Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis seeks to advance the understanding of Zimbabwe’s current political situation and how it has regressed towards authoritarianism. The assumption when initially embarking on this research assignment was that Zimbabwe’s political failures over the past three and a half decades since its independence in 1980 could be traced back to its original Constitution – the Lancaster House Constitution of 1979. The research in this thesis is guided by a central question: Has Zimbabwe’s failure to successfully institutionalise democratic institutions, in particular through the 1979 Constitution, contributed to its regression to authoritarianism, despite its initial democratic transition? This question is substantiated by way of four sub-questions: • What processes lead from democratic transition to authoritarianism? • What are the institutional prerequisites for democratic development? • How was Zimbabwe’s Lancaster Constitution negotiated? • Did Zimbabwe’s institutional framework set it up for failure? In order to answer the research questions, a descriptive and exploratory study with emphasis on a case study was conducted by drawing from both secondary as well as primary sources of data. The primary data examined is a compilation of original documents belonging to the late Leo Baron, former Acting Chief Justice of Zimbabwe (1983) and lawyer to Joshua Nkomo. These documents include a personal record and interviews previously conducted in 1983 for the national archives of Zimbabwe between Baron and the state, an original ZAPU document titled Proposals for a settlement in Southern Rhodesia as well as the original Lancaster House Constitution of 1979. This thesis used democratic consolidation as a theoretical framework to assess the processes that lead from democratic transition to authoritarianism as well as the institutional prerequisites for democratic development. By exploring the field of democratic consolidation, the author settled upon two analytical frameworks for this research assignment. The first is that of Kapstein and Converse, who argue that in order for a democracy to be effective the power of the executive needs to be successfully constrained. They contend that if the executive faces sufficient constraints only then is it accountable to the electorate. Secondly, this thesis focuses largely on the institutional framework developed by Dahl, which highlights a set of criteria underlining the political institutions necessary for a country to transition into a successful democracy. The key findings are that, firstly, Zimbabwe’s Lancaster Constitution was not the product of an inclusive and participatory process; instead it has been discovered that the process was one that lacked public participation and thus lacked wider legitimacy. It can thus be argued that the Lancaster House Conference, normally regarded as the platform upon which Zimbabwe’s negotiated transition to majority rule took place, was in fact not a negotiation at all; instead it resembled more of a handover of power with forced implications and unrealistic expectations. And secondly, that the Lancaster Constitution of 1979 did not sufficiently provide for a democratic political institutional framework for democratic development in Zimbabwe. Instead it failed to highlight the importance of, and make provision for, several important independent organs usually responsible for the smooth transition towards democratisation and the eventual consolidation of democracy. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis beoog om ‘n dieper begrip van Zimbabwe se huidige politieke situasie aan te bied, asook die reprogressie na outoritarisme. Die aanvanklike aanname met die begin van hierdie studie was dat Zimbabwe se politieke mislukkings oor die afgelope drie en ‘n half dekades, sedert Zimbabwe se onafhanklikheid in 1980, terugspoor na die oorspronklike Grondwet naamlik – die Lancaster House Grondwet van 1979. Die navorsing in hierdie tesis is deur ‘n sentrale vraag gelei: Het Zimbabwe se mislukking om suksesvol demokratiese instellings te institusionaliseer, in besonder die Grondwet van 1979, bygedrae tot die regressie na outoritarisme, ten spyte van die aanvanklike demokratiese oorgang? Hierdie vraag word gestaaf deur vier sub-vrae: • Watter prosesse is gelei van demokratiese oorgang na outoritarisme? • Wat is die institusionele voorvereistes vir demokratiese ontwikkeling? • Hoe was Zimbabwe se Lancaster Grondwet beding? • Het Zimbabwe se institusionele raamwerk homself vir mislukking opgestel? Om in staat te wees om die bogenoemde navorsingsvrae te beantwoord, was ‘n beskrywende en verkennende studie met die klem op ‘n gevalle studie gedoen, deur data van beide sekondêre sowel as primêre bronne te trek. Die primere data wat geondersoek is, was ‘n samestelling van oorspronklike dokumente uit die besit van oorlede Leo Baron, voormalige Waarnemende Hoof Regter van Zimbabwe en prokureur van Joshua Nkomo. Hierdie dokumente sluit in ‘n persoonlike rekord asook onderhoude gevoer in 1983 vir die nationale argiewe van Zimbabwe tussen Baron en die staat. Hiermee saam volg ‘n oorspronklike ZAPU dokument getiteld Proposals for settlement in Southern Rhodesia asook die oorspronklike Lancaster House Konstitusie van 1979. Hierdie tesis gebruik demokratiese konsolidasie as ‘n teoretiese raamwerk waardeer die prosesse wat gelei het van demokratiese oorgang na outoritarisme, asook die institusionele voorvereistes vir demokratiese ontwikkeling, beoordeel word. Deur die veld van demokratiese konsolidasie te verken, het die outeur haar studie op twee analitiese raamwerke gevestig. Die eerste is die van Kapstein en Converse wat argumenteer dat vir ‘n demokrasie om effektief te wees, moet die mag van die uitvoerder beperk word. Hulle beweer dat slegs indien die uitvoerder voldoende beperkinge het, die kiesers dit as verantwoordelik erken. Tweedens fokus hierdie tesis grootliks op die institusionele raamwerk wat deur Dahl ontwikkel is. Dahl beklemtoon ‘n stel kriteria wat die nodige politieke grondwette vir ‘n land onderstreep om ‘n suksesvolle oorgang na demokrasie te verkry. Die sleutel bevindings is dit, Zimbabwe se Lancaster Grondwet was nie die produk van ‘n insluitende en deelnemende proses nie; in stede was dit bevind dat dit ‘n proses was van gebrekkige publieke deelname en dus het weier legitimiteit ontbreek. Daar kan dus geargumenteer word dat die Lancaster House Konferensie, wat normaalweg beskou is as die platform waarop Zimbabwe se oorgang tot meerderheid oorheers geonderhandel is, was in werklikheid nooit ‘n onderhandeling nie; instede blyk dit meer in gestalte na ‘n oorhandiging van mag met geforseerde implikasies en onrealistiese vereistes. Tweedens, dat die Lancaster Grondwet van 1979 nie daarin voldoen het om ‘n suksesvolle politieke institutionele raamwerk vir demokratiese ontwikkeling in Zimbabwe neer te lê nie. Eerder het dit daarin misluk om die belangrikheid van verskeie onafhanklike noodsaaklike organe uit te lig, of te voorsien, wat normaalweg verantwoordelik is vir ‘n gladde oorgang tot demokrasie en uit eindelik konsolidasie van demokrasie.

Thesis (M.A. (International Politics)) --University of Limpopo, 2014 / Debate on GNU centres around whether or not as a tool/plan/strategy it promotes, cultivates and fosters democracy in situations where there is lack there-of. In other words does a GNU create the conditions or environment necessary for the establishment of democracy? Various studies have shown that GNU is popular as a conflict-resolution tool and that in countries where it has been employed, it has resulted in the successful cessation of violent conflict. This study explores GNU to find out how successful it was in democratic entrenchment in Zimbabwe. It revealed through interviews and secondary sources that in Zimbabwe GNU managed to bring together antagonistic political contenders to work together for the restoration of peace and democracy and nation-building. GNU did not however, guarantee permanent solution of the crisis. In other words there were other significant issues which could not simply be resolved through a GNU. Finally the study further explored the different reasons for GNU inability to resolve those issues in Zimbabwe.

Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Democracy is understood by many to be a government for the people by the people. As far as academic or scholarly traditions are concerned however, this is a rather populist depiction of the concept. According to the intellectual tradition, democracy is such when a system of governance meets several conditions. For the purpose of this study, the institutionalist tradition or theory of democracy which sees democracy as being dependent on institutions of contestation (elections) and participation (parliament) as well as others, is an important variable. However, the very same theory on democracy is not limited to institutions as the sole requirements for democracy. For the economic determinists, the point is that whilst institutions are important for democracy, they are not sufficient. In order for there to be such, favourable socio-economic conditions are important as well and these include affluence amongst other issues. The scientific orientation of this study being comparative, it seeks to take both the institutionalist variable of elections and the economic determinist variable of affluence as operational measures of the state of democracy in South Africa and Zimbabwe. As an additional operationalisation, the issue of civil and political liberties as per Freedom House classifications is also investigated in a similar comparative manner. The outcomes of the study show that at an electoral level, South Africa's model of proportional representation in the seat allocation system gives minorities a voice as opposed to Zimbabwe's fast past the post system based on the winner takes all principle. It was also established that the electoral machinery in Zimbabwe is more chaotically arranged and thus susceptible to abuse than in South Africa. At a socio-economic level, conditions have also been found to be a lot more favourable to the consolidation of democracy in South Africa than in Zimbabwe because of a wide array of issues, the most serious one being the declining income patterns for the average Zimbabwean as compared to the South African. Though the issue of high income inequality in South Africa should be highlighted as a threat, it should also be noted that in Zimbabwe, the apparent disrespect of the rule of law has an added negative implication for Zimbabwe as Freedom House has highlighted the declining of the country from partly free of 3.4 in 1980 to a partly free of 6.5 in 2000. The overall analysis comes to the conclusion that given the findings above, it seems South Africa's democracy can still hold stronger given an accelerated equitable distribution of wealth whilst for Zimbabwe, the revitalisation of democracy needs to start from the re-engineering of institutions to the regeneration of the concept of respect for the rule of law. Thus the comparison seems to show a democracy better suited for consolidation than the other. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Demokrasie word deur talle verstaan as regering van die volk deur die volk. Hierdie is egter 'n populêre voorstelling van die konsep. Volgens intellektuele tradisies, moet 'n demokrasie aan sekere vereistes voldoen. Vir die doel van hierdie studie, word die institusionele denke aanvaar wat die demokrasie as afhanklik van sulke instellings soos mededinging (verkiesings) en deelname ('n parlement) beskou. Dieselfde denke beklemtoon ook dat instellings nie die enigste vereistes is me, byvoorbeeld vir ekonomiese deterministe, is instellings nodig maar nie genoegsaam nie. Dit beteken dat gunstige sosio-ekonomiese toestande ook moet geld, spesifieke relatiewe hoë welvaartspeile. Die wetenskaplike orientasie van hierdie studie is vergelykend. Dit vergelyk sowel ekonomiese as institusionele kriteria, asook twee state, Suid-Afrika en Zimbabwe. 'n Addisionele saak word ook geoperasionaliseer, te wete burgerlike vryhede en politieke regte. Hier word Freedom House se klassifikasies aanvaar. Die studie toon dat op die vlak van verkiesings, Suid-Afrika se proporsionele verteenwoordigingstelsel kleiner partye en minderheidspartye verteenwoordiging bied, teenoor Zimbabwe se wenner-vat-alles-stelsel. Die Zimbabwiese stelsel was meer vatbaar vir wanbestuur en onvrye en onregverdige verkiesings. Op die sosio-ekonomiese vlakke is toestande vir die konsolidasie van demokrasie in Suid-Afrika veel beter as in Zimbabwe, waarvan die vernaamste die afname in welvaartspeile in Zimbabwe is. Hierteenoor is die styging van ongelykheidsvlakke in Suid-Afrika 'n negatiewe faktor. In Suid-Afrika is vryheidsindekse van Freedom House egter steeds op 'n hoë vlak, terwyl die Zimbabwiese vlakke drasties agteruitgaan, byvoorbeeld vanaf 3.4 in 1980 tot 'n onvrye vlak van 6.5 in 2000 waar 'n punt van 7 totaal onvry is. Die konklusie is dat demokrasie in Suid-Afrika konsolideerbaar is, terwyl Zimbabwe ook instellings sal moet red van ondergang. Die herstel van regsoewereiniteit kan 'n beginpunt wees. Die vergelykings wys dus uit dat Suid-Afrika veel beter daaraan toe is as Zimbabwe.

Includes bibliographical references (leaves 135-150) / It is increasingly becoming apparent that elections, as component parts of democratic processes, do not always guarantee a smooth transfer of power and stable democratic cultures in many contemporary polities. Whenever election outcomes are disputed, Governments of National Unity (GNU) are presented as strategic conflict prevention and resolution models. Yet, the GNU’s ability to nurture democracy in situations where it remains weak or non-existent is extremely limited. This dissertation therefore uses Zimbabwe’s case study to examine how its recent internal political turmoil had overwhelming implications for its legitimacy and democracy. Through qualitative research, the study reveals that despite partially reconciling Zimbabwe’s political protagonists, the GNU neither permanently resolved the crisis nor addressed significant related issues; thus, creating a paradox of legitimacy for the country. The dissertation concludes with recommendations for further research on matters of legitimacy in power-sharing scenarios such as Zimbabwe’s. / Political Sciences / M.A. (International politics)