Page 15 - WEEKLYDIGEST 13042022

POLITICS April 13-18 2022 Weekly Digest 15

l FROM PAGE 14 area that is dominated by resettled farmers race. massively following the land reform pro-
whose insecurity of title makes a captive mar- Although Mnangagwa won 3 of the gramme and increased activity in artisa-
stituency has more than 60000 ket for ZANU PF. Chipinge seats 2 of them (Chipinge South nal mining. While there are good chances of
registered voters, which means Peri-urban swing constituency and Chipinge East) were very close with only snatching Chimanimani West, the strategic
there is plenty of room for im- Mutasa South, which was recently lost by Chipinge Central giving him a bigger mar- hope in Chimanimani East must be to reduce
provement in what is an opposi- the opposition in the by-elections had swung gin of just over 5000 votes. In Chipinge East the margin of loss. This is critical for the presi-
tion stronghold. to the opposition in the 2018 elections. It is his majority was just 175 votes. At the par- dential race where every vote matters.
In Mutare Central, another op- always a closely contested seat in the parlia- liamentary level, Chipinge South is anoth- Manicaland also hosts 3 Mutasa seats all
position stronghold, the gap be- mentary race which makes it a swing constit- er seat that was lost by the opposition be- of which were won by Chamisa in the presi-
tween Chamisa and Mnangagwa uency. In 2018, the MDC Alliance candidate cause of a split vote. The ZANU PF candi- dential race. We have already examined Mu-
was 9618 votes. The total number got 14783 votes while the ZANU PF candidate date won the seat with 9382 votes, but the tasa South above. The MDC Alliance lost one
of voters was just over 18000 in a had 12736 votes. However, in the presidential MDC Alliance candidate had 7870 while the of the seats (Mutasa North) because of split
constituency of more than 22000 race, Chamisa was well ahead of Mnangag- MDC-T candidate got 2366 votes. The two voting between opposition candidates. The
registered voters, which also wa with 17615 votes to 10257 votes. It was one opposition candidates had a combined to- presidential race in Mutasa North was al-
means there is room to do bet- of Chamisa’s largest majorities in the province tal of 10236, higher than the ZANU PF candi- ready finely balanced with Chamisa winning
ter in a stronghold. Better perfor- making it one of his strongholds, although it date’s votes. We have already observed that by a thin margin of 1380, so the moment there
mance in Mutare South and Mu- is clearly a marginal seat at the parliamenta- Musikavanhu is another seat that the opposi- was split voting at the parliamentary level, the
tare West would also have en- ry level as the by-election outcome revealed tion lost because of a split vote. Nyanga has seat was at a higher risk of being lost which is
hanced the gap. However, as al- with the seat narrowly swinging to ZANU PF two constituencies that were evenly split be- what happened.
ready highlighted, the anomalies by a tiny majority of just 495 votes. tween Mnangagwa and Chamisa at the presi- Overall, the following points are worth not-
in Mutare North raise questions There is no reason why the parliamenta- dential level but both went to ZANU PF at the ing in respect of Manicaland:
about the authenticity of these ry candidate cannot match the presidential parliamentary level. Mnangagwa won Nyan- · The divergence in voting figures in Mutare
figures which helped Mnangag- candidate’s performance. With over 33000 ga North with a majority of 4561 votes while North raises a significant red flag over the au-
wa to close the gap significantly. registered voters, Mutare South Chamisa has Chamisa’s victory in Nyanga South was nar- thenticity of ZEC’s election results. While vot-
Although Mnangagwa and room for improvement. We saw in the recent row at 2581 votes. It is notable that the ZANU ers do not have to vote in both races, a dif-
ZANU PF won most of the ru- by-elections that most registered voters are PF candidate for Nyanga South, Supa Mandi- ference of more than 18800 people voting in
ral seats, their advantage was in the urban wards, but they did not turn up wanzira (12322), did considerably better than the presidential and the parliamentary elec-
weakened by the fact that both in large numbers, which disadvantaged and Mnangagwa (10298) whereas Chamisa (12879 tions raises serious questions. A further study
Chamisa and the MDC Alli- cost the CCC parliamentary candidate. By votes) did significantly better than his parlia- of polling station and ward voting figures is
ance put up some commenda- contrast, the rural wards, which voted for the mentary candidate (7464). This suggests that recommended as is a more systematic study
ble performances. In the presi- ZANU PF candidate, had a better turnout. voters who chose Mandiwanzira in the parlia- that compares voting figures in all two races
dential race, Chamisa managed In short, the opposition has a chance to win mentary race also preferred Chamisa in the across all constituencies.
to snatch Buhera West albeit by back Mutare South come 2023, and Chami- presidential race, ahead of Mnangagwa. · A party can lose an election, but for its
a narrow majority of 264 votes, sa has room to increase his voting numbers. The Chimanimani Seats both went to ZANU candidate to win the popular vote in the pres-
but the MDC Alliance candidate Chipinge – a swing district PF and Mnangagwa in the two races although idential race as Chamisa did in Manicaland.
lost the seat. Mnangagwa won Chipinge and Chimanimani districts pre- one was closer. Mnangagwa’s majority in Chi- This is because voters’ choices in harmonized
the other 3 Buhera constituen- sent an interesting set of results. In the case manimani West was only 1376 and ZANU PF’s elections are complex and nuanced. There is
cies but with an average majority of Chipinge, the figures suggest that it is a majority at the parliamentary level was also no necessary correlation between voting for
of around 3 000 votes. swing political zone. In the 7 constituencies, a slim 1558. However, ZANU PF’s majority in a political party and voting for its presiden-
Chamisa also won Mako- 73132 voters chose Mnangagwa while 62121 Chimanimani East was bigger with the parlia- tial candidate.
ni West with a small majority of voted for Chamisa. The figures were lower mentary candidate getting 13458 more votes
227 votes but lost Makoni South in the parliamentary races where 69999 vot- than the MDC Alliance’s candidate. The ma-
with a small deficit of 668 votes. ed for ZANU PF candidates while 57879 vot- jority at the presidential level was reduced l Alex T Magaisa is a prominent Zimbabwe-
The gaps in the other 2 Mako- ed for MDC Alliance candidates. The reduced with Chamisa increasing the opposition to an lawyer and constitutional expert current-
ni seats were wider in favour of number of voters for MDC Alliance candidates more than 8000 votes. However, still, the gap ly teaching law at the University of Kent Law
Mnangagwa at more than 5000 is partly because of more competition from was high at just over 8000 votes. School in England. He once served as advisor
on average. Mnangagwa post- other opposition candidates who took some This is a seat that was formerly in the hands of the then Prime Minister of Zimbabwe Mor-
ed a large majority in Headlands, of the opposition votes. Although they voted of the MDC during the time of Roy Bennett gan Tsvangirai from 2012-2013. He writes here
probably another reflection of for non-MDC Alliance candidates, they seem who was massively popular with locals. The in his personal capacity.
the political economy factor in an to have chosen Chamisa in the presidential political economy of the area has changed