The right to democratic entitlement : time for change?

Abstract

Condemnation of the 2002 Zimbabwe Presidential Election is widespread and convincing. The election has been variously described by the United States (US), the European Union (EU), Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway and by observers of the fourteen member Southern African Development Community (SADC) of which Zimbabwe itself is a member as" ... fundamentally flawed and inconsistent with norms and standards of the SADC ... ", " ... a systematic subversion of democracy' and as" ... [a] poll marked by numerous, profound irregularities that ended in an outcome that thwarted the people's will. [Consequently] Mugabe can claim victory but not democratic legitimacy". Glenys Kinnock, Co-President of the EU/ACP (African Caribbean and Pacific) Joint Assembly in the European Parliament (EP) described it as " ... a coldly calculated, predetermined outcome resulting from draconian legislation, widespread and sustained political violence and intimidation". This condemnation stemmed from months of State sponsored political violence and intimidation, including torture, murder and rape of opposition party members and workers, repressive security legislation, a huge propaganda campaign by State media and, on the election day itself, the disenfranchisement of large numbers of people as a result of government engineered queues which forced people to wait in many regions for up to thirty hours. Reduction of polling stations in urban areas where opposition support was strongest resulted in several thousands of registered voters failing to cast their votes even after three days and two nights of queuing. Curiously, neither the South African nor Nigerian election observer teams wished to describe the election as free and fair though they both approved the result.