Robert Mugabe wins (again). Opponent cries fraud

Robert Mugabe was declared winner of Zimbabwe's election with 61 percent of the vote. His main rival Morgan Tsvangirai said the results were a "monumental fraud."

(AP Photo/Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi)
Zimbabweans wait to cast their vote in presidential and parliamentary elections in Harare, last Wednesday. President Robert Mugabe was declared the winner Saturday, Aug. 3, 2013. His party has denied allegations of vote-rigging.

Africa's oldest leader Robert Mugabe was declared winner of Zimbabwe's disputed election on Saturday, while his main rival Morgan Tsvangirai dismissed the result as a fraud and said he would challenge it in court and in regional forums.

Mugabe, 89, who has ruled the former British colony in southern Africa since its independence in 1980, was formally proclaimed re-elected for a five-year term barely an hour after Tsvangirai announced his planned legal challenge.

"We are going to go to court, we are going to go to the AU (African Union), we are going to go to the SADC (Southern African Development Community)," Tsvangirai angrily told a news conference in Harare. He rejected the result as "fraudulent".

While African observers have already broadly approved Wednesday's peaceful vote, independent domestic monitors have described it as deeply flawed by registration problems that may have disenfranchised up to a million people.

Western observers were kept out by Harare.

In its strongest criticism so far of the poll, the European Union said on Saturday it was concerned about alleged irregularities and a lack of transparency in the election.

The EU's verdict on the fairness of the vote will be crucial to deciding whether it continues to ease sanctions on the southern African country. These were originally imposed because of previous accusations of vote-rigging and abuses of power made against Mugabe and his followers.

Mugabe's ZANU-PF party, which the official results show won a more than two-thirds majority in parliament, has rejected the latest allegations of massive vote-rigging and intimidation made against it by Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

Zimbabwe's Election Commission announced Mugabe had soundly beaten Tsvangirai in the presidential contest with just over 61 percent of the votes, against nearly 34 percent for Tsvangirai.

"Mugabe, Robert Gabriel, of ZANU-PF party, is therefore declared duly elected President of the Republic of Zimbabwe with effect of today," commission head Rita Makarau told a news conference, drawing cheers from ZANU-PF supporters.

Tsvangirai, who had been serving as Prime Minister in a fractious unity government under Mugabe, said his party would present evidence in court to back its charges that the July 31 vote was a "monumental fraud" engineered by ZANU-PF.

"I thought this election was going to resolve this political crisis. It has not. It has failed. It has plunged the country back to where it was," Tsvangirai said.

He has called on the African Union and SADC to investigate the vote, calling it "null and void" and "not credible".

But he faces an uphill struggle to convince the regional bodies, as their observers have already publicly endorsed the election as free and peaceful, while acknowledging minor problems.

Adding to the controversy surrounding the election, one member of Zimbabwe's nine-member Electoral Commission, Mkhululi Nyathi, has resigned since the vote, citing doubts about the integrity of the results.

Tsvangirai's MDC said on Friday it could take to the streets to challenge ZANU-PF's claim of a landslide victory, made less than 24 hours after the polls had closed on Wednesday. (Additional reporting by Stella Mapenzauswa in Harare and Xola Potelwa in Johannesburg; Writing by Cris Chinaka and Pascal Fletcher; Editing by Xola Potelwa and Pascal Fletcher)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.