains for him to seek leverage and some kind of imagined bargaining power in Zimbabwe’s political matrix.
