nyaladzani tshuma

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@Am_Blujay Why not hide behind the tree?

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@matinyarare It wasn’t one emotional act, 3 people were killed.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@Shadaya_Knight Dununu. How about you tally all the goals scored in the world against leagues the goal scorer plays in? Or look at the players left in the semi finals against the leagues they play for. Surely that’s a better matrix than what you have.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@Cde_begar This smells like bullshit. Why is that the shona speaking people all of a sudden know more about this Ndebele speaking couple? Amangenu mashona lithanda indaba phinde lithi amawala.

[mawarire mbizvo jealousy @mawarirej]

CAB3 Survey Results Doctored! Lead Researcher Afraid of Being Killed if Actual Results are Published

By Mbizvo Jealousy Mawarire

The so-called survey report on CAB3 by the Public Policy and Research Institute of Zimbabwe (PPRIZ) is turning out to be one of the most scandalous things that have been thrown into Zimbabwe’s political arena to support the constitutional coup that Mnangagwa pulled off to extend his stay in power.

PPRIZ and its lead researcher, Gorden Moyo, misled Zimbabweans by presenting views gathered from Zanu-PF supporters as if they reflected the position of the general public on CAB3. They failed to disclose that the survey was an internal Zanu-PF exercise designed to measure party support for CAB3 and assess whether the bill could withstand a referendum.

Instead, PPRIZ released a PowerPoint presentation to the media purporting that the survey results were national and reflected opinions gathered from the generality of Zimbabweans, not just Zanu-PF supporters. This was a duplicitous act meant to hoodwink Zimbabweans into believing that CAB3 had national support when the bill faced resistance even within Zanu-PF as the actual research results showed that almost 50 % of Zanu-PF supporters opposed the bill.

The propaganda presentation that PPRIZ availed to the media deceitfully throws around percentages which the organisation claims represent public approval of the unconstitutional changes contained in Constitutional Amendment 3. The institute purports that 48.9% of the respondents approved election of the president through parliament while also claiming that 51.3% of Zimbabweans “strongly” support the extension of the president’s term of office from five to seven years.

Ominously, the institution is now refusing to publish the full report and the lead researcher, Gorden Moyo, is claiming his life could be in danger if the full report and its actual contents are availed to the public.

After being continuously pestered for the report, Moyo availed the PowerPoint presentation that his organisation made public, an act tantamount to sending a table of contents to someone looking for one’s dissertation or book.

Moyo shockingly justifies his failure to avail the full report by claiming that there are things in the report that he felt, if published, would have gotten him killed. He even dismissed the Herald story on the survey revealing that the narrative contained in the story was totally opposite to the findings contained in the “actual report”.

He said, “If you don’t read the report and you just read what the Herald is saying, you simply say, ooh the public institute is supporting this thing (CAB3). But read the report, you will see that it’s a totally, totally different story.” He went on to say that “there are things I will tell you, but I won’t tell the public because they will get us killed. Some of the things are treasonous, you know, with our government”
This is a shocking revelation by the person who was central in the research and the compilation of the report.

The question then is, what is in the report that would get Moyo and his colleagues killed if they were shared with the public? Who would kill them for publishing public opinions on a constitutional amendment change that the regime purports to be coming from the people?

If a researcher and academic like Gorden Moyo is afraid to publish empirical findings from a public policy survey and, instead, chooses to distort the outcome, what does that reveal about the research environment? What does it say about academic freedom and intellectual independence that should guide public policy? What does it say about the report he ultimately produced and released to the public? And what does the publication of politically convenient, doctored results reveal about Gorden Moyo himself?

Does it mean the PowerPoint presentation that Moyo and his institute shared with the Herald and other media organisations for public consumption is a doctored report meant to preserve Moyo and his colleagues’ lives? Is it the survey is a hatchet job to further some nefarious political agenda? If that is the case, why should Zimbabweans trust PPRIZ and its so-called opinion survey?

That instructive statement by Moyo, that he is afraid of being killed if he publishes the actual survey results, brings a whole lot of new interest in his so-called survey including his research methods, his sampling methods, his funders, the objective of the survey and how he got to know that some findings from his research could get him killed.

The other thing coming out is that Moyo has suddenly become very evasive and seems like he no longer wants to share the report with the media, raising concerns whether there is any survey report in the first place or there is just that contrived PowerPoint presentation that his institute has shared with the media to throw into the national political discourse, the propaganda that Zimbabweans approved of the constitutional changes that Mnangagwa and his cohorts have just introduced.

The big question becomes, who is Moyo working for, and what does he hope to achieve? We can begin to answer this and other questions by looking at what I have discovered about the survey sample. Conversations with people close to the so-called survey revealed striking details.

The exercise began as an internal Zanu-PF tool to gauge party support for the constitutional changes it had initiated. As a result, the sample was convenient and limited to Zanu-PF supporters. Its original purpose was to measure internal support for CAB3 in case the party decided to pursue a referendum. It was meant to help Zanu-PF leaders decide whether to follow the constitution by allowing a referendum on the proposed changes or to proceed with the constitutional coup they ultimately carried out.

The findings revealed that almost half of the party did not support CAB3 and therefore subjecting the bill to a referendum would have spelt disaster for its exponents and chief architects. The idea of extrapolating the survey results to portray public approval of CAB3 was an afterthought, a propaganda gimmick by Professor Jonathan Moyo and Speaker of Parliament, Mudenda, who has been working closely with Gorden Moyo to drum up support for Mnangagwa and his CAB3 in Matabeleland. That is the reason why Jonathan Moyo’s sidekick, Glen Mpani was present in Harare at the launch of the propaganda ‘research report.’ The survey was meant to justify Jonathan Moyo and Mpani’s Breaking Barriers Initiative delusions that postponing elections was fundamental to bringing peace and stability in Zimbabwe.

The other issue which came out is the funding of the project. Who funded it? That’s where the issue of the picture that was circulated on social media comes in. That picture, fortunately, explains the funding structure, not only of PPRIZ and the John Landa Nkomo Memorial Lecture, but of the survey and Gorden Moyo’s activities around drumming up support for ED and CAB3.

That nexus explains why Jonathan Moyo jumped in to try and put context to Gorden Moyo’s picture with Mnangagwa at State House. Jonathan Moyo’s intervention was meant to divert attention from the real deal behind the John Landa Nkomo Memorial Lecture and activities around CAB3.

Jonathan Moyo panicked that the truth was just about to be exposed. The truth about who is behind the funding of PPRIZ, the survey and the so-called John Landa Nkomo’s Memorial Lecture. The survey, the memorial lecture, CAB3 and ED’s involvement are not unrelated. They are carefully planned events and processes meant for drumming up support for ED and CAB3 in Matabeleland.

The John Landa Nkomo Trust has become an important funding vehicle for Jonathan Moyo and his allies in the region. If that were not so, why would Jonathan Moyo concern himself with John Landa Nkomo’s legacy? Is this not the same Jonathan Moyo who sued John Landa Nkomo while he was on his deathbed? Jonathan does not care about John Landa Nkomo’s legacy; he is interested in the money Dumbuzenene is channelling into the Trust. Those funds were used by Jonathan Moyo and Gorden Moyo to commission the so-called research. It is therefore clear who funded the research and what it was meant to achieve.

The other thing is that Gorden Moyo and Mudenda have been close buddies since the GNU. Gorden is now very important in the succession matrix in Zanu-PF since he has been involved in efforts to galvanise support for ED in the region even in the run-up to the November 2017 coup.

Zimbabweans might remember an organisation called Matabeleland Collective which was used by Catriona Laing’s husband Thomas, to try and coalesce different groups in Matabeleland to ostensibly fight for things like devolution and inclusion when in actual fact it was a conduit for drumming up support for ED’s quest to wrestle power from President Mugabe.

Matabeleland Collective crumbled after misuse of donor funds by some Women in Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) characters and the drying up of donor funds after USAID ceased operations. This prompted the Matabeleland Collective characters to look for new funders. That’s where ED and Dumbuzenene come in. They became the new donors and PPRIZ replaced Matabeleland Collective but with the same objective of propping up Mnangagwa in Matabeleland and Gorden Moyo is central in the operation.

That is Gorden Moyo. He is not merely the academic his public persona suggests; he is a political operator who knows how to position himself for political transitions. It is public knowledge that, in 2008, he used Bulawayo Agenda as a conduit for donor funds to oil the MDC election campaign. He was later rewarded with a ministerial appointment by Morgan Tsvangirai during the GNU. Now, sensing another transition, he is using PPRIZ to promote Mudenda, hoping to benefit if Mudenda becomes Vice President and Mnangagwa extends his stay in office to 2030 or beyond.

So, fellow Zimbabweans, the so-called public opinion survey by Gorden Moyo’s PPRIZ is nothing but an internal Zanu-PF report that PPRIZ is now contriving to reflect national opinion. It shows that almost half of Zanu-PF supporters did not approve Mnangagwa extending his stay to 2030 and this informs why Zanu-PF did not want to take CAB3 for a referendum even when the changes in the bill touched on provisions in section 328 of the constitution.

The only positive thing from this PPRIZ survey is the claim that only 12.5% of Zimbabweans participated in the parliamentary consultations on CAB3, a clear indication that CAB3 was not subjected to the public for their input.

If only 12.5% Zimbabweans participated in the parliamentary consultative process, either physically, or by way of written submissions to parliament, what does that say about public involvement in the process that fundamentally changed the 2013 constitution?
Otherwise, the PPRIZ so-called survey is nothing other than Jonathan Moyo’s usual gimmicks to push mischievous political agendas.

Until then Madzimbabwe

#2030EDAnengeAsipo!
#Ngazvitenderere!

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@mkhatsh3 @Leokoni And then he says he doesn’t get intimidated easily. Gwara hiding behind soldiers.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@UnathiAfrika @SayEntrepreneur And then that person will end up in a shack (mokhukhu).

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@ZimEye Kuza dropper unina.

[Dhara Blessed Mhlanga @bbmhlanga]

Never underestimate the effect of poverty in the fight for democracy. The desire to join the gravy train at times far outstrips the determination for personal freedom. This is why a few wealthy people have over the years managed to control millions of poor people.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@iNdaba_ Kawe ukhokho kanti usalindeni?

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@tafimhaka @mahlayeya Mondi, the whole lot of them.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@freemanchari @mahlayeya @penuelist_ Mbeki and his quiet diplomacy in 2008.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@Am_Blujay They did. They left as quietly as church mice.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@FabrizioRomano He plays better for country than the club.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@ChenaiIrene @Munya_Daniel The 1980 ones were not even free and fair. They were rigged by the white man so Nkomo wouldn’t win. Nkomo wanted land to be given back to the indigenous people.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@NhlamuloNeay @RapulanaTsepe Mrs Linda Gxasheka, how are the kids and the husband coping with just one salary?

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@insightsPhathi @Mathuthu Never trust ama yellow borne.

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@nhlanhladube09 @Mathuthu What are you basing your assertion on exactly?

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@ZamaNyathi14 @Mathuthu Ngu Zamani owaye hlabela lo ladi?

[nyaladzani tshuma @NT_Gould]

@NhlamuloNeay I remember gogo Matshazi smirking and being downright rude when she appeared at Madlanga commission. Is she going to keep her pension considering that she has already retired?