Adverse Public Statements
It is also against this background that violence and intimidation must be read in
the widest sense to also include partisan use of office by senior state officials
(including, in particular, security officials) who have constitutional duties to
uphold the laws of the state. These prohibitions should cover the making of public
statements that are designed to affect the outcome of an election or are made
recklessly without due regard to their negative impact on the election process.
There have been instances in the past when senior security personnel have made
statements to the effect that they would not salute certain candidates even if
they won an election. Such statements may have affected voting decisions,
causing fear and helplessness amongst members of the public, especially because
they are made by senior officers of the uniformed forces in an atmosphere of
violence and intimidation which also often involves members of the security
forces. The law must regard such statements as acts of political violence and
intimidation which must be prohibited, with adverse consequences upon those
who make them.
Urgency
Finally, is the public is to have confidence in these measures, justice must be
seen in action in real terms. This means matters must be brought before the
courts expeditiously and the courts must handle the matters on an urgent basis,
ensuring that cases are concluded without undue delay. Perpetrators of offences
must suffer consequences of their actions during the relevant election period and
the more this is visible to the general public, the more it will inculcate a culture of
accountability and therefore build confidence in the system. It may also deter
would-be offenders.
Election observers will have their work cut out. It is important to recognise that in
an environment such as that obtaining in Zimbabwe, when the country has been
in an almost permanent state of electioneering acts of violence and intimidation
take place in any given period. They do escalate when elections are officially
called but even now, before elections have been called, acts of violence and
intimidation have been reported in various areas, including Mbare where regular
‘mobilisation’ meetings are reportedly being held – often under duress. The public
are on permanent alert in regards to elections. It is therefore important that the
‘election observation’ process be read more widely to include other periods even
before official announcement of the election season. Of particular significance is
to keep a watchful eye on the selective application of the law.
Conclusion
Overall, even if the legal provisions have many admirable qualities, at the end of
the day, it is the human factor that will determine the success or failure in
preventing political violence and intimidation. For as long as holders of offices
responsible for acting against such conduct do not exercise professional
independence , the laws will remain impotent against the scourge of violence and
intimidation. The ideal scenario would be a complete overhaul so that such offices
are populated by persons who have greater professional integrity and
independence. The best hope is that they can be compelled to exercise greater
professional independence and that laws be clear on the impact of their failure to
comply with those mandatory rules.
Send comments and feedback to: info@zesn.org.zw or
zesn@africaonline.co.zw
3