Editorial: Obasanjo’s Disgraceful Verdict on Zimbabwe’s Election

Against mounting international apprehension over the re-election of Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe in elections roundly condemned by the international community as a farce, the conclusion by former president Olusegun Obasanjo who headed the African Union (AU) observer mission; that the polls were “free, honest and credible” is baffling and most embarrassing to his person and his country, Nigeria. It is equally curious that South African President, Jacob Zuma, offered his “profound congratulations” to Mugabe, saying the election was an expression of the will of the people. This indeed is scandalous. The AU position over the election is a stomach-turning international embarrassment and one for which the continental body ought to be ashamed for holding the continent up to ridicule. On a personal level, Baba disgraced himself and put his towering image and credibility as an elder statesman in jeopardy!

Even by African standards, the elections were certainly a far cry as a free expression of the choice of a majority of the Zimbabwean people. Mugabe, 89, Africa’s oldest leader; in power since 1980, trounced his long-standing rival Morgan Tsvangirai in Wednesday’s polls with 61% of the presidential vote while his party swept to a crushing parliamentary majority. The Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN); the largest group of election observers said the polls were "severely compromised." Mr. Tsvangirai, the main challenger to Mugabe has vowed to challenge the results in court, saying “the fraudulent and stolen election has plunged Zimbabwe into a constitutional, political and economic crisis.”

Western powers, barred from sending full observer teams, have voiced serious doubts about the polls. US Secretary of State, John Kerry described the election as “deeply flawed” and said Washington “does not believe that the results ...represent a credible expression of the will of the Zimbabwean people.” British Foreign Secretary William Hague added his own “grave concerns” over the conduct of the vote. Germany said the election “casts a big shadow on the political and economic future of Zimbabwe”, while Australian Foreign Minister, Bob Carr called for new polls “based on a verified and agreed voters roll.” Even African and local observers raised concerns over the voters registers, the printing of extra ballot papers, and the turning away of voters at polling stations.

All these negative views contrast markedly with the view of AU monitors led by Obasanjo, who dismissed the blatant irregularities as “little incidents here and there” that would not have changed the outcome of the vote. Credible or not, that Mr. Mugabe “won” another six-year mandate, extending his 33-year rule is, if anything, an embarrassment and a blight on the toga of Africa’s leadership crisis marked by the syndrome of sit-tightism. In fact, Mugabe actually emerge a loser as the victory detracts from his freedom fighter status. Irrespective of his storied life and achievements, it is a trite principle that success without a successor is failure. Honestly, at 89 years and counting, there is something absurd in Mugabe still ruling Zimbabwe because he obviously is tottering on the borders of senile decay.

So far, by public opinion and by demonstrable evidence, there is nothing to justify the AU verdict regarding the election. There should be something psychologically and mentally wrong with anyone who can pass off the elections in Zimbabwe as free and fair. So, on what basis did OBJ declare the elections “free, honest and credible”? The answer lies in Obasanjo’s own perception of free, honest and credible elections. During Obasanjo's disastrous eight years in office, elections became the biggest circus sideshow in Nigeria. Obasanjo’s last stage as President was mired in a third-term controversy that he never denied, and instead, sought to justify as arising from “pressure” from unnamed people. He also introduced “do-or-die” contest for power, the harbinger of the electoral disaster of 2007; one of the worst ever elections in the history of Nigeria, which became the albatross his successor, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, had to contend with throughout his tenure as President.

Undoubtedly, Obasanjo’s era was one of impunity where democracy was slaughtered on the altar of imposing candidates, leading to intractable acrimony and internecine factional squabbles, which speak volumes about the deficit political charisma of Obasanjo. When he disengaged as President, he foisted himself on the PDP as its Board of Trustees (BoT) chairman, another vantage position. More than any other Nigerian, Baba has been in a veritable position of influence to put Nigeria on a sound democratic footing. He instead tried to hang onto power with his tenure elongation project and failed; sharing the unsavory reputation with many African sit-tight rulers. One must therefore wonder on what moral authority did the AU chose him to head their team of election monitors.

Declaring the election in Zimbabwe as credible portrayed Obasanjo as imperious and insensitive to the sufferings of the Zimbabwean people from Mugabe’s prolonged misrule since 1980. The elections might have been violence-free; unlike in 2008; it nevertheless leaves much to be desired in terms of credibility. More than that, it typifies a classical official endorsement by the AU of African leaders abusing the power of incumbency and the trust reposed on them by ordinary citizens. Zimbabweans will ultimately have to bear the brunt of Mugabe’s decision to deepen the country’s unfortunate history of enormous promise, voracious rule and abysmal failure. Zimbabweans would be the losers if the country plunges into further socio-economic and political crisis. For a man who sacrificed so much, in prison, in guerrilla wars, and who has also, sometimes deservedly, been demonized for his misguided nationalistic policies, this is Mugabe’s last chance to leave the stage while the ovation is loudest. He should simply stand down and stand tall.  

Despite his gallant and tenacious fight to free Zimbabwe from British colonial rule, Mugabe in large measure would be remembered more for insisting he must die in power; and the AU compounded this profound political misjudgment by putting its seal of approval with OBJ playing the devil’s advocate. It’s a shame! Whatever respect or credibility OBJ had is gone with this supreme act of betrayal. Also gone is Baba’s moral authority to criticize the Jonathan administration. Henceforth, nothing OBJ does or says should be taken seriously, as he has reduced himself at home and abroad to a public nuisance. Even if the AU does not owe the world any debt of democratic loyalty, the continental body at least owes itself some modicum of integrity. The AU position on the elections makes a mockery of the African Charter on Democracy and the much vaunted African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) for democratic governance.

The AU has once again confirmed its reputation as a trade union of tyrants who meet once every year to congratulate themselves for continuously criminalizing the continent and pauperizing its peoples. The fact however remains that good governance matters. Leaders are not remembered by the ruin of their nations –the number of opposition personalities in jail, the money stashed away in foreign accounts – but by national prosperity. The AU verdict on the Zimbabwe elections points to an obstinate refusal to come to terms with the reality that, free and fair elections shows respect for democracy and the rule of law; which in itself is a mark of international civility. OBJ and the AU have made themselves the laughing stock of the international community. This is plain disgusting and disgraceful.