Experts say Zimbabwe’s Political Parties (Finance) Act is riddled with loopholes and lacks proper oversight, allowing politicians, particularly those in the ruling Zanu PF, to access state resources with little accountability or transparency.
The law, which was intended to promote fairness in political financing, has instead become a “blank cheque” for the political elite, according to analysts who spoke during CITE’s Asakhe Morning X Space discussion titled “Financing Money: Who Gets the Money in Zimbabwe Politics.”
Accountability Lab of Zimbabwe Programmes Officer, Beloved Chiweshe, said the practice of using state resources to fund political activity dates back to the Unity Accord of 1987.
“In 1987 when there was a merger of Zanu PF and PF ZAPU, an interesting ministry established at that time called the Ministry of Political Affairs,” said Chiweshe.
“Its major function was to make sure the party was serviced through resources from the state, making sure it was healthy, well administered, and that Zanu PF MPs were whipped into line.”
He said the ministry received about Z$50,000 in 1990, a significant sum then, which sparked criticism from opposition parties and citizens over the use of taxpayers’ money for partisan purposes.
“It was eventually abolished in 1992, but immediately after, we saw the Political Parties (Finance) Act coming into play,” Chiweshe added. “The ruling party has perpetually since 1987 benefitted from the state in terms of how it runs and functions.”
Chiweshe also revealed that during the early years of independence, civil servants were compelled to contribute part of their salaries to fund the construction of Zanu PF’s headquarters.
“This is how the state, over time, has been funding political parties,” he said.
While the Act was meant to regulate party financing and ensure democratic fairness, he said it has instead institutionalised the state’s financial support to Zanu PF while evading scrutiny.
Elections Resource Centre (ERC) Senior Programmes Officer, Takunda Tsunga, said Zimbabwe’s political funding framework remains “historically opaque,” giving excessive power to the Minister of Justice.
“The political funding framework in Zimbabwe has been historically opaque,” Tsunga said. “The Minister of Justice has full discretion on how and when to release funds.”
Initially, the law applied to parties with at least 15 parliamentary seats out of 120, but this was amended to cover only parties securing five percent of the total vote, currently benefiting only Zanu PF and the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC).
According to ERC’s Political Parties (Finance) Act Factsheet Analysis for 2025, the Ministry of Justice disbursed ZiG147.6 million (about US$5.5 million) this year, 69.3% to Zanu PF and 30.7% to the CCC, an 8.3% increase from 2024.
Cumulatively, since the 2023 elections, government has paid out US$10.6 million under the Act, with US$7.3 million going to Zanu PF and US$3.3 million to the CCC.
Tsunga said the law’s roots lie in Zimbabwe’s early 2000s political and economic crisis.
“It was amended in 2002 to restrict foreign funding and assert state control,” he said.
Experts argue that while the Act legalises political party funding, it fails to ensure accountability.
“The bulk of resources appropriated in the national budget have accountability mechanisms,” said Chiweshe. “But the Political Parties (Finance) Act has no such requirement.”
He said the law merely instructs beneficiaries to maintain financial records but imposes no penalties or audits.
“There are no reporting requirements, no regulations to enforce transparency, and no penalties or sanctions for misuse,” Chiweshe noted. “The law merely says beneficiaries should maintain books, but if no one checks those books, what happens?”
Chiweshe said the lack of transparency raises serious governance concerns.
“We are sinking money that could have gone toward productive sectors or key social services,” he said. “If you follow both the ruling and opposition parties, there are daily allegations of resource abuse. In short, we are financing the lifestyles of politicians at the expense of citizens.”
He said the scale of the money involved, around US$10 million, makes accountability critical.
Analysts also criticised the discretion granted to the Minister of Justice, which they say enables political manipulation. The issue came under the spotlight last year when the minister disbursed funds meant for CCC to Sengezo Tshabangu, who claimed to be the party’s interim secretary-general despite disputes over his legitimacy.
“The Minister has discretion on when and who to give those resources once they apply and when he is convinced,” said Chiweshe. “You wonder how Tshabangu ended up receiving money from national coffers despite not having participated in the election.”
He said the case exemplified how vague legal provisions allow political elites to exploit state funds.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if those who facilitated that payment went behind the scenes and demanded kickbacks,” Chiweshe said. “The person who received the money knew they didn’t deserve it.”
Chiweshe further questioned whether state funding of political parties should even be a priority amid economic hardship.
“In the developing world, is funding political parties really a priority in light of collapsing service delivery, poor infrastructure, and limited disaster management capacity?” he asked.
He likened political parties to “the engines of democracy,” but warned that without proper oversight, the system merely entrenches privilege.
“Without transparency and accountability, public financing only fuels political privilege,” he said.
Support CITE’s fearless, independent journalism. Your donation helps us amplify community voices, fight misinformation, and hold power to account. Help keep the truth alive. Donate today