Counting in the election is under way today. As the House is well aware, there has been every sign of ZANU-PF-backed violence and intimidation, right up to the close of polling, as well as many reports of irregularities, including a shortage of polling booths in urban areas, and harassment of opposition election agents in rural areas. We will make a final judgment when the outcome of the election is declared and the international observers have reported. I will, of course, keep the House informed. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made clear in his statement last Wednesday, Zimbabwe dominated discussions at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Australia.
Murder, violence, intimidation, gerrymandering, corruption, arson—these are the lengths to which Mr. Mugabe has gone to thwart the democratic process in Zimbabwe. Leaving aside the impotence of the Commonwealth, does the Foreign Secretary agree that Mr. Mugabe has no legitimate right to be head of state in Zimbabwe, and will he confirm that this Government will not recognise him as such?
The descriptions that the hon. Gentleman has uttered are entirely accurate. This is a terrible period not only for Zimbabwe but for those who hold dear the cause of democracy in Africa and elsewhere. I am not making predictions about the formal outcome of the election, but I promise that I will keep the House informed and, if I can, I will make a statement to the House about the decisions that we shall make. The only reason why that might not immediately be possible would be if such decisions were made at a weekend.
On the issue of recognition, it is states that are recognised, not Governments—a view also taken by the previous, Conservative, Administration. Of course, if it becomes clear, in the event of President Mugabe's being declared the winner, that he has stolen the election—the evidence is already pretty strong—that will have enormous implications for the nature of our relationship with Zimbabwe.
The answer to my hon. Friend is yes. I have been in touch with Brian Donnelly, the British high commissioner in Zimbabwe, about this matter as well as many others. The fact that President Mugabe and ZANU-PF have resorted to methods of violence, intimidation, murder and bringing charges, which many say are trumped up, against members of the MDC, including Welshman Ncube and Morgan Tsvangirai, illustrates President Mugabe's lack of confidence in his ability to win a free and fair election.
May I, from this side of the House, warmly congratulate the Foreign Secretary on the reply that he gave to my hon. Friend Richard Ottaway? Whatever the outcome of the election, I remain optimistic that the presidential candidate from the Movement for Democratic Change can and should be elected. Is it not devastating that the objectives and criteria of the Harare declaration of 1991 have been busted open and flagrantly abused by the current president of that country? We want a change, so that the wonderful people of Zimbabwe can share in the genuine growth and prosperity that they warmly deserve.
I agree with the hon. Gentleman, and I am grateful to him for his remarks. I hope that the issue of democracy in Zimbabwe will not be not subject to partisan exchanges across the Floor. Everyone should be united on the need for democracy and for all sides in this country to support the forces of democracy. As for the future, my long experience of elections is that they are often difficult to predict, even more so when there has been such intimidation and so many irregularities. The immediate future for the people of Zimbabwe may be dark, but I have faith that they will be able to come through that, and that in the end democracy and right will triumph.
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the stand that he took on suspension at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting. Can he confirm that steps will be taken by the institution of the Commonwealth following the election result? Does not the Commonwealth have to grapple with the issue of suspension in the long term? In the future, other countries will deserve to be suspended, just as Zimbabwe deserves to be suspended now.
My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made it clear last Wednesday that we regretted the decision—or lack of decision—of the Commonwealth Heads of Government in Australia last week not to move immediately to suspend the Mugabe Government from the Commonwealth, just as I greatly regretted the failure of the Commonwealth Ministers action group to do so when it met on
At Coolum, it was agreed that a troika of the three Heads of Government should be established to determine whether Zimbabwe should be suspended following the outcome of the election and the report of the Commonwealth observers. What decisions they make remains to be seen, but what has become clear over the past year is that the existing arrangements for what amounts to disciplinary action by the Commonwealth need to be changed to take account of regimes, like the Mugabe regime, that may have been democratically elected but have rapidly resorted to undemocratic practices. I am pleased to say that at least one good thing happened at Coolum, which was that the decision was taken to ensure that there is such a disciplinary process in future.
At the last Labour party conference, the Prime Minister said that there would be no tolerance of the activities of Mr. Mugabe's henchmen. I do not want to anticipate the statement that the Foreign Secretary proposes to make in the next few days, but can he tell the House exactly how that policy of no tolerance is to be put into effect?
I can tell the House what has already happened. On
My hon. Friend Sir Patrick Cormack—[Hon. Members: "Macclesfield."] I am sorry. How could I confuse my two hon. Friends? I thank my hon. Friend Mr. Winterton for rightly reminding us of the 1991 Commonwealth declaration, which ironically was signed in Harare. A quotation from that declaration was included in the booklet produced by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office yesterday to celebrate Commonwealth day. It is worth recalling the words:
"We believe . . . in the individual's inalienable right to participate by means of free and democratic processes in the society in which he or she lives."
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the Harare declaration rings tragically hollow in Zimbabwe today? Has not the Mugabe regime ridden roughshod over the principles of democracy, making a total mockery of that declaration? Has not the barbarous and brutal conduct of the election—both before and during it—been outrageous, and on any fair test unacceptable? Why will the Foreign Secretary not make it clear today that if Mugabe is proclaimed the winner, he will reject the result and act accordingly?
Is Zimbabwe—is the regime of President Mugabe—in breach of the Harare declaration? Yes, manifestly so: there is not the slightest doubt about that. At least I got the Commonwealth to recognise that in the Commonwealth ministerial action group, both before Christmas and on
As for what action we should take, I think it wise to await the outcome of the election. Counting is taking place this afternoon. I promise to keep the House informed and, if I am physically able, to make a statement to the House immediately. Let us make decisions when we know the full facts.
The right hon. Gentleman obviously has more faith in the Mugabe-endorsed election observers than I have.
Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Commonwealth disgraced itself at last week's Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting? Does he agree that if Mugabe claimed victory and the Commonwealth failed to disown the result and suspend Zimbabwe, it would be a travesty of everything that the Commonwealth stands for? It would be a failure not so much of the Commonwealth as of its collective leadership.
After so much dithering, which has led to so much suffering for the people of Zimbabwe, will the right hon. Gentleman now grasp the nettle and give the lead that is necessary for the building of an international coalition to restore genuine democracy in that sad country?
The gentlest thing I can say to the right hon. Gentleman about his suggestion that I have faith in Commonwealth observers is that it is an error rather like confusing South Staffordshire with Macclesfield. In fact I did not mention observers, or whether I have any faith in them. Whether the House has faith in them will depend on the quality of their report, in the light of palpable evidence—seen and read by all of us—of the irregularities that have been going on under the nose of the international community, as well as their own noses.
There are three principal sets of international observers in Zimbabwe, from the Commonwealth, the Southern African Development Community and South Africa itself. What reports they produce remain to be seen, but of course those reports will be scrutinised very carefully, and the credibility of those organisations and individuals will be as much at stake as the issue of the integrity of the election.