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?

Select target paragraph3