Harare — ZANU PF has refused to dismantle the Joint Operations Command (JOC), a state security organisation that was reportedly behind the bloody presidential run-off poll last year that retained President Robert Mugabe in power.
This comes as the MDC formation led by Morgan Tsvangirai is demanding that two key ministries -- Foreign Affairs and Home Affairs -- be re-allocated to his party in the ongoing talks to resolve outstanding issues of the global political agreement (GPA), further widening cracks in the inclusive government.
While the negotiating teams from Zanu PF and the MDC formations have made concessions on a number of issues to do with the media, external radio stations, a land audit, tenure systems, electoral vacancies and external interference, disagreements on critical issues that caused the deadlock still remain.
The negotiating teams led by Zanu PF's Patrick Chinamasa and Nicholas Goche, MDC-T's Tendai Biti and Elton Mangoma, MDC-M's Welshman Ncube and Priscilla Misihairabwi-Mushonga, have failed to agree on the key appointments of Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono and Attorney-General Johannes Tomana.
They have also disagreed over the swearing-in of deputy Agriculture minister-designate Roy Bennett, appointments of provincial governors and on Tsvangirai chairing cabinet in the absence of Mugabe.
In addition there are also new areas of potential contestation in the new year, such as the re-allocation of the two key ministries.
According to a report from the negotiators to the Sadc Dialogue Facilitation team and the principals of the GPA, which is in the possession of the Zimbabwe Independent, the MDC-T wanted JOC to be dismantled now that there was a National Security Council in place.
The facilitation team was appointed by the new negotiations facilitator, South African President Jacob Zuma, and is made up of his political adviser Charles Nqakula, special envoy Mac Maharaj, and the president's international relations adviser Lindiwe Zulu. The report was handed to Zuma.
JOC is made up of army commanders, Central Intelligence Organisation directors, police and prisons commissioners.
"Zanu PF expressed the contrary view that JOC only dealt with operational issues whilst the National Security Council dealt with policy issues," the report said. "The MDC-T also raised, on the subject of security reform, the existence of a formalised and legalised intelligence agency covered under an Act of Parliament."
It was agreed that members of the negotiating team, who were members of the National Security Council, should raise the issues at their meetings.
JOC has been accused of master-minding the wave of brutal violence that engulfed Zimbabwe after Mugabe lost the March 29 2008 presidential election to Tsvangirai. The strategy was to ensure that Mugabe is re-elected on June 27's presidential run-off at any cost.
The MDC-T claimed that at least 200 of its supporters died during that period, while thousands of others were tortured, injured and displaced. The defence forces have always maintained that they were not responsible for the violence and deaths.
Zimbabwe Defence Forces Commander Constantine Chiwenga, Police Commissioner-General Augustine Chihuri and Commissioner of Prisons Paradzai Zimondi are on record as saying they would never salute a president other than Mugabe, least of all one who did not participate in the war of liberation.
On the review of ministerial allocations, which was supposed to have been done in August, the report said MDC-T wanted the ministries of Foreign Affairs and Home Affairs to be re-allocated to the party.
Currently, the Ministry of Home Affairs is co-ministered by Kembo Mohadi of Zanu PF and Gile Mutsekwa of MDC-T.
"In respect to Home Affairs, it is their (MDC-T) view that the co-ministering is not working as exemplified by the breakdown of relations between the two-co-ministers," says the report. "They propose that Foreign Affairs be re-allocated to them and that in return Zanu PF should be re-allocated the Ministry of Public Service."
MDC-T also wants the current co-minister of Home Affairs from Zanu PF to be appointed a Minister of State.
As an alternative, it suggested that Home Affairs could be split into two ministries, one being ministry for the police and the other encompassing all the non-security aspects in the ministry such as immigration.
Contrary, Zanu PF felt that the co-ministering was working well and the current discord was a deliberate ploy to create the false impression that all was not well.
The matter was not resolved with Zanu PF negotiators arguing that it had no mandate to discuss a general ministerial review.
Turning to the role and funding of non-governmental organisations, Zanu PF argued that they were aligned to one political party, thereby affecting the political playing field.
They want transparency in respect to funds being channelled to NGOs, in terms of both the amounts and the recipients.
MDC-T denied that NGOs in Zimbabwe were acting for and on its behalf.
The negotiators then resolved that all funding and assistance to Zimbabwe from NGOs be channelled through the government, which should have the right of determining where resources were to be channelled.
The negotiators failed to agree on the mode of communication among principals, with MDC-T saying Tsvangirai should have direct access to Mugabe by telephone rather than the current situation in which the premier could only access the president through his assistant.
It was then agreed that Zanu PF would consult on the matter.
On Tsvangirai's transport arrangements, which MDC-T said was inadequate, Zanu PF negotiators indicated that they would have to consult their party first as the matter raised protocol issues, which include the question of what arrangements existed for the two vice presidents.
On the appointment of governors, it was agreed that MDC-M gets a post, while either Zanu PF or MDC-T gets five and four plus a minister of state. The question of who between Zanu PF and MDC-T get four and the minister of state post had to be referred to the principals for discussion in February next year.
On sanctions, it was agreed that the re-engagement committee set up by cabinet be convened as a matter of urgency to deal with issues like the work-plan, with time lines in respect of engaging the European Union, the United States, the Commonwealth and multi-lateral financial institutions.
The principals are expected to meet next week and issue a statement at a press conference restating commitment to the GPA and calling for the removal of sanctions.
On the media, all parties agreed that the Broadcasting Services Authority be set up to immediately process and finalise all applications for broadcasting licences that are pending and to immediately produce and flight adverts in the national media inviting interested parties to make applications for broadcasting licences.
On the Zimbabwe Media Commission it was agreed that it be sworn in and be directed to immediately process all applications for media licences that are pending and call upon interested parties to make applications for newspaper licences.
On external radio stations, they agreed to formally request Sadc to prevail on governments of Botswana and Madagascar to terminate its facilitation of the external broadcast to Zimbabwe.
The negotiators also agreed to convert ZBC into a public broadcaster with an independent board appointed by the president from a list given to him by the Standing Rules and Orders Committee of Parliament.
While they agreed on the land audit, the negotiators disagreed on how to implement the policy of compensation on improvements made on farms acquired.
On by-elections, the three parties agreed to extend the agreement not to contest each other in any by-election to cover the entire lifetime or duration of the inclusive government.
On Tsvangirai chairing cabinet, Zanu PF argued that in the absence of the president, one of the vice presidents who would be acting should chair cabinet, not the premier.
They also did not agree on the cabinet and council of ministers rules, ministerial mandates, parallel government and on who should determine national heroes.
The matter referring to the role and position of permanent secretary of Media, Information and Publicity George Charamba was deferred, with the MDC-T saying it was not proper or acceptable that a presidential spokesperson be a permanent secretary in the ministry. Zanu PF saw no problem with the permanent secretary speaking for the president in his governmental capacity and also in his capacity as leader of a political party.
The negotiators also agreed that the Constitutional Amendment No.19 be gazetted as passed by parliament in December, which had 18 more pages than the one gazetted on February 13.
Comments 1 to 5 of 7 Post a comment
Let us dream: Consider the people's Zimbabwe at some future time (that will never come - Glory to Mwari.) The UK's MDC-T is the party in power ( call it a neo-colonial, rhodie governement) and it is in coalition with the people's ZANU-PF.
And ZANU-PF demands that it must have tthe critical ministries like
- the Finance ministry(stop MDC from increasing ZIM's depepndence on UKeconomy),
- the Home Affairs ministry(stop MDC goons from killing the peopleinternal security),
- the foreign ministry (stop MDC from reliance on UK in foreign policy) and
- the Defense Minisrtry ....
In addition, ZANU-PF want their own bank governor(stop MDC from maintaining the high(usurous) interest rates that depress economic activity but benefit foreigners)
- and attorney general (promote laws that stop MDC from repossessing the people's ancestral lands and re-instituting rhodie primacy and priviledges.)....
[Which reminds us of how Kenya's Odinga (the victor in elections2007) was marginalized in a coalition by U/K's Kibaki (the loser) ..]
What would the MDC-T president say to that?
Coalitions are NOT a good idea. Too much time and resources wasted in worthless squabbles instead of the business of governance. You wouldn't wish that on a friend (and that is why USA and UK push it on Africans.)
What reasons would MDC-T give for rejecting outright (and with deadly force) the idea of a coalition government?
Choker, you're right about one thing... coalitions are NOT a good thing for running a country. That's why the MDC, as the democratically elected leaders of the country, should be doing so. This business of letting the loser, a senile, nasty old windbag named Robert the Maggot, run a parallel government structure like the JOC is a strategy for failure. Lets just admit that the JOC is not a part of the GPA and there is no legislation empowering it to even exist! It's a parallel government structure created by Robert the Maggot to keep him in power even though the majority of people voted for him to go away.
Oh Mwari wakanaka, Oh Mwari Wakanaka, Oh Mwari wakanaka, Mwari wakanaka kwaindiri.
Despite the unity governmentZANU PF and the MDC do not trust each other, it will take many years before mistrust disappears in Zimbabwe. JOC is an instrument of power the government uses to remind the MDC about its power. MDC I think must submit to the Mugabe government for the sake of Zimbabwe. If MDC politicians mean their goal of a prosperous and pogressiv Zimbabwe seriously, then they must accept that Mugabe is the political king of Zimbabwe, MDC they can improve the economy, health care, the situation of the nations ethnic minorities, etc. While Zanu PF its in control of the political power. But it is unrealistic to believe that Zanu PF will give up power voluntarily. The most impotent think for the MDC must surely be to improve Zimbabwe and not to have political power?
Mohamed Yusuf , an african college student currently living in Denmark and a proud pan-africanist.
Mohamed:
I categorically disagree with you on almost every point. (I have placed your comments in quotations to avoid confusion over who says what).......
"JOC is an instrument of power the government uses to remind the MDC about its power."
No, actually the JOC is an instrument of power that ZANU-Poof uses to remind everyone else in Zimbabwe about ZANU-Poof's power of physical violence, not their actual record of governance or their powers of persuasion. Actually, MDC-T and MDC-M "are" presently part of the government of Zimbabwe yet they exercise no civilian control over this supposed "instrument" of the government - why is that?
"MDC I think must submit to the Mugabe government for the sake of Zimbabwe."
Are you freaking kidding me? ZANU-Poof LOST the elections of March 2008 - by what measure of reason or by what "mandate" do they have the right to "rule" (rather than "govern") without the consent of the people? For the "sake of the people"? The "people" have already made their voices heard in March 2008 by voting against ZANU-Poof - if the people have already made their preference known, by what right does ZANU-Poof maintain their current position - without any popular mandate or political legitimacy?
"If MDC politicians mean their goal of a prosperous and pogressiv Zimbabwe seriously, then they must accept that Mugabe is the political king of Zimbabwe, MDC they can improve the economy, health care, the situation of the nations ethnic minorities, etc. While Zanu PF its in control of the political power."
KING? You did say "KING", right? So you're in the camp that agrees with Comrade Bob when he said "Zimbabwe is mine!". So you're basically saying that Zimbabwe (ALL Zimbabwe - NOT just ZANU-Poof) fought for liberation so that they could supplant the "Rhodies" or the "English Queen" with a "King" of their own? I doubt many liberation-era revolutionaries would agree with THAT sentiment.
You continued, "But it is unrealistic to believe that Zanu PF will give up power voluntarily. The most impotent think for the MDC must surely be to improve Zimbabwe and not to have political power?" I'm assuming you misspelled and meant "important"..........
No, ZANU-Poof has already shown that they will not give up power voluntarily by their rampage of rape, torture and murder following the "humiliation" (per Robert Mugabe) of the March 2008 vote. But you mistake giving up power voluntarily versus being compelled to give up power by a lack of any mandate from the people.
Also, you assume that MDC actually "can" improve the current conditions in Zimbabwe "without" power, and consequently risk "King Bob" taking credit for any improvement that actually occurs. Surely you have seen the pronouncements from the recent ZANU-Poof Congress that spouted off about how "they" saved Zimbabwe's economy by abandoning their own sovereign currency (after they had already driven it into worthlessness).......?
No, true progress in Zimbabwe will ONLY come with ZANU-Poof relinquishing it's current death-grip on power and the subjugation of the military/intelligence/police to civilian authorities. The military/intelligence/police supposedly "serve" the people of Zimbabwe, but what happens in reality is that the people serve the powers of ZANU-Poof who control the military/intelligence/police.
For any progress to be truly made, the military/intelligence/police of Zimbabwe must be brought to heel, they serve the people of Zimbabwe, they should NOT serve a party even though they currently do.
Zimbabwe, is "owned" by, or "belongs" to ALL Zimbabweans, whether they be "black", "white" or "indian", it belongs to ALL political parties, whether they be ZANU-Poof, MDC-T, MDC-M or even Makoni (LOL!). The arms of the government of Zimbabwe SERVE the people of Zimbabwe, they are subserviant to the people, their is a moral obligation for any government to both represent AND protect the interests of ALL of it's citizens.
And because this is not the case in reality is all the more cause for outrage! Since when do self-proclaimed "progressives" call for the elevation of one political party and it's control over the military/intelligence/police? Oh yeah............ the Soviet Union........
Unfortunately, even the Soviet Union discarded communism, and Eastern Europe shed no tears at it's passing. The Chinese themselves could hardly be called "communist" these days, although they do enforce an iron-fisted control of the security apparatus. But Zimbabwe has already left the era of "one-party" rule and there is no putting the "genie back in the bottle". Whoever governs Zimbabwe, MUST govern (NOT "rule") in the interest of ALL ZImbabweans. When the people grow tired of them, they MUST be turned out by proper elections where each citizen is allowed to voice their support/dissent at the ballot box without fear of retribution, incaceration, torture, rape or murder...........
ANY Government exists to "administer" FOR the people, the people do NOT exist to "serve" the government......... A government "serves" the people at the request of the people, when the people disagree with their government, it is their RIGHT to choose another that will better reflect it's wishes.
All of this is NOT what exists in Zimbabwe today and THAT is why so many of us are pissed off about it! But don't post here any garbage about MDC-T's interests laying in "submitting" to ZANU-Poof or acknowleding Bloodstained Bob as any kind of "King" - otherwise you just put yourself in the corner with those who are against justice, freedom, indvidual rights, the rule of law........... hardly a "progressive" perspective Mohamed........
Be progressive as you want Muhamed, but your post rather illustrates you to be a royalist rather than one who actually believes in the power of the people.
See All Comments