Commentators’ attacks on Madhuku unjustified

IT is unfortunate that both social and political commentators chose to attack National Constitutional Assembly chairman Dr Lovemore Madhuku for the stance of the NCA on participation in the poll held yesterday.



ONT face=”Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif”>I call it unfortunate because these attacks smack of attempts to over-simplify, and indeed compartmentalise Zimbabwean politics, especially at a time when lack of diversity of views is one of the prominent factors that have rendered the situation untenable.


It is important for such critics to recognise that the MDC’s success in the past was due to the fact that it was a conduit through which Zimbabweans could vent their frustration at the mismanagement of their country and oppression that was, and still is, so rife.


The success of the MDC should not in anyway be viewed as testimony to its political competency or prowess.


If Madhuku’s critics dispute this, I challenge them to make a snap survey of their acquaintances who voted for MDC candidates in the past two elections, and ask the names of their members of parliament in their respective constituencies.


They would be surprised at how many people do not know their representatives yet they voted for the opposition.


In light of such a scenario, it is inappropriate for individuals to attack a prominent member of the struggle against tyranny in Zimbabwe.


Zimbabwe finds itself in its seemingly inextricable position because when the majority were fighting a visible common enemy during the pre-Independence era, voices that differed with those of the leadership were quickly and mercilessly snuffed out as it was believed they could only emanate from enemies of the struggle despite the rationality that abounded in such expressions.


As a result, Zimbabwe emerged from Independence with a confused mentality so deeply imbued in its citizenry that it has taken almost two decades for people to wake up and start realising that they can think and act for themselves.


Madhuku may be mistaken in some people’s views but we need to inculcate a nature of tolerance of diversity in our politics at this stage of the struggle.


If we don’t, we will only create conditions for history to repeat itself. In other words, we will replace Pamberi naComrade nhingi with Chinja zvakati and yet these two slogans will remain mere rhetoric if they come from people who are neither allowed, nor encouraged, to think differently or for themselves.


I for one agree with the statements attributed to Madhuku and his organisation.


It gives me solace to know that should the opposition win the election, people like Madhuku and his counterparts will not give any emerging government rest until it fulfils its promises to the people — including an undertaking to facilitate the writing of a new constitution.


Baba Mbezo,

Canada.