The Zanu PF government used proxies to capture the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) through the election of a new leadership with leanings towards the ruling party, insiders say.
Florence Taruvinga, a technician with the state-owned power
utility Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority (Zesa), emerged victorious,
garnering 73 votes against ZCTU president Peter Mutasa’s 59 in elections held
under controversial circumstances.
Mutasa is viewed as an ally of MDC Alliance leader Nelson
Chamisa.
Taruvinga, previously Mutasa’s deputy, is the first woman
to become ZCTU president. Zanu PF and
MDC-T led by Douglas Mwonzora were quick to celebrate her victory.
Mwonzora is widely viewed in opposition and civil society
circles as a Zanu PF proxy.
Doug Coltart, who followed the ZCTU election process
closely as a lawyer for the Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union of Zimbabwe
(Artuz), said the elections were manipulated to tilt the ground in favour of a
pro-Zanu PF faction in the country’s leading labour centre.
Artuz and the Footwear Tanners and Allied Workers’ Union
delegates were stripped of their voting rights ahead of the congress under
unclear circumstances.
ZCTU wrote to the two unions on October 8 advising them
that their voting rights had been stripped basing on legal opinion from the
labour body’s lawyers Muchadehama and Makono (MMM).
However, the two unions on October 20 represented by their
lawyers Mtetwa and Nyambirai filed an urgent chamber application seeking the
postponement of the elective conference until the issue of their voting rights
was addressed.
Justice Fatima Maxwell ruled in favour of ZCTU, resulting
in the holding of the elective congress.
But Coltart raised concern that proceedings leading to the
congress were pre-determined to ensure the “capture” of the organisation by the
state.
“The story needs to be told,” the human rights lawyer said.
“Essentially, it relates to the co-option of the ZCTU by
the regime at the just-ended elective congress; some of the shenanigans that
have gone on in the lead up to that congress in order to facilitate that
co-option.”
Coltart added: “It’s quite concerning, it has implications
for the society as a whole.
“The labour movement is being co-opted and I think it’s
part of a broader strategy of co-option that the regime appears to be rolling
out.
“I have been involved in the legal side of things trying to
defend the rights of certain unions who were stripped of their voting rights in
the lead up to the congress as part of this strategy of co-option.”
In an urgent Chamber application, Artuz and Footwear
Tanners and Allied Workers’ Union argued stripping the unions of their voting
rights was illegal, discriminatory and irrational.
“The decision to exclude the applicants’ delegates from
voting at the general conferences ostensibly made on the basis of their
non-compliance with section 9.5 of the ZCTU constitution, which requires that
the names of delegates and current membership be submitted to the
secretary-general four months prior to the conference, which according to the
MMM legal opinions gives a cut-off date of 31st May, 2021,” ARTUZ
secretary-general Robson Chere said in his founding affidavit.
“However, if the decision to hold the general conference in
October 2021 was only taken by the general council at a meeting held on the
26th June 2021 and communicated to the 1st and 2nd applicants on the 29th July
2021 and 2nd July 2021 respectively.
“Therefore, it was impossible for any affiliates to comply
with clause 9.5 of the constitution and it is a fact that none did.”
Chere argued the elective conference was supposed to be
postponed under the circumstances.
“Therefore, this means that all affiliates, whether new or
old, are in exactly the same position with regard to non-compliance with clause
9.5 of the constitution.
“If however, the ZCTU is determined to go ahead with its
general conference on 27th October 2021 without compliance with clause 9.5 by
any affiliates on the basis that non-compliance may be ratified, then such
ratification must and can only be done with respect to all affiliates.
“To ratify non-compliance by some affiliates while refusing
to ratify non-compliance for others would be patently discriminatory,
arbitrary, irrational and unlawful.”
ARTUZ president Obert Masaraure and Mutasa were diplomatic
when asked on the next course of action.
“Yes, we had issues,” Mutasa said. “We were not happy about
the process, but so far our team has decided to let that be water under the
bridge. We are moving on to the next assignment.” Standard
0 comments:
Post a Comment