Gibson Nyikadzino Correspondent
There is nothing peculiar in challenging an election result in a court of law as that has been the tradition in many countries.
Just a few instances suffice as examples.
In the 2000 United States of America presidential election, losing Democratic Party candidate Al Gore challenged the result against the Republican Party candidate and eventual winner George W Bush, and the matter was decided by the country’s Supreme Court.
In 2010, former President of Cote d’Ivoire Laurent Gbagbo launched a legal challenge at the country’s Constitutional Council against the electoral commission’s announcement that his main rival and current president Alassane Ouattara had won the election.
Last year, Kenya’s Raila Odinga challenged President Uhuru Kenyatta’s victory and the court annulled the result, and called for a fresh election between the two candidates.
What Nelson Chamisa and his colleagues are doing, challenging President Mnangagwa’s official victory is nothing out of this world, and it is purely legal and constitutional, hence it has to be decided by our competent courts.
Challenging the official results is far from being an electoral victory. The unfolding events are a reflection that the minority are always a victim of a democratic process, hence they use every avenue in the book, yet the legal consequences can be dramatic.
Chamisa has been an active component in opposition politics since his days as a student activist and also at the inception of the main MDC movement in 1999.
He was there when the late MDC founder Mr Morgan Tsvangirai upheld violence as a tool to gain power when he said: “What we want to tell (former President) Mugabe is, if you do not go peacefully, we will remove you violently.”
To that end, violence has been institutionalised in the MDC by embracing Adolf Hitler’s view that “we will fight with our ideas, and if necessary, also with our fists”.
The similarities exist in the use of violence between the Hitler Youth and the MDC- T faction led by Chamisa’s Vanguard as both entities have their loyalty and allegiance tied to their leaders.
Vanguard commander Shakespeare Mukoyi has been clear that the youth brigade was established to carry out directives by their leader, Chamisa.
Above all, what Chamisa is doing, though necessarily legal, are the last kicks of a dying horse that does not want to suffer humiliation alone.
To taint other people, he called Dr Nkululeko Sibanda to his humiliation and made him his spokesperson, shutting the door on Luke Tamborinyoka, who has been in the frame of the opposition upper room for many years.
What will hit Chamisa is reminiscent of what US general Douglass MacArthur said in his 1951 farewell speech: “Old soldiers never die, they simply fade away.” The legal noise is but a bark that does not commensurate the bite. It will soon fade away.
The MDC used to enjoy political monopoly since 1999, but since the end of former president Mr Mugabe’s rule, the opposition voice has been hanging in volatile space.
Multi-party democracy, civic participation and individuals’ rights to political participation unlocked the gates of reality and enlightened the citizens that the MDC-Alliance is running scared because its days are numbered.
Chamisa has issued more suicidal statements than any other political leader can ever say prior, during and after an election.
He has confused his followers and other principals of the so-called MDC-Alliance, primarily with his admission that it is only the presidential elections they won and yes, turning a blind eye to the National Assembly results, which he is not interested in.
Commenting on the challenge by Chamisa, political analyst Mr Richard Mahomva said the MDC is running scared because their dominance and close to two decades monopoly is coming to an end.
“The mushrooming of the many opposition political parties is a sign that the MDC movement has lost its credibility and a reflection that many people are tired of its existence.
“There is a greater possibility of votes that traditionally went to the opposition were shared between Zanu-PF and other independent candidates. This is broadly reflected in the manner in which Tendai Biti and Jameson Timba spoke ill of other candidates. The MDC had enjoyed a lot of monopoly.”
Mr Mahomva also indicated that Mr Chamisa and his faction have a structural deficit as they do not represent any ideology that is policy premised.
He adds: “There is also a structural deficit in the Chamisa faction considering the manner in which he ushered himself to power.
“Some of the people that he hounded left, others are suffering in silence because there was an unfair transition after Tsvangirai’s death.”
A reformed Zanu-PF on the other hand does not want to combat anyone because it has opened a free and more democratic space for the people, which the MDC has been promising, but failed to deliver.
The equation does not tally. Many promises have been made for the people, yet sanctions have been also invited by Mr Chamisa and his acolytes to disrupt chances of economic revival that Zimbabwe should enjoy.
The MDC-Alliance presidential candidate has been boasting that whenever they speak to the Western powers, they are listened to, therefore, they feel proud in exposing Zimbabwe to the ills of economic brutality because of their quest for power.
When all is said and done, Chamisa as a Zimbabwean, fought his fight and as an old soldier in the opposition politics, he is simply fading away on national politics.