Table 3: Votes Cast 2000-2008 Party Number of Votes in 2000 Number of Votes in 2002 Number of Votes in 2005 Number of Votes in 2008 ZANU PF 1,212,302 1,685,212 1,569,867 1,112,773 MDC (Both 1,171,051 1,258,401 1,041,292 1,241,656. Formations.) Independents 92,943 55,145. 16,878 68449 Zanu Ndonga 17,629 6,608 ( Source: Figures for the 2000-2005 election were sourced from africanelection,tripod.com/zw.html#2005_House_of_Assembly_Election. Figures for the 2008 Election were taken from www.zimbabwesituation.com/apr3b_html and supplemented with figures from Veritas.) In the senate the tally was combined MDC (30), ZANU PF (30), Chiefs (18), plus the 10 seats for Provincial Governors. A further 5 seats will be appointed by the new President. From the voting figures it is clear that Morgan Tsvangirai and his formation of the MDC in particular have once again changed the terrain of Zimbabwean politics significantly, with the parliamentary votes of both MDCs and the first round of the Presidential election signalling the defeat of a de-legitimised liberation party. This clearly establishes the firm roots that both Tsvangirai and the MDC have established in Zimbabwe politics, and that no amount of ZANU PF invective can undermine this in the near future. For the Mutambara MDC it is clear that the formation need to take very serious stock of the changes in politics in Matabeleland, in particular the Bulawayo area, and to assess the huge cost of endorsing Simba Makoni who was still perceived by many as a ZANU PF candidate. Because of the long delay in the announcement of elections results, there was a great deal of legal dispute over the legality of this delay on the part of the ZEC. On the 6th April 2008 the MDC submitted an urgent court application to compel the release of the results after what was argued to be the required seven day period. This application was rejected by Justice Uchena on the basis that the provision in subsection 67A(4) of the Electoral Act allowed ZEC the discretion to order a recount and that there were no time provisions to be followed in this regard. 24 In addition to this court appeal to compel the release of the results, the MDC had also adopted the strategy of announcing its own results in order to pre-empt what it understandably perceived as the bias of the ZEC towards the ruling party. On the 2nd April 2008 the MDC Tsvangirai announced that according to its own estimates, garnered from the figures posted outside of polling stations the votes for the presidential election were as follows: Tsvangirai (1,169,860), Mugabe (1,043,451), Makoni (169,636). In the MDC announcement it was then claimed that Tsvangirai had exceeded the 50%-plus-one threshold to be legally declared the winning candidate. In fact a calculation of the figures provided by the MDC showed that Tsvangirai had only garnered 49% of the Presidential vote. As the journalist Patrick Laurence wrote this was a “tactical blunder” which undermined, ….the MDC assertion that Tsvangirai obtained more than half of the vote and provides the ZEC with an argument with which to justify its controversial decision to recount the presidential vote (and as the MDC and many observers suspect, to readjust the result to the advantage of Mugabe and ZANU PF.) 25 Since none of the Presidential candidates received the majority required to be declared an outright winner, the Government of Zimbabwe announced on the 14th May 2008 that a run-off would take place 24 For a full discussion of the legalities of the election delay see IDASA: States in Transition Observatory, “The Inconvenient Truth: A complete guide to the delay in releasing the results of Zimbabwe’s presidential poll.” Prepared by Derek Matyszak of the Research and Advocacy Unit, Zimbabwe. 21st April 2008. See also Derek Matyszak, “The Inconvenient Truth (Part 2)”. 19th April 2008. 25 Patrick Laurence, “Nothing suggests a quick end to Zimbabwe impasse.” The Sunday Independent, 11/05/08. 14