or ‘safe’ (27%) come the time of a next election. 13% felt indifferent on the matter [Q57E]. (Other items in this question are discussed in the context of elections and safety.) Perspectives on the preceding constitution Zimbabweans’ awareness of the new constitutional processes rose substantially in the period from 2009 to 2010. So too, did their insistence that the old constitution should be completely replaced. A consistently miniscule group – 3% in 2009; 4% in 2010 – insisted that the old constitution met the needs of Zimbabweans. There were sharp rises from 2009 to 2010 in respondents who thought that the constitution had to be amended – 15% to 28%, and who thought it needed to be replaced8 – 19% to 38%. 4.3 The 2010-11 constitutional process There is haste and impatience that a new constitution needs to be adopted and that the constitutionshapers should ‘get on with the job’. Yet, there is concurrent insistence that more civic education is needed on constitutional matters before the draft can be taken into a referendum. The COPAC process is seen as quite credible. Only small percentages of respondents report having experienced problems, or having experienced prescriptions regarding the nature of inputs. Anecdotal reports prior to the survey had suggested that there might have been widespread intimidation and prescription on the inputs into the process. Respondents felt reasonably confident that the inputs would be reflected in the to-be-drafted constitution (42% reckoned it would). Yet, they also expressed doubt as to whether the ‘meaningful’ COPAC process would carry over into the formulation of a constitution that will be good for democracy. The COPAC process is widely known: Close to three-quarters of the respondents (72%) have heard of the unfolding constitutionmaking process [Q21A]. (74% had heard of the Constitution of Zimbabwe [Q19].) However, only 24% of respondents report that they had attended a COPAC constitutional outreach meeting in their areas [Q22A]. This attendance appears to have been overwhelmingly by personal choice, rather than coercion [Q22B]. The 2010 survey retained a 2009 item on Zimbabweans’ understanding of the constitution-making process (Table 13). (To prevent distortions, those respondents who were not aware of the process, were excluded from the tally.) The results showed a substantial increase in awareness of the process, as judged by the percentage of the total sample that responded – rising from 38% to 70%. The 70% comes to within the margin-of-error range of the 74% who reported having heard of the constitution. 8 This theme was covered through an equivalent (not identical) question formulation in 2010, to capture the rising three-point scale of insistence on a new constitution [Q20]. 38