EMAIL DETAILS

I thought you would be interested in receiving the preliminary NDI/IRI
statement on the presidential and parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe. The
statement was released earlier today at press conference in Harare. The
situation remains tense in the country as the election authorities have yet
to release the final result of the polls.

With best regards,

Ken


Kenneth Wollack
President
National Democratic Institute
455 Massachusetts Ave., NW, 8th Floor
Washington, DC 20001
202-728-5500 (Tel)
888-875-2887 (Fax)
email: ken@ndi.org
website: www.ndi.org


*PRELIMINARY STATEMENT*

*Harare, August 1, 2018*

This Preliminary Statement is offered by the joint International Republican
Institute (IRI) and National Democratic Institute (NDI) Zimbabwe
International Election Observation Mission (ZIEOM) to the 2018 harmonized
elections. The election is presently incomplete; the ZIEOM will therefore
continue its observation and may issue further statements as warranted.


An international, bipartisan delegation of short-term observers joined the
ZIEOM over the voting period. The delegation members, which hailed from 11
countries, was co-led by: former Liberian President and Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and former Interim President of the Central
African Republic Catherine Samba-Panza. The leadership team was further
comprised of U.S. Congresswoman Karen Bass, and former U.S. Assistant
Secretaries of State for African Affairs, Constance Berry Newman and
Ambassador Johnnie Carson. NDI Senior Associate and Director of Electoral
Programs Patrick Merloe, IRI Vice President for Programs, Scott Mastic, IRI
Regional Director John Tomaszewski, and ZIEOM co-directors Larry Garber
(NDI) and Jessica Keegan (IRI) accompanied the leaders. Through this
delegation, NDI and IRI seek to: express the international community’s
interest in and support for credible, peaceful elections in Zimbabwe;
provide an accurate and impartial report on the character of the election
process to date; and offer recommendations appropriate at this interim
point to improve the electoral process.


The delegation visited Zimbabwe from July 25-August 1, 2018, as part of
IRI/NDI’s long- term election observation mission that began in April and
will continue until the election process reaches its conclusion and the
rightful winner of the presidential election assumes office. The ZIEOM
fielded approximately 60 observers to the country’s 10 provinces to observe
in a mix of urban and rural areas. This statement addresses the election
process within its broader context. It builds upon the findings of
NDI/IRI’s pre-election assessment conducted from June 2-8 and benefits from
the ongoing analysis conducted by the ZIEOM long-term observation. The
mission is being conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Principles
for International Observation, in conformity with the laws of Zimbabwe, and
in reference to international and regional standards for democratic
elections. These standards include the Southern African Development
Community (SADC) Guidelines and Principles for Democratic Elections and the
African Union (AU) Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance.


The delegation is grateful for the warm welcome and cooperation it received
from all Zimbabweans with whom it interacted, including the Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission (ZEC) Chair and election officials around the
country, the leading presidential candidates, political party leaders,
citizen election monitors, other civil society leaders. *IRI/NDI* *recognize
that it is the people of Zimbabwe who will ultimately determine the
credibility of* *their elections.*

*Summary of Initial Observations*


*The mission would like to stress that it is only two days since polling
took place and the results are not yet certified. The period for potential
legal challenges to the results has not begun, and the law presents the
possibility of a presidential runoff election on September 8. It is crucial
to see the electoral process to its conclusion, including monitoring any
electoral challenges, and installing the legitimate winner to office. It is
also important to note that the elections, while vitally important, are
themselves an indicator of the nature of the broader transitional process
in Zimbabwe. The ZIEOM therefore will continue to observe electoral
developments as they unfold.*


If a solely relativistic approach is applied, simply acknowledging
improvements over a history of deeply marred elections could suffice.
However, relative improvements are not the same as meeting Zimbabwe's
constitutional principles for democratic electoral participation. It is
important to view relative improvements in light of such principles.


*Context: *Every election must be seen in its context. Zimbabwe’s 2018
elections are taking place in the context of 18 years of repressed
political rights, deepening economic pain, and a history of rigged
elections, including the use of wide-spread electoral violence in
2008. Violence
and the threat of it were used to a lesser extent in other elections.
Exceptional efforts were therefore required to convince the populace that
citizens are actually free to make political choices through a ballot that
is secret in a process that respects the will of the people and ensures no
retributions for choices made. Otherwise, voters could be haunted by the
ghosts of past elections. This is all the more important as Robert Mugabe’s
37-year rule ended as a result of military intervention.


*Current Process: *Zimbabwe’s July 30 elections present the country with an
historic opportunity to break with the past 18 years of political crisis
and mark the beginning of a genuine democratic transition. The delegation
notes several improvements to the electoral process compared to Zimbabwe’s
past elections, though equally important problems give rise to deep
concerns that the process thus far has not made the mark. The people came
out to vote in great numbers, demonstrating their desire for democratic
governance. The process was peaceful and relatively well administered,
which underscores the need for all stakeholders to act peacefully and work
diligently to honor the people’s will through and beyond the elections.


Incremental improvements in the electoral environment during the
pre-election period were insufficient to establish broad confidence among
the political competitors and Zimbabwe’s sharply divided populace. Thus, no
matter what the outcome of the harmonized (general) elections, including a
possible presidential runoff, those who legitimately assume office and
those in opposition will need to marshal the will and demonstrate concerted
efforts to unify the country, if progress is to be made. Civil society and
the international community will need to support such efforts while
critically reviewing them to ensure their sincerity and effectiveness. Such
vigilance in support of genuine democratic progress and credible, peaceful
elections is equally important as the presidential election unfolds in the
days ahead.


*Campaigning*


Political parties and candidates, including those from the opposition, were
generally free to campaign across the country without the widespread
violence and harassment of the past. This was the most notable improvement
over past elections. The most noticeable incident of violence was a grenade
attack at the June 23 rally of President Emmerson Mnangagwa in which at
least 49 people were injured, including the country’s Vice President, and
two people later died from their injuries. The police are still
investigating that deplorable incident.


To their credit all presidential candidates entered into a well-publicized
Peace Pledge. The top two candidates, Emmerson Mnangagwa of ZANU-PF and
Nelson Chamisa of MDC-A, sent surrogates on their behalf. All sides managed
to avoid large-scale confrontations, although they were not held
accountable to the code of conduct for various violations that took place,
such as localized intimidation, tearing down of campaign posters, and other
infractions.


Unfortunately, campaign freedom was significantly offset by: numerous
incidents of distributing food and agricultural assistance in politically
partisan manners that favored the ruling party (ZANU-PF) and other overt
uses of state resources for electoral advantage; partisan activities by
some traditional leaders in contravention of constitutional requirements
for their political neutrality; and extreme bias in state media, including
television and radio (which is the main source by which Zimbabweans get
political news). As a consequence, the campaign playing field was unfairly
balanced. Digital media was more open than traditional media, though the
social media environment was negatively affected by hate speech, including
attacks against women candidates for president and other offices, as well
as excessive focus on personalities over the substantive issues concerning
voters.


*Voters’ Free Political Choice*


Universal and equal suffrage is guaranteed under Zimbabwe’s constitution.
The relatively free campaigning allowed citizens to make comparisons to
past elections and gain information about the choices before them. Voter
information campaigns, including assurances of ballot secrecy conducted by
the election commission and civil society organizations provided positive
messages on voter rights. However, the improvements were likely
insufficient to build broad public confidence that voters could make a
choice adverse to the ruling establishment without fear of violence or
other retribution should the opposition prevail.1


Credible reports to ZIEOM’s long-term observers and reports of various
credible citizen groups, including the Zimbabwe Electoral Support Network
(ZESN),2 We the People of Zimbabwe (WTPZ),3 and others, demonstrated that
there were coercive actions around provision of government food and other
assistance; so-called “soft-intimidation” (such as reminding citizens in
threatening ways of the 2008 violence and its return unless the ruling
party wins); lack of widespread publicity campaigns on state radio and
other media that the military would accept a ruling party loss; incidents
of citizens being coerced into attending ZANU-PF rallies; numerous
incidents of ruling party or government officials demanding to see
citizens’ voter registration slips and saying that the new voter
registration system would allow them to know how the person voted; and
incidents of military personnel in civilian clothing conducting politically
intimidating activities. Such incidents undermine voters’ free political
choice, particularly given the widespread use of electoral violence as a
form of intimidation and retribution in Zimbabwe's 2008 elections.


*Inclusive Elections*


Zimbabwe’s constitution requires inclusive elections, equality of the vote,
and full gender equality in all agencies of government. However, there are
no similar requirements established for political parties to achieve gender
equality. Women comprise 54 percent of the electorate, yet only 18 percent
of candidates presented by parties in the 2018 harmonized elections were
women. Four of the 23 presidential candidates are women, and some women
stood for election as independents. Standing as an independent gains access
to the ballot, though raising the resources necessary to campaign is
extraordinarily difficult outside of the party contexts.


Politically active women, including party activists, presidential,
parliamentary and ward-level candidates, faced high levels of abuse and
intimidation during the electoral period. In particular, media attacks
against female candidates were common. Traditional and social media
coverage about women candidates focused on superficial attributes such as
appearance, and politically active women were often cast in a biased,
derogatory and pejorative manner. For example, the four women presidential
candidates received a disproportionate amount of negative press undermining
their credibility as viable candidates. The ZEC Chair, who also is a woman,
has been similarly targeted with criticisms based on her gender.


The Constitution provides that all Zimbabwe citizens have the right to
vote. There are approximately three million Zimbabweans living outside the
country, many fleeing the harsh conditions of the last 18 years. A petition
was filed seeking to allow them to vote in their countries of residence,
but the Constitutional Court, on May 29, 2018, denied the petition.


Young women and men, particularly those who recently came of age to vote,
were the subject of numerous voter education campaigns by the ZEC, civil
society, and even some parties.

Youth participation in rallies and other campaign events was fairly wide
spread and, the notable liberalization of the campaign environment
contributed to a high number of youth reporting strong enthusiasm to
participate in elections.


The Constitution provides that persons with disabilities (PWD) and other
persons with special needs must be accommodated so they may fully
participate in political life. Though voter education material to
accommodate the visually impaired existed, it is unclear whether
distribution of materials addressing the needs of blind voters reached its
intended beneficiaries. In addition, while many stations featured special
voting booths designed to accommodate voters in wheelchairs, many polling
centers lacked sufficient ramps for disabled voters and universal access
remained a challenge.


*Election Administration*


The ZEC has taken a number of steps to open the electoral process,
including establishment of Multi-Party Liaison Committees (MPLCs) at the
national and provincial levels, early outreach to civil society, and
cooperatively facilitating the government’s decision to accredit
international election observers from beyond the region for the first time
since 2002. In many cases, the regional MPLCs have provided useful forums
for party interaction, though the national MPLC was convened by the ZEC on
only four occasions with some difficulties. The

ZEC also successfully recruited approximately 130,000 polling officials to
staff Zimbabwe’s 10,985 polling stations and smoothly conducted training
for those officials.


Opposition parties consistently accused the ZEC of being politically
biased. Further fueling those concerns was a lack of consultation with the
parties on the design of the presidential ballot, and there was not
meaningful observation of the ballot production, storage and transportation
processes.

The presidential ballot is legally required to be arranged alphabetically,
and regulations require that the candidates’ names appear in a single
column.4 However, the presidential ballot had 14 of the 23 candidates’
names in one column, and the second column of only nine candidates started
with incumbent President Mnangagwa. The lopsided ballot layout provided a
clear advantage to the incumbent, though the exact magnitude of the
advantage is impossible to measure.


The ZEC refused the opposition’s requests to test the quality of the
indelible ink used on Election Day to mark voters’ fingers to prevent
multiple voting and refused their request to randomly audit the security
safeguards built into the ballot papers. The no-bid contracts awarded for
procurement of such sensitive materials also did not build confidence in
the ZEC’s impartiality. The ZEC fairly consistently took a “legalistic”
approach, saying that since the law did not require a certain action it
need not do it, and its public communications were weak. It did take some
discretionary actions however, such as changing the positions of voting
booths so that voters’ backs would face officials. After opposition parties
and civil society organizations protested the change, the ZEC brought the
issue to the MPLC and upon party agreement reversed that decision.


Significantly, ZESN and others involved in Zimbabwe’s Election Situation
Room (a platform of civil society groups) noted on July 28, that ZEC did
not sufficiently present details on transparency and safeguards for its
results tabulation and transmission process. For example, timely
publication of polling station level results in addition to the aggregated
presidential result would allow parties, citizens, and citizen groups to
verify copies of official tally sheets given to party agents and posted
publicly at polling stations. The ZEC should be commended for adopting the
practice of providing such copies. Plus, it informed the ZIEOM and other
international actors that it planned to publish on its website polling
station results, though it committed late to that change and did not widely
communicate the decision.


*New Voters Registry*


Another major effort of the ZEC was creating a new voters registry using
biometric voter registration (BVR) that included photos and fingerprints of
eligible voters. This was a result of moving production of the voters
registry to the ZEC’s authority rather than the Registrar General’s office,
which was widely perceived to be biased in past elections. The registration
process went relatively well, creating a roll of 5,695,706 registered
voters, 54 percent of whom are women.


Unfortunately, the ZEC did not release publicly the preliminary voters
registry for independent verification and confidence building. The ZEC
explained that it was not legally required, so it could not do so even
though the preliminary voters registry was released in the 2013 elections.
In addition, upon registration citizens were given slips that contained
their identification number, and incidents of party activists demanding to
see such slips undermined confidence of some voters in the secrecy of the
ballot.


The final voters registry was released very close to Election Day, which
limited the ability of parties and civil society to conduct robust
verifications. ZESN and an anonymous team of volunteers known as Team
Pachedu did verifications nonetheless. Team Pachedu found the registry to
be unacceptable. ZESN, which employed well-known and reliable
methodologies, found that the voter registry was a major improvement over
the disputed 2013 registry, though there were still some weaknesses. The
weaknesses included underrepresentation of youth and an 11 percent
underrepresentation of eligible urban populations. Inadequate allocation of
registration resources to urban areas and a degree of disinterest among
urban populations could have been among the contributing factors for urban
underrepresentation.


*Legal Framework and Quality of Justice*


The legal framework for Zimbabwe’s elections provided by the Constitution,
Electoral Act, and regulations could provide the basis for a credible
electoral process. The framework was amended on May 28, 2018, just two days
before the elections were officially set. While the amendments in some
respects opened the electoral process, several key points from inter- party
negotiations concerning independence of the ZEC were omitted. The MPLCs
also added a dimension for resolving disputes and potentially reducing
tensions without turning to the courts, though the performance of the
national level MPLC did not provide a consistently effective resolution
mechanism. Also, the electoral law provides for expedited processing of
cases of politically motivated violence and intimidation, and more than 50
magistrates were designated to address such cases. This was a significant
development.


The courts demonstrated some capacities during the pre-election period to
act independently of political bias, although key decisions were reversed
on appeal. The example of rulings concerning use of schools, their
transportation resources, and compelling school children to participate in
ZANU-PF rallies illustrate this matter, with restraints ordered by a High
Court being dismissed by the Supreme Court. Such examples have been cited
as evidence of judicial bias favoring the ruling party, including by those
who note that the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice, and Judge President
of the High Court, though constitutionally appointed by the president, have
ties to the military and ruling party, which may present conflicts of
interest when adjudicating electoral-related cases. Nonetheless, it is
crucial that those with electoral grievances seek redress though the
judicial process even while advocating for improved quality of justice.
This is an essential element of upholding the rule of law even as elections
are also judged in the court of public opinion.


ELECTION DAY


Zimbabweans turned out on Election Day in great numbers, demonstrating
their desire for democratic governance, and the electoral environment was
peaceful. The polls were generally well administered in accordance with
procedures, and over 100,000 polling officials seemed experienced and
appeared to work diligently in the presence of political party agents from
different camps, who for the most part cooperated throughout the process.
Included among the officials were a large number of women, many of whom
served as presiding officers. The police performed their duties
commendably. Nonpartisan civil society monitors were also present in large
numbers where the ZIEOM observed.

In the densely populated urban areas of Harare, observers noted long lines
in some polling centers, with confusion among some voters about which
sub-polling place was theirs. That resulted in some people leaving the
lines, including women with babies and those who had left children at home
to be attended. There were also examples of people waiting in line for
hours and finding out that they were in the wrong place, which perhaps
could have been mitigated had voters lists been posted outside the
stations. In some polling stations the official list of voters who were
turned away for various reasons showed significant numbers. ZESN reported
that at six percent of polling stations nationally 26 or more people were
turned away from voting, while in Harare 19 percent of polling stations had
such numbers of voters turned away.5 The problems just noted did not appear
as frequently to observers around the country.


Our observers noted that the layout of most polling stations appeared to
safeguard voting secrecy. ZIEOM observers noted instances of assisted
voting in accordance with procedures. Assisted voting occurred infrequently
except in one rural area where more than 50 voters had been assisted before
midday.


The counting process, though slow in many places, generally went well in
the polling stations observed by ZIEOM. The count went well into the night
in many locations. No examples of party agents refusing to sign tally
sheets were observed, though tally sheets were not posted publicly at some
polls even though that is required by law.


RECOMMENDATIONS


Appreciating that the electoral process is presently incomplete, the ZIEOM
will consider offering further recommendations as appropriate in the days
ahead and in its final report. In the spirit of international cooperation
and demonstrating support for Zimbabwe’s continuing process, the delegation
offers the following recommendations.


1) The ZEC should take immediate steps to ensure the public of its
independence and political impartiality by completing the vote tabulation
process for all presidential, parliamentary, and local elections in an open
and transparent manner that is verifiable by the parties and the public.
The ZEC should publish and timely update its Excel spread sheet populated
with polling station results as the ZEC’s Chair said the commission will do.


2) If a presidential runoff is required, the ZEC should promote
substantive and peaceful dialogue with the two presidential candidates
throughout the runoff election period, for example in person and through
more effective use of the MPLCs and civil society. Concerned international
actors should promote open dialogue concerning matters that need to be
addressed to conclude the process credibly and peacefully.


3) The candidates of the two major political parties should
recommit personally and in public to their Peace Pledge and lead meaningful
dialogue to complete credible, peaceful elections. Whether or not there is
a runoff in the period ahead, such leadership will be important for
safeguarding democratic rights, and sustaining peaceful political
competition beyond these elections.

4) The Zimbabwe Defence Forces should reassure the public that it
will accept the legitimate result of the election process no matter who is
the winner and that it will be politically neutral as that result is
transparently and credibly determined, including during a presidential
runoff election should one be declared.


5) The electoral contestants should pledge to pursue any electoral
complaints and grievances only through peaceful means, including through
judicial processes, while the judiciary should fulfill its constitutional
obligations to act impartially and in a timely manner to address electoral
challenges and provide redress for complaints that are lodged.


6) The people of Zimbabwe, having the most at stake in these
elections and having demonstrated their hopes by turning out to vote in
great numbers, also must meet their responsibility going forward to demand
that government and political leaders honor the voters’ will and deliver
peace and personal security throughout the electoral period.


7) The international community, particularly the African Union and
SADC, should actively encourage the government of Zimbabwe, the candidates,
and political parties to deliver a credible, peaceful conclusion to the
2018 harmonized election process, including through a presidential runoff
if it is called, and encourage stakeholders to work beyond the elections to
take the country forward on a genuine democratic path.


8) The media, including government-controlled communications
media, should uphold the constitutional provisions for impartial treatment
of electoral contestants and follow journalistic principles for honest and
accurate electoral coverage.


9) The ZEC, political parties, and civil society should work
diligently to advance the constitutional principles for inclusive
elections, particularly for greater participation by women, youth, and
people withdisabilities.


10) Civil society organizations that are monitoring the electoral
process, including conditions in the broader electoral environment, should
be encouraged to vigorously continue their efforts throughout the electoral
period and to advocate for reforms and other improvements that they
identify as a result of their monitoring.


No matter who wins the elections, those who seek to establish a democratic
Zimbabwe will have to unite the country and find a way to work effectively
with their political opposition and civil society. The 2018 elections are
but one critical step in taking that path. The overall health of Zimbabwe’s
democratic transition requires a strong multi-party system, a free and
vibrant press, and for Zimbabweans to actively engage in creating a
responsible and accountable government. The ZIEOM will continue to observe
the electoral process, and IRI and NDI stand ready to help.


1E.g., a reputable public opinion survey by the Afrobarometer just a month
before the election indicated that 44 percent of Zimbabwe’s population
believed that the country’s security forces would not accept a ruling party
loss. *Afrobarometer Dispatch No. 223*, survey commissioned by the
Institute for Justice and Research (South Africa), and field work conducted
between June 25 and July 6, 2018.

2 E.g., ZESN Long-Term Observation Report: *Issue One*; *Issue Two*; and *Issue
Three*.

3 E.g., WTPZ Brief: *Electoral Malpractices Pre Election*: May30-24July,
2018, report Date 25 July 2018.

4 E.g., Open Parly Zimbabwe, *ZEC wrong on ballot paper design: Veritas*,
article date, July 18, 2018; and Veritas, *Election Watch 34-2018 -
Presidential Ballot Paper*, July 18, 2018.

5 ZESN *2018 Harmonized Elections Preliminary Statement*, July 31, 2018