MDC-T ‘Renewal Team’: Frail politics hoping for legal rescue

By Allen Hungwe

I have previously discussed what I termed as Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) leader, Morgan Tsvangirai’s “privatisation of the struggle.” I mentioned how the MDC-T “Renewal” group also had serious blind spots in their quest to dislodge him.

It is only fair to dedicate this week’s column to focus on what those blind spots are. In order to emphasise my focus, let me mention once again that the intention is not about determining who between the pro-Tsvangirai and the “Renewal” teams must be vindicated. Rather, it is merely about tracing the political ramifications in the current MDC-T melee.

The “Renewal” team’s approach has been questionable when it comes to strategy and the reading of political signs, both inside their own party and in the broader Zimbabwean space. There has also been more emotion than reason, at times exhibiting flagrant disregard for what their pursuit should be about – party renewal – and instead reducing it to merely seeking to get even with Tsvangirai.

Firstly, the argument for party renewal would have been better handled had the “Renewal” team, constituted by some members of the party’s top leadership structures — the Standing Committee (SC) and National Executive Council (NEC) — taken collective responsibilities for the failures they now lump on the personhood of Tsvangirai.

Yes, Tsvangirai has had a lot of faults, especially in how he has managed his personal life in light of his ambitions to run for top national political office.

However, on issues around political strategy, voter mobilisation, ZANU-PF’s outwitting of the MDC-T in the Government of National Unity and other such allegations, it is unfair to heap it all on Tsvangirai.  In fact, some of the senior members of the “Renewal” team were directly responsible for resourcing the party’s trail towards the elections while others oversaw the policy, research and strategy departments of the party.

Accepting their part for the party’s failures at elections would have been a noble gesture by these senior members of the “Renewal” team.

Blaming it all on Tsvangirai does not absolve these “Renewal” team members and does not give anyone hope that they will be any different as replacements for Tsvangirai.  The meeting that was called by the “Renewal” team at which Tsvangirai and some senior party officials were allegedly suspended was also unfortunate. Clearly, the MDC-T’s top two hierarchies are the SC and the NEC.

The fact that the “Renewal” team constituted what they termed as the National Council, mainly made up of provincial leaders also ensured that their efforts lacked political clout from the onset.  Without sizeable support from the SC and the NEC the “Renewal” team’s expedition began on the wrong footing.  One would argue that the biggest slant that the “Renewal” team seems to be relying on is the legal element rather than the political.

I am not sure if this is because of the composition of that team, which seems heavy-laden with sharp legal minds. When the pro-Tsvangirai team responded to their suspension by instead expelling the “Renewal” team, this team then challenged their adversaries to a legal rather than political battle.

The “Renewal” team called on the pro-Tsvangirai team to challenge their suspension in court, but they made no mention of the political legitimacy of their action.  Whereas Tsvangirai has been quick to dash back to the grassroots in his quest to reclaim legitimacy, the “Renewal” team has rather been stuck in press conferences and legal offices, obviously preparing for a long drawn out legal battle.

The “Renewal” team has not demonstrated any political traction in their mission to remove Tsvangirai from the party. The grassroots connection of their agenda has been reticent.  I, however, seem to pick a precedence that the “Renewal” team could be inclining itself towards. As I mentioned earlier, given that the “Renewal” team has some top lawyers and also given the huge grassroots popularity that Tsvangirai still has, the “Renewal” team has picked its battles selectively.

That could have also been influenced by other political-legal battles that have evolved in the past. If we look back at the Arthur Mutambara and Welshman Ncube tussle for leadership of the other MDC party, we see how the politics interacted with legal and how the legal seemed to override the other.  Although Mutambara participated at the congress that dislodged him from the leadership of the party, he later went to court to challenge that ouster, claiming unconstitutionality in that action.

We then saw how the legal battle dragged for more than three years, in the meantime sustaining Mutambara’s political position in government. Mutambara’s position in government was not due to his political legitimacy, rather it was due to the legal overhang of the case.  Eventually, even when the courts ruled in favour of Ncube, the political grounding that Mutambara had set himself in, courtesy of the legal overhang, was then difficult to extricate.

He therefore lasted in a political position, that he had no legitimacy to, all because his permanence had been guaranteed by the legal impediment he earlier created against Ncube’s efforts.  The “Renewal” team must have learnt from the Mutambara/Ncube legal case – lawyers study and act upon legal precedence anyway.  However, unlike Mutambara, instead of using the legal route to challenge a political decision, they instead made a political decision (to oust Tsvangirai) which they want to sustain through a legal process.  At times the wheels of justice turn slowly, and that is a factor that could benefit the “Renewal” team.

Tsvangirai, for all purpose and intent, will have to abide by the “rule of law”. As one who has always accused ZANU-PF of being “allergic” to the “rule of law”, he will be forced to either approach the courts or respond to the “Renewal” team in court. I am not sure how long it will take the courts to make judgement on this case, given the precedence of how long it took in the Mutambara/Ncube case?

Even when the court finally makes judgement, it’s not obvious in whose favour that decision will be. However, what is worrying is: what will the state of the party be as the legal battles drag? Will Tsvangirai continue to use his grassroots appeal while the court battle rage on? Will the “Renewal” team not apply to the courts to suspend Tsvangirai from using party assets and the party’s name – while the legal battle sustains? Will Tsvangirai’s party be able to hold its congress under the banner of the MDC-T, while the court case lingers?

A legal friend of mine told me that legally the pro-Tsvangirai team’s expulsion of the “Renewal” team is “more legal”, but who says you need to be “more legal” in order to get a desired political outcome? Again, I am not a lawyer, but these are questions worth posing, should the appetite for seeking a legal course that the “Renewal” team has exhibited fully materialise.

Another broader question to all this is: how will ZANU-PF benefit or not benefit from a long legal battle for control of the MDC-T by the two factions? Is there any fuel that ZANU-PF can pour onto the already-burning-fire for a possible legal battle for control of the MDC-T, or will the two factions merely burn the party apart?  What is, however, clear is that Tsvangirai seems to have an upper hand in the political contestation for control of the party, but the “Renewal” team is hoping for a legal course to dilute that advantage.

The “Renewal” team, therefore, seems poised to pick up traction from the conundrum of the political and legal processes of the battle for the heart and soul of the MDC-T. Their frail political clout is hoping for a legal rescue. Financial Gazette