Will Zanu-PF Have Immoderate Influence Over Government?

There has always been a lingering view that Zanu-PF plays an ‘excessive’ part in government, but there has been little desire to know better how Zanu-PF interfaces with government. The recent deployment of several ministers who did not make it into the new cabinet to the ruling Zanu-PF headquarters on a full-time basis raised much interest and curiosity. At least 11 departments of the party are now expected to be managed by full-time employees who include ex-ministers. 

This bureaucratic configuration of Zanu-PF is quite a significant thing. The structure has typically been set up to help organise and run the party membership and the deployees in government - it is then a utilitarian resource for the party in government.

The major questions that come to mind are; How close should the interface be between Zanu-PF and government? Will Zanu-PF capture and use government for its particular goals? Will the executive be tightly controlled by the party? Will the executive pursue policies that originate from the party? What role will Central Committee and Politburo play?

Zanu-PF has effected these seismic changes due to the prominent challenges it has faced: poor delivery of manifesto promises by government bureaucracy, wafer-thin presidential election victory, loss of some stronghold support to opposition, and so on. In the face of these challenges they had no option but to appoint full-time senior party leaders so that they monitor the implementation of government policies and programmes and invariably turn around the fortunes of the party.

The paradigm shift in Zanu-PF involves a procedural diffusion process of government mechanisms, practice, behaviour, and orientation into Zanu-PF - internal practice, policy development and implementation. They have mirrored the government administration structure. This transformation of the party into an institutionalised and professional entity naturally results in a shift of party-state interrelations and interpenetration. The boundaries between the ruling party and government will inevitably become volatile, fluid and uncertain.

Since electors vote for parties and only incidentally for individuals, and since parties are involved in the government formation and composition process, the conclusion that the government is party government seems inescapable. Zanu-PF by winning a majority through a competitive representation, gained the status of crucial ‘transmission belt’ of the democratic will. Their normal expectation is that they should gain an upper hand on the government and use the government to implement their manifesto. The dominance of Zanu-PF party over government - far from being an ‘evil’ becomes a critical condition of true democracy.   

In the run up to 2018 elections, Zanu-PF constructed and published its election manifesto which was shaped by its ideology, the party internal structure and preferences. After being elected, the party has to negotiate policy orientations, programmes and implementation with the government so that there is minimal variation from the original ideological goals of the party. The success of the government on manifesto implementation is seen central by the party, and the party sees itself as the most competent and potent actor to implement the manifesto. The self-perception of governing parties is centrally shaped by an idea of being part of the state or even the state.

Concerns have been raised that the direction of influence will go from Zanu-PF to government. But the fact that the influence could take place in both ways seems overlooked. The government, far from being always the obedient servants of Zanu-PF, can on the contrary, supervise and even control Zanu-PF. 

We cannot rule out the possibility for the relationship of influence to go from government to the party as well as from the party to the government. More interestingly, both types of influence may be so evenly balanced that they cancel each other out. The party-government relationship must also include the possibility for parties and governments to declare a truce and go about their own business independently. We could possibly witness true autonomy between Zanu-PF and government, as each side realises that it cannot force the other to accept its wishes.

Zanu-PF has a substantial opportunity to have a say in decision-making in governmental processes through agency and patronage. However, the government must maintain some degree of autonomy and in that pursuit find means of reducing the impact or influence of Zanu-PF on them. 

The limits of party influence on government may take different forms which may be intentional or unintentional. Firstly, some ministers may be more powerful and refuse to adopt party policies. Secondly, the President and not the party selects the ministers, and as such they may owe more allegiance to the President than to the party. The third limitation may emanate from the fact that some ministers are chosen from outside the ranks of the party. 

Similarly, Zanu-PF influence may be limited with respect to patronage, as this may or may not be distributed by the party itself. It may be distributed, in part at least, by the members of the government who may follow their own inclinations rather than party instructions. The party may be helped in the process, but more as a passive instrument than as an actor. Lastly, after a general election the government may follow the party programme, but after some time the party programme may be toned down, modified or entirely altered. In such cases, the party may be presented with a fait accompli.

The Government and Zanu-PF are two systems with variable degrees of overlap. The actors of the two systems are to an extent, but to an extent only, identical. It will be interesting to see how the symbiosis between the two systems will evolve given the context of a re-configured Zanu-PF structure. But it is my fervent hope that they will act in complementarity and at the same time respect each others boundaries, influence and authority.