“In the main, the electoral process was characterised by an atmosphere of peace and political tolerance. Political parties and candidates were able to freely undertake their political activities unhindered. SEOM wishes to take this opportunity to congratulate the people of Zimbabwe for turning up in large numbers to exercise their democratic right to choose their political leaders. A new chapter in the process of consolidation of democracy in the Republic of Zimbabwe has been opened and we hope that the people of Zimbabwe will work together to build their country. This is a major step in the implementation of the GPA and I therefore would like to take this opportunity to urge the political leadership and all the people of Zimbabwe to uphold peace and stability. SEOM wishes to implore all Zimbabweans to exercise restraint, patience and calm. The future of your country is in your hands. More importantly, SEOM would like to call on all political parties to respect and accept the election results as will be announced by the constitutionally mandated Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC). Whoever is aggrieved with the results, should not resort to violence, but rather should go to the court of law, or engage in dialogue.” The African Union stated on 2 August: “The Mission wishes to express its hope for a successful conclusion to the 2013 Harmonised Elections, and urges all electoral stakeholders in Zimbabwe to continue to communicate messages of peace and nonviolence to sustain the reigning calm political environment. To this end, it is critical for all contesting political parties to pursue the established legal channels and dispute resolution mechanisms in resolving disagreements that might arise.” In their final report released in October the AU observation mission stated: “82. In general, while the AUEOM observes that the 31 July 2013 Harmonised Elections in Zimbabwe were professionally and successfully conducted by the ZEC despite the financial, time and staff constraints.” After that they listed a number of recommendations. SADC Parliamentary Forum (SADC PF) stated on 3 August: “Based on its overall findings, the Mission is of the view that there existed a generally conducive and peaceful environment in which the elections were conducted. Notwithstanding the challenges and observations made thereto, Zimbabweans were mostly accorded the opportunity to freely express their will in voting for political parties and representatives of their choice. The SADC PF Election Observation Mission to the 2013 Zimbabwe Harmonised General Elections is therefore of the view that the 2013 Zimbabwe Harmonised General Elections were, on the whole, a credible reflection of the will of the people 34 of Zimbabwe. Accordingly, the Mission declares the 2013 Zimbabwe Harmonised General Elections as having been free and fair. In Conclusion, the SADC PF Election Observation Mission to the 2013 Zimbabwe Harmonised Elections extends its hearty commendation Zimbabwe’s Political Leadership, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), the People of Zimbabwe and other critical stakeholders for the mature and progressive way they conducted themselves prior, during and post the 2013 Zimbabwe Harmonised General Elections.” Contrary to these international observers who despite reporting on deficiencies concluded in a positive tone, the main domestic observers organised by ZESN stated in their final report released in September 2013: “In conclusion, ZESN reiterates its concerns on the critical factors such as inadequate and delayed voter education, an inadequate and flawed voter registration process, failure to provide the voters’ roll to political parties and stakeholders on time, chaotic special voting, and the high numbers of assisted and turned away voters. These highlighted challenges seriously compromised the credibility and fairness of the 31 July 2013 Harmonised Elections.” All observer missions and parties agreed that the election day was conducted in a peaceful manner. However, the assessment of how serious the deficiencies were for the credibility of the results varied a lot. The MDC-T stated immediately after the elections that they were a sham and they challenged the elections in court, a case they later withdrew because they felt the judges did not support them in providing evidence, see Section 14.3 on the MDC Constitutional Court Petition. 11.2 The Voter Registers and Multiple or Illegitimate Voting The voting was ward-based. That meant that within each of the around 1,900 wards a voter could vote at any of the polling stations. Each polling station would have the same list of voters. The main measure against double voting was that the finger would be marked with indelible ink after the voting. The names on the voter lists were crossed out when voters voted. In theory one could check the voters list after the elections, but the lists were sealed off in packages that could only be opened by a court decision (the Election Code Section 70, and the Manual for Presiding Officers and Election Officers Conducting Ordinary Poll Harmonised Elections 2013 Section J18). On election day many voters showed up in a ward where they thought they had been registered without finding their names on the lists. When this became a problem, the ZEC announced that voters should vote by presenting a voter registration receipt for the constituency. The presiding officer was to record the names of such voters. The receipt did not indicate the ward. This lead to a number of allegations of fake voting receipts being issued to illegitimate voters who were then able to vote. There were also allegations that the ink could be removed and that voters then could vote several times, based on the false 18 The provision to pack the voters list was only given in the manual, not in the act. 35