Mugabe’s “last minute” inauguration party planning
Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Court ruled on Tuesday that Zimbabwe’s 31 July Election was free and fair, and that Robert Mugabe was duly elected President. This followed the submission of an election petition to the Constitutional Court by Morgan Tsvangirai of the MDC-T, and the subsequent withdrawal of the petition when it became clear that the Electoral Court would not give the MDC-T access to the election materials they needed to support their election petition.
Mugabe’s inauguration has been scheduled for today – and yesterday it was announced that today would also conveniently be declared a public holiday, so that everyone can attend. (As I recall, inaugurations in the past haven’t been public holidays.) Oh yes – And 30 heads of state (current and former) are expected among the guests.
So, never mind whatever plans, appointments, meetings or other obligations you may have had for Thursday 22 August, they’re all suspended. And hey – If 30 heads of state can clear their calendars to arrive in Harare at a moment’s notice, who are you to complain about a last minute public holiday. Besides, this year Zimbabwe has held a Constitutional Referendum with one month’s notice, and Harmonised Elections with six weeks’ notice. What’s a bit of last minute inauguration party planning?
But is it really that last minute? As this Kubatana subscriber comments, the timing of all of this makes it clear that petition withdrawal or not, there was only one possible outcome of the election petition before the Constitutional Court – Mugabe’s inauguration on Thursday. The “last minute” notion is just to add to the sense of theatre:
Claims that in Zimbabwe there is no rule of the law have been vindicated. How can a judiciary rubber stamp a ruling from Mugabe on Sunday 18 August that he will be sworn in on Thursday 22 August. Chidyausiku reiterated the same in his constitutional judgement on 20 August as if he was something new but a pre-determined statement. What a mockery of justice system in Zimbabwe? On the other hand Bhunu was delivering a judgement to order arrest of MDC lawyers for saying the courts are an appendage of Zanupf, a thing they the mdc lawyers where not supposed to say to the sacred Courts, infringing on freedom of speech as allowed in the constitution of Zimbabwe. Why are the courts not prone to criticism. The courts are above the law. I thought if they were not an appendage of Zanupf they should have simply proved that and not to abuse their powers infringing the constitutional rights of citizens and lawyers doing their job. Why should lawyers be intimidated in a free Zimbabwe? It a shame? What will the international and not sadc say about the rule of law in Zimbabwe and more on sanctions? What are we trying to prove to the superpowers? That we are dictators. That we do not reason? That courts are there to punish voices of reason? And not to protect or remedy from injustice amongst ourselves? Why oppress ourselves in the name of protecting one person over millions of God fearing people? Protect the ruling elite (Zanupf members only). The courts have failed this nation, proving there is no rule of law? They are biased. And the country expects foreign investment? Hey God forbid! Ndanyara lusvika pekupedzesera. Ko kungoti yave one party state vanhu voziva ka, zvinei, than to pretend and wasting people’s time!