2030 Campaign Continues As Owen MUDA NCUBE Fires ED’s Relative For Refusing To Chant The 2030 Slogan

Pearson Mbalekwa’s Dismissal: A Reflection of ZANU PF’s Authoritarian Shift

By Dr Masimba Mavaza

The political landscape in the Midlands Province reached a boiling point when Pearson Mbalekwa started living in fear after refusing to chant the”2030 Anenge Achipo” slogan. One could have only wondered what would come next after he highlighted that he was living in fear, well, he is safe, and has been expelled from ZANU PF – the controversy, the drama. Once a close advisor to President Emmerson Mnangagwa, Mbalekwa’s dismissal not only raises questions about the internal dynamics of the party but also about the state of democracy and constitutionalism in Zimbabwe.

Mbalekwa, a former senior administration officer in the President’s office, was against the party’s call for the “2030 ED anenge achipo” campaign. His refusal to utter slogans he considered not sanctioned by the party was rewarded with instant retaliation by a provincial disciplinary committee, which accused him of contravening the party’s “ethos and principles.” The committee’s ruling, headed by Lewis Matutu, has been characterized as scandalous and suspicious, and has cast a dark shadow over due process and justice.

Most reprehensible is the manner in which this disciplinary hearing was conducted. Mbalekwa was not asked to make an appearance, nor was he issued with a prohibition order—both conditions stated in the ZANU PF constitution. In what manner is a judgment delivered in absentia, particularly where the accused has no clue what he is being charged with? This corruption of justice typifies an overall modus operandi of ZANU PF, where opposition more and more and more is answered by threats and intimidation.

The allegations laid against Mbalekwa are imprecise and general, and one suspects whether the compilers of them had any complete conception of the consequences of their behavior. Natural justice requires specificity and precision; and without them, how can someone prepare for a successful defense? The lack of legal acumen in the disciplinary committee seems merely to add such issues, and one sees an appalling disregard of the rule of law.

In addition, Mbalekwa’s removal calls into question the democratic nature of ZANU PF. The supporters of the 2030 agenda are lauded for exercising their democratic right, yet opponents such as Mbalekwa are sidelined and exiled. The double standard applied not only tarnishes the party’s image but also constitutes a chilling message to members of the party: loyalty to leadership trumps allegiance to democratic values and constitutional dictates.

Mbalekwa himself has insisted that the provincial committee is not able to suspend him, as they are only able to recommend suspension to the National Disciplinary Committee. The fact that he is planning to appeal the ruling highlights the fundamental flaws in the process—if he was not told about the first hearing, how can any hearing that follows be valid? His labeling of the disciplinary committee as a “guillotine committee” is true to many who are convinced that the opposition is being systematically stifled.

The significance of this sacking goes wider than Mbalekwa himself. It undermines all the past assurances by President Mnangagwa that he is not going to stand for election after 2030, a contradiction which will echo right through the party hierarchy. If politicians can be fired for not subscribing to a phrase which the president himself insists is not going to be used to describe his own future, what does this denote about the inner integrity and cohesiveness of ZANU PF?

Secondly, we also need to ask ourselves whether it is criminal to promote constitutionalism. If the ruling party leadership cannot respect their own constitution, how can they lead the populace to respect the law? Such a disconnection between the government party and its founding basis is portentous in as much as it creates ominous implications about governance in Zimbabwe.

Our nation is already in the spotlight with corruption and human rights abuses issues, the removal of Pearson Mbalekwa is a stark reflection of the fragile state of democracy in Zimbabwe. If the trend of silencing dissent continues, the nation risks being labeled undemocratic and authoritarian by the global community and this does not affect only them but the country as a whole.

At this critical juncture, all citizens, whether politically aligned or independent, must take a step back and acknowledge the significance of preserving democratic values. A party which ignores its own constitution cannot be justified as legitimate, and a nation which allows it to happen cannot anticipate its growth. Removing Pearson Mbalekwa is not an individual accident; it is an eye-opener for all those who cherish democracy’s values to take a stand and insist on accountability from their leaders.