Provisions for Young People in the Draft Constitution

The COPAC Draft constitution can be commended for moving a step further in ensuring that specific provisions are made and clearly stated for the benefit of young people in Zimbabwe.  Such provisions in the Draft Constitution indicate that:

1   The state and all institutions and agencies of government at every level must take reasonable measures, including affirmative action programmes, to ensure that youths (15-35):

·         Have access to appropriate education and training
·         Have opportunities to associate and to be represented and participate in political, social, economic and other spheres of life
·         Are afforded opportunities for employment and avenues to economic empowerment
·         Have opportunities for recreational facilities and are:
·         Protected from harmful cultural practices, exploitation and all forms of abuse

2.      An Act of Parliament may provide for one or more national youth programs.

It goes on to state that measures referred to in 1 and 2 must be inclusive, non-partisan and national in character. Such provisions become significant in the supreme law of the land as it legally binds the state to act in accordance so as to ensure that the full potential of young people in realised.

It should be noted however, that in the Lancaster House Constitution signed in 1979 such provisions were not made, and thus youths were not clearly sectored. At another level, the country using the Lancaster Constitution has been grappling with the nuances of age range for youths and in the process in some circles older people have been benefiting at the expense of youths. Such unclearly defined age range can be noted in the reports in the census of 2002, which brackets youths within 15-29 years of age, yet the Zimbabwe Draft Youth Policy defines a youth as aged between 10-35 years. Such inconsistencies can also be attributed to the fact that the Lancaster House Constitution did not spell out a clear definition of a youth.

It is within this backdrop that this constitution amongst other things stands out in terms of being sensitive to young Zimbabweans. Also, NYDT in a youth convention held on June 23, 2012 posed a question of the required youth age in which the youths indicated that they would be comfortable with a youth age range being clearly defined in the constitution as “16 -35 years of age”.  As such it can be celebrated that some of the key factors identified by youths at the convention have been stipulated in the draft constitution.

Another significant point to note is the fact that the State has to take reasonable measures including affirmative action in ensuring that youths are economically empowered through education. Also, the deliberate attempt in ensuring effective participation of young people strikes as one of the most significant provisions highlighted in the constitution. This was a key missing link in the Lancaster house constitution as policies were used as the framework for youth development without substantial support from the supreme law. Juxtaposing the youth demands in the convention to the new constitution, the youths in 2012 pointed out that:

The state must adopt policies and measures to ensure that youths are afforded opportunities for employment and representation in political, social, economic and other spheres for their own development and that of the country. (NYDT youth convention on the non-negotiable demands held in July 2012).

The current draft constitution therefore shows similarities with the youth demands laid in 2012.

A closer inspection into other countries indicates the draft constitution is in line with regional and international trends. The Constitution of Kenya for instance also underlines the importance of young people in nation development and binds the state in ensuring that it offers opportunities for youths to ensure that they effectively participate in political, social, economic and other spheres of life and above all have access to relevant education and training. The current Draft constitution in Zimbabwe therefore, paused with the Kenyan one share similarities on the provisions for the youths.

Additionally, while the provision for national youth programmes is a noble and welcome idea to young people, it must be noted that this clause would be best implemented in a multi party representation in parliament. It may however be problematic if the parliament responsible for crafting the law is dominated by one political party as this may leave the programme prone to political manipulation.   

It is therefore, important to note that the constitution clearly underlines the need for youth programs to be more inclusive and non-partisan. The historiography of youth programs in Zimbabwe has been a case for concern. A case in point has been the National Youth Service which by far proved to be more partisan in approach, design and implementation leading to it losing favour even amongst key stakeholders, the youths. The provision in the draft constitution therefore makes it mandatory to ensure that the previous cases of partisan youth exploitation is criminalised under the Supreme Law of the land.

It is therefore important to ensure the proper implementation of such provisions for the benefit of young people, if this constitution is voted into law at the Constitutional referendum on March 16, 2013.