The MDC: Once upon a labour party

THE Movement for Democratic Change was catapulted to power by its promise to champion the workers’ cause.

The MDC and its founding President, Mr Morgan Tsvangirai are brainchildren of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions where Mr Tsvangirai was Secretary General before he changed his shooting trajectory into opposition politics. This history gave the MDC the moniker “the labour based party.”

But if events of this previous week are any point of reference, it clearly shows that the ghost of the once vibrant ZCTU is turning in its grave after the Messenger of Court opened a can of worms into the party’s labour law compliancy.

The party has been exposed as a lying charlatan that preaches west, but marches south in matters of workers’ rights.

In its compromise plan, the Inclusive Government gave the Ministry of Labour to the MDC which was held by Ms Paurina Mpariwa.

Authoritative sources in the former labour backed party even openly say that the party now surviving on a frugal budget owing to donor fatigue, has since 2013 failed to pay its workers.

The party has even gone on to ignore the Labour Court rulings in favour of disgruntled workers, prompting the hand of the Messenger of Court to descend upon it.

Last week’s emptying of Harvest House furniture to put under the hammer to recover unpaid wages running into hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single employee means the party owes wages running into several millions of dollars.

A party worthy its name must live by its founding principles. Nothing in its course of action must negate its identity. That is the meaning of integrity. Now let us dissect the party in full.

The party claims to be a movement. What really is a movement? A movement should be seen to be inclusive and be home to membership from various walks. But lately, the political party is as frail as its leader, financially and ideologically. The party is now a grouping of elite chauvinists who behave like they have a monopoly to knowledge and political wisdom.

The party is suffering so much of democratic and inclusivity fatigue that the majority of its membership are now disinterested fence sitters in a wait and see attitude to the unfolding drama. And now to democratic change! The party’s name insinuates that there was need in this county’s political space to change the manner in which democracy was being discharged.

Change can either be sudden or gradual. If it happens in whatever format, shall the party’s name remain relevant? Is it necessary to change the chemical composition of pure water? For what ends? Well, what this simply suggest that the party has designed itself to continue being a Non-Governmental Organisation always opposing Government position whenever it comes, whether or not they would do that after understanding the merits and demerits of the proposed Government position.

My thrust here is rather on the democratic-ness of the movement. The party has since its inception suffered two major fractures over the depletion of democratic space.

The aggrieved disserted the party to form their own outfits after they felt that some powerful elements in the party were usurping democratic space for private use.

The biggest showcase of this capture of democratic space was the unilateral representative powers conferred on or claimed by Mr Tsvangirai on coalition engagements. This has seen the party mutating to a court marshal entity where the whims of the leader are to be swallowed by every member regardless of how lethal they can be to democratic sensitivities.

And finally to Change! The party preached the need to change negative political systems, be it patriarchy, corruption, graft, violence or poor service delivery. Interestingly, the party is synonymous with all these ill practices.

Of the four people in presidency, a single woman casts a lone and weak shadow in this arrangement. The secretariat is also held by men alone.

This position is ultra vires the party’s public claims that it is a proponent of the quota system seeking equal representation of women in parliament.

Everybody knows it, charity begins at home. How does the party expect parliament and Government, entities it has no exclusive control over, to do things it is itself failing to implement in their own organization?

The coalition negotiations which Tsvangirai has undemocratically usurped as well have totally shut out women voices in it.

Women voices have been erased completely from the coalition arrangements with word saying there is no woman whatsoever in the top five leaders of an alliance of the original MDC. To expect such a party to change its gender rigidities only because it has entered government will be similar to anticipating a school of hyenas to run a successful veterinary clinic.

How about stopping corruption? The party has exclusive control of many urban local authorities, but they have failed to weed out institutional corruption. Instead, graft has been on the increase since the arrival of opposition town councils.

The MDC also promised its supporters that constitutionalism is among its founding principles. True or false? Your guess can be as good as mine. The major splits of 2005 and 2014 in the party came from constitutional miscarriages, both seeing the departure of the then respective secretaries general, both respected lawyers, one of them a constitutional lawyer who runs a successful law firm.

Both departed with the complaint that Tsvangirai had been flouting the party constitution across, deep and above in order to pamper his ego.

With such power, limited only to the confines of Harvest House, how will such a character fare should the electorate erroneously send him to State House and Munhumutapa Buildings?

The MDC took to the streets and to Parliament to oppose a landmark Supreme Court labour law ruling in 2015, also purportedly to protect the rights of workers.

Unbeknown to the common man walking on Nelson Mandela Street was that workers up Harvest House were not being paid by the purported champion of trade unionism.

And of violence? The party has fought among itself. Members have attacked each other in open glare of the media and grassroots supporters. Another breakaway senior member, Mr Elton Mangoma had hooligans allegedly set upon him by Mr Tsvangirai at Harvest House.

Mr Tendai Biti had similar fate designed for him prior to his departure from the troubled political outfit.

Members also openly fought to influence the outcomes of an ill fated 2014 congress where the competition for influential office had reached dizzying heights.

If such a party believes in the power of wooden swords, what much shall it do with real swords in its hands?

It calls for no intelligence at all but minimum wisdom to see the hollow promises wielded by the party, its propensity to disobey set rules and the penchant for the use of might to achieve desired ends. The office of democratic opposition politics remains vacant in Zimbabwe. The only candidates available are allergic to democracy.

Chigumbu Warikandwa