A critical analysis of the dynamics of intergovernmental relations in Zimbabwe

The field of intergovernmental relations (IGR), both from a conceptual and practical perspective presents a contested order in Zimbabwe’s political and public administration discourse, with a fairly long and complex historical and institutional context. The advent of colonialism in Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) gave birth to a dualised form of government with a separatist development agenda. The dualistic model of government was anchored on a segregationist centralist ideology that advanced a white supremacist agenda while entrenching underdevelopment in native areas. This was attained through the use of draconic and ingrained racially discriminatory laws, ordinances and policy enactments, inter alia, the 1910 High Commissioner’s Proclamation, the Native Councils Act, the African Councils Act, and the District Councils Act which supported the overriding philosophy of colonialist hegemony. The direct rule policy was used and in practice, administrative, political, judicial and legislative powers were under the purview of the whites. Under this political dispensation, the nature of IGR was typically a master-servant relationship as African institutions had limited policy latitude under the tentacles of race-driven white control over the socio-economic and political space with an exploitative and subservient underpinning. The demise of colonialism and the birth of independent Zimbabwe in 1980 ushered a new political dispensation. The post-independence government embarked on a number of reforms aimed at dismantling the racist undertones of government. These reforms include the expanded decentralization frameworks supported by legislative instruments and policies such as the 1984 Prime Minister’s Directive and the 1996 thirteen principles of decentralization. Other key reforms are the 1996 Urban Councils Act, Chapter 29:15 and the 1988 Rural District Councils Act, Chapter 29:13. However, it is important to note that despite this plethora of legislation and reforms purportedly meant to dismantle racist backed institutional differentiation, the new national government did not depose its excessive control on sub-national governments. It is therefore an insoluble contradiction that the legislation and institutions created in post-independence Zimbabwe promoted the autonomy of sub-national governments while broadening democracy and citizen participation. This era rather presents an aporetic discourse epitomized by the national government’s perfection of colonial dominance approaches through creating legislation and institutions to retain wide and extensive control of sub-national governments. The Global Political Agreement of 2009 culminated into the promulgation of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment Number 20 of 2013 with provisions for devolution of power, Provincial and Metropolitan Councils and the enshrinement of Local Government as a tier of government with constitutionally guaranteed autonomy. However, despite these reforms with far reaching implications on the configuration of IGR, the ZANUPF led national government is lethargic in implementing them. This has sparked controversy as these constitutional reforms and their potential to promote an integrated and efficient system of governance may turn out to be a pyrrhic victory. This is so because the necessary legislation anchoring the constitutional reforms may not be created in the foreseeable future as the current national government views devolution, for instance, as tantamount to surrendering political power to sub-national institutions. The purpose of the study was to critically examine the dynamics of intergovernmental relations in Zimbabwe. The overlapping authority model of IGR and the theory of networked governance underpinned the study. A comparative study of IGR was conducted focusing on two federal nations (United States of America) and Nigeria) and two unitary nations (United Kingdom and South Africa). A qualitative phenomenological methodology was used and the sample size was 20 respondents selected using the purposive sampling technique. Data was collected using in-depth interviews and analyzed using thematic analysis and critical discourse analysis. Key findings of the study reflected on the conception and relevance of IGR in unitary nations in contrast to classical perspectives that restricted the field as a discourse of federalism. The study established that the unitary system of Zimbabwe is anchored on a strong centralist ideology that suffocates the autonomy of sub-national institutions. In the same context, there is absence of political will on the part of the ZANUPF led government to implement crucial constitutional reforms that have a bearing on the configuration of IGR. The study also revealed that political party incongruence is a threat to intergovernmental coordination, integrated planning and collaborative development. Various recommendations were made from the study and these include that national government should expedite the implementation of the Constitution, codification of IGR by way of legislation and rationalization of fiscal transfers and intergovernmental fiscal equalization