By Tichaona Katsvamutima
Outspoken former Norton legislator Temba Mliswa has launched a scathing attack on senior ZANU-PF official Obert Mpofu, accusing him of ‘indiscipline’ and questioning why the ruling party has failed to invoke its own constitution against him following his reassignment from the Secretary-General’s office.
In a lengthy Facebook post, Mliswa used Mpofu’s alleged conduct to press for tougher action against ZANU-PF members who resisted Constitutional Amendment Act Number 3 (CAA3), arguing that those opposed to the measure should either resign or be “weeded out” of the party.
Mliswa framed the dispute as a test of the balance between internal democracy and democratic centralism within ZANU-PF, arguing that while members could debate issues before a decision was reached, they were expected to unite behind the party once a collective position had been adopted.
“While there may be freedom of discussion before a decision, there should be absolute unity of action after,” Mliswa wrote.
He said CAA3 had been decided by the People’s Conference, Central Committee, Politburo and the President, arguing that continued resistance could therefore no longer be defended as an exercise of internal democracy.
“Resistance after that point is not democracy; it is factionalism, and factionalism is counter-revolution in embryo,” he said.
Mliswa described CAA3 as more than a policy question, characterising it as a fundamental strategic issue touching on what he called “state continuity and revolutionary succession”.
“To claim a ‘democratic right’ to resist a fundamental issue is to elevate procedure over revolution,” he said.
Mliswa then turned his fire on Mpofu, a veteran ZANU-PF politician, presenting his alleged conduct following his reassignment as an example of what he said could happen when internal indiscipline was allowed to go unchecked.
He alleged that since being moved from the Secretary-General’s position and reassigned as Secretary for Information and Communication Technology, Mpofu had retreated to Bulawayo, stayed away from duties at party headquarters and ignored attempts by party officials to re-engage him.
Mliswa further alleged that Mpofu had, at one stage, continued signing correspondence as “Secretary General” despite his reassignment.
Mliswa argued that the alleged conduct should be examined against ZANU-PF’s disciplinary rules, citing Article 10, Sections 74 and 75 of the party constitution, which he said cover acts of misconduct including “disloyalty and treachery”, “gross misconduct”, “disregarding party principles of communication” and “insubordination”.
He also claimed that absenteeism from Politburo, Central Committee or Provincial Coordinating Committee meetings without official permission could constitute misconduct warranting disciplinary action.
“Why is ZANU-PF not using its own Constitution to discipline errant cadres? Is he untouchable?” Mliswa asked.
Mliswa also questioned Mpofu’s suitability to lead the ruling party’s ICT portfolio at a time when artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies are rapidly transforming communications.
“Is he even the correct person to lead the party’s ICT arm in this era of AI and technological advancements when there are other capacitated younger leaders?” he said.
He contrasted Mpofu’s alleged absence from party activities with President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s participation in structures from the grassroots upwards, arguing that senior officials should lead by example.
“From the DCC, PCC meetings party leaders should be attending and the President is a good example. He repeatedly attends even Cell meetings in his own area,” Mliswa said.
Mliswa also invoked his own history within ZANU-PF, saying that when he served as Mashonaland West provincial chairperson he had taken disciplinary action against Christopher Mutsvangwa.
“I did it with Cde Mutsvangwa when I was Mash West Chairperson. Why has that not been raised for Mpofu?” he asked.
Mliswa, who has himself was expelled from ZANU-PF, accused the party of applying disciplinary standards inconsistently, claiming some members had been removed on what he described as false allegations while others appeared to escape sanction despite what he regarded as ‘clear grounds for disciplinary action’.
“Some of us were removed from the party based on false allegations yet here we have explicitly factual matters yet nothing is being done,” he said.
His criticism of Mpofu became particularly severe as he portrayed the veteran politician’s alleged conduct as the reaction of a senior cadre struggling to accept the loss of his previous position.
“His actions are not mere wounded pride; it is the inevitable psychosis of the deposed careerist,” Mliswa wrote.
He went further, describing Mpofu as embodying what he termed a “lumpen-cadre who confuses the Party with his person”.
“The lesson is clear: had the Party been ruthless with earlier, lesser acts, the Mpofu syndrome would never have metastasized,” Mliswa said.
Mliswa concluded by calling on ZANU-PF to return to what he described as its 1963 founding ethos of “Unity, Discipline, Loyalty”, insisting that those who continued resisting CAA3 should either resign or face removal from the party.
“The weeding out of CAA3 resistors is therefore not a purge; it is the Party cleansing its own body politic to ensure that the permanent Zimbabwe revolution does not die of a thousand ‘democratic rights’,” he said.
