Sekoma ward bye-election, upset, what happened?

Michael Dingake | Tuesday March 15, 2016 15:35

Ruling parties in democracies are obliged to serve all citizens without discrimination; how can a Cabinet Minister make such an outrageous statement contrary to the ideals his/her government professed? I meant it when I commended her arrest and prosecution for violating her oath of office.

In the aftermath of the bye-election results, a big upset, I was disappointed to read some facebook posts which downplayed the impact I dreaded from the Minister’s speech. Dismissing the threat as ineffectual, overlooked the fact that rural voters were ignorant of their political rights, were overawed by the power of the public authorities, while desperate for social services, particularly health services. The wisdom of choosing a health service above the derring-do of voting for a party which for the past 20 years had failed to fulfill the need of a hospital in the ward, was easy to appreciate. Needless to say, the Minister’s threat wouldn’t have been made where voters’ political consciousness was higher. She took advantage of the level of political consciousness in the area and drove her advantage home. It was wrong to pooh-pooh the Minister’s threat. During Gabz FM programme - Breakfast with Reg - spokespersons of the ruling party and the opposition UDC, accused each other of buying votes to win. The accusations and counteraccusations always surface after every election. True or not, it shouldn’t be a big factor in the bye-election analysis, notwithstanding the dent it may have left in the results. We explore other causal factors that may have been substantial.In the postmortems, the political parties conducted, following the startling results, the parties recount mistakes they committed or the bulls-eye they hit. The opposition camp admits complacency had a role in the embarrassing results; the BDP, on the other hand states how it outsmarted the opponent, to turn the tables.

The self-backslapping is palpable. Complacency is bound to reap negative consequences; self-praise, it’s said, has no recommendation; this time around self-praise needs re-evaluation! Sekoma Ward which the opposition (BNF) won in four successive general elections was verily an opposition stronghold. The complacency is traceable to this historic fact. The BCP reinforcement arriving on the eve of the bye-election, to ensure opposition victory, in the form of signing of the MOA, between the two opposition parties, looked like the icing on the cake. Six successive bye-elections defeats post-2014 general elections, ironically energized and acted as a stimulus package, spurring the determination of the ruling BDP to a stunning victory.The opposition primary elections were surrounded, from hearsay, by a slight controversy. Could that have been of some material effect? Maybe. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Management of primaries can spoil things if conducted in a carefree manner. Sources also indicate that the house of the Umbrella had begun to show cracks following the sterling performance at the 2014 general elections. BMD elements queried the abnormality of installing a BNF member as the leader of an un-merged opposition (LOO) in parliament when the BMD had netted more MPs! An article/letter in the Patriot on Sunday newspaper of 06/03/16 by one Mercy Batsei confirms the existence of internal tensions. The article headlined: ‘Ndaba Gaolathe should be UDC President,’ opens up with the tell-all, pull-no-punches statement: “I can’t just observe when the party I love is being torn apart by forces within the Umbrella for Democratic Change. The BMD leadership is not telling us something, it is not well. It has not been well amongst us as the ordinary members for the BMD for a while and we managed to conceal it….” Further down, the writer reveals the source of the un-wellness: To her, the BMD is closer to the BDP than the BNF! The polarization within the BMD brought about by reinstatement of Advocate Sidney Pilane is referred to:  “Bakaulengwe, all I am saying is that while as is the case with Advocate Sidney Pilane, we must open our eyes to realise the BNF is taking more that belongs to us.

To avoid this, we must take our rightful place at the table and lead the UDC.”

You may recall that while Umbrella One talks were on, Ndaba Gaolathe circulated a paper in which he cautioned against precipitous action on cooperation; he felt the BMD as a new party had to sort itself out, build its own structures and so forth! Unfortunately the hype of ‘people’s project’ was irresistible and the parties had to go headlong into the project, brushing aside the potential hiccups that suggested a go-slow.  Tragically in the process the question of ideology has intervened, rubbing some the wrong way.

All the petty differences, the abysmal tensions, the hesitation towards a merger of the Umbrella constituents may have contributed to the inexplicable upset. Finally, the coming on board of the BCP, previously denounced and ridiculed, was its contribution posi-tive or negative?  There are BMD elements that subscribe to Mogapi’s categorisation of BCP as ‘control freaks;’ hardly complimentary for a wooed partner - Is BCP so desperate as to take that on the chin without flinching? Humiliated, pathetically on its knees!? Were the handful of Sekoma BCP sympathizers taken on board the MOA Express, or were they steamrollered without consultation? Did they vote or abstain? Quo vadis? Answers to the questions may also answer the puzzle of Sekoma!