When news of the military coup in Gabon first broke earlier this week, most stories led with accounts of Gabonese people celebrating the overthrow of the despotic Bongo political dynasty, which held its grip on the nation’s presidency for over half a century. Reports of jubilation in the capital, Libreville, and of residents embracing military personnel in the streets following a deeply contested election in which then-president Ali Bongo sought a third term, took me straight back to 2017 in Zimbabwe.
Then, as now, news of the coup led with visuals of citizens in Harare embracing and taking selfies with soldiers in celebration of the removal of Robert Mugabe as head of state. The Zimbabwe military at first denied that this was a coup. Even as the junta seized control of the state broadcaster its leaders were at pains to point out that this was a coup in defence of the people, rather than a callous power-grab, undermining the principles of democratic process.
Yet the promise of Zimbabwe’s political transformation following the military’s installation of former vice president Emmerson Mnangagwa as president was painfully short-lived, as should have been expected. Because there is no such thing as a coup in defence of democracy. History has shown us time and again that such upheavals lead to further oppression and instability.
However much a military junta may claim to be defending the country’s people from an autocratic and illegitimate leadership, the responsibility for the removal of that leadership remains the people’s alone. The unconstitutional seizure of power using the military’s exclusive capacity to threaten violence is not a sound foundation upon which to re-build a broken democracy.
Our efforts must consistently prioritise the people's right to choose their leaders through democratic processes
Our efforts must consistently prioritise the people's right to choose their leaders through democratic processes.
Two highly contested presidential elections were held days apart in Gabon and Zimbabwe this past week, with opposition candidates challenging the results announced by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and Gabonese Elections Centre calling the polls for each country’s incumbent president.
On Tuesday, Zimbabwe’s main opposition party, the CCC, called for the elections to be re-run amidst allegations of flawed polls and election fraud, and appealed to other African nations to mediate the impasse. In the latter respect, the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) has come to the table for the very first time, with its observer mission essentially declaring that the election was not free and fair, citing issues such as voting delays, opposition rally bans and biased state media coverage.
According to the mission, although “generally calm and peaceful”, the election "fell short of the country's constitutional requirements of the constitution of Zimbabwe, the Electoral Act, and the Sadc Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections” — an effective indictment by a regional bloc which has traditionally steered clear of criticism in reporting on elections in Zimbabwe.
Sadc's stance signals a significant shift which raises questions about the organisation's approach to elections and democracy in the region.
Should Sadc support calls for a re-run under international supervision, it would mark a significant departure from past practices. Such a move would signal a commitment to democratic principles and the protection of the rights and voices of African citizens. It would also demonstrate that we, as African nations, are willing and able to stand up for each other and collectively promote constitutionalism and democratic governance in times of crisis.
South Africa, as a regional leader, plays a pivotal role in shaping the response to events in in Sadc. While the official statement from the South African Presidency congratulated Zimbabwe on holding elections, it remained silent on the preliminary findings of observer missions.
Earlier this year, President Cyril Ramaphosa emphasised the “importance of consolidating democracy and good governance across Africa” in a speech delivered during an Africa Day celebration. Sadc flagging the results of Zimbabwe’s electoral process could be the perfect moment for the president to demonstrate his commitment to such values, instead of merely “taking note”, as the government has thus far, of the preliminary pronouncements by AU and Sadc observers.
Our government's approach to crisis engagement in the Sadc region tends to centre solely on party-to-party and government-to-government discussions with ruling regimes, rather than engaging with the people they are supposed to serve. In fact, the last significant visit to Zimbabwe by a South African delegation was by the ANC national executive committee meeting with its counterparts in Zanu-PF in 2020 — a visit marred by controversy over the inappropriate use of SANDF aircraft.
But when last did our government meet with civil society organisations, youth groups, religious organisations and opposition political parties to gain a more comprehensive perspective on the situation in Zimbabwe? South Africa should stand with and stand up for people, not regimes.
We should follow Sadc's lead in pointing out election irregularities and demonstrate our commitment to upholding democratic values. And we must remember that good regional neighbourliness is not turning a blind eye to injustice but championing the very principles of constitutionalism, democracy, human rights and good governance which we espouse within the borders of our own country.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.