28 IRI/NDI Zimbabwe International Election Observation Mission Final Report candidates, allegations of vote-buying and the use of members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) to conduct party primaries. A number of ZANU-PF “political heavyweights,” including several war veterans, were defeated in the initial voting. The ZANU-PF politburo resolved to conduct reruns in 17 constituencies on May 14, 2018. The opposition primaries were held in mid-May 2018 in constituencies where, in most cases, candidates were not designated through consensus. Like with ZANU-PF, the opposition primaries were chaotic, with allegations of fraud, vote rigging, imposition of candidates, intimidation, and, in some cases, physical clashes occurring between supporters of different aspirants. Fueling the tension was that some MDC-T officials opposed the agreed-upon seat-sharing formula and fielded their own candidates in constituencies reserved for smaller coalition parties. In 13 constituencies, multiple MDC Alliance-affiliated candidates submitted nomination papers to contest the national elections, which led to a split in the MDC Alliance vote in a number of constituencies. The PRC, MDC-T, and NPF also had double nominations in a number of constituencies. On June 14, the Zimbabwe Nomination Courts processed application documents from aspiring candidates for presidential, National Assembly, Senate, women’s quota, and Provincial Council races. Notably, the process was marked by a record number of candidates contesting the presidency, of political parties fielding candidates, and of aspirants contesting as independent candidates.32 The Nomination Courts remained open beyond the official deadline of 4:00 p.m. in order to accommodate the numerous candidates. Some candidates were asked to correct their documents or resubmit different credentials by midnight on June 14. One of the challenges raised by some candidates and parties before nomination day was the unavailability of the voters roll, which would have allowed political parties and candidates to verify if nominees were actually on the voters roll. Candidates were required to present documents proving they had obtained the requisite signatures of support to run for office. However, the lack of a published voters roll did not lead to significant issues in practice, and no prospective candidates were rejected because their nomination papers did not include those on the voters roll. Incorrect and incomplete documentation was the most common reason given for rejection of nominations. There are no specific regulations regarding the formation of political parties. As a result, 133 parties announced their intention to contest in the 2018 harmonized elections. However, only 55 parties ultimately fielded candidates for the National Assembly races.33 There were also 246 independent candidates competing for National Assembly seats; in many cases, these independents were former incumbents, who lost in their party’s primaries. In addition, 6,576 candidates contested for local authority seats. Voter Education The Electoral Act mandates ZEC to oversee voter education initiatives conducted by non-state actors, including civil society, churches, community-based organizations, and others.34 For the 32 Equitable treatment of candidates and parties during elections is important to protecting the integrity of democratic elections and the right of every citizen to be elected. 33 According to the Extrao rdinary Government Gazette June 22, 2018, of the 133 parties registered with the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), only 55 fielded candidates, however, it should be noted that the ZEC didn’t issue an updated candidate list after the withdrawal/dispute period ended following the initial registration deadline. 34 Veritas challenged provisions of the Electoral Act, which have the effect of giving ZEC a monopoly over voter education. Although ZEC lawyers acknowledged in court the unconstitutionality of several legislative provisions that Veritas was challenging, the court on June 27 dismissed the case. The court’s reasoning behind this judgment was based generally on the lack of legal capacity for Veritas, since it is a trust not a legal person.