1
Managing Election-related Conflicts in Zimbabwe
Introduction
The issue of disputed election outcomes is not a new phenomenon to countries that have carried
out periodic elections to elect new governments after particular periods as stipulated by those
countries’ constitutions or any guiding governance documents. Managing such conflicts has always
been a challenge. Often some of these conflicts have degenerated into outright physical
confrontations in the form of military surges, genocides and other forms of physical conflict capable
of killing or maiming those caught up in the conflict. Zimbabwe is a good example of a country torn
apart by a conflict that is election-related. Allow me ladies and gentlemen, to give background to
the Zimbabwe Crisis.
Background
The Zimbabwe Crisis, which has often been identified by an economic downturn, can be traced to
as far back as 1997.
What does this mean?
It means the only legal route through which post-election conflicts are resolved is through the High
Court which has been the case before the Electoral Court was set up. This has its own shortcomings
and precedent cases have taken forever to be heard in the court. As we speak, there are 16 election
petitions before the High Court, submitted by MDC in 2005 after the General Election, which have
not been resolved. There is also a petition lodged through the same court by Roy Bennett
challenging his disqualification from running for office in the Chimanimani constituency during the
2005 parliamentary elections, which is still unresolved two years after the election.
What then should be done?