AS Parliament prepares to vote on Constitution Amendment No 3 Bill (CAB 3), lawmakers face a choice that could shape Zimbabwe's democratic future for decades. This is not just another legislative exercise — it is a test of whether elected representatives will defend the Constitution or weaken the safeguards designed to protect it.
CAB 3 has generated widespread concern among constitutional experts, civil society organisations and opposition legislators because it seeks to alter key provisions of Zimbabwe's supreme law without broad public consultation or any compelling national necessity. Constitutional amendments should be driven by national consensus and the public interest, not political convenience.
Several provisions contained in CAB 3 are deeply troubling.
The Bill seeks to extend the tenure of the President, Members of Parliament and councillors from five years to seven years without seeking the approval of citizens through a referendum. While proponents argue that they are merely adjusting the electoral cycle rather than extending terms of office, the practical effect is the same: elected officials will remain in office for longer without a fresh mandate from voters.
The Bill also empowers the Parliament to elect a president, effectively diluting the principle of one-person-one-vote. It further proposes giving the President greater influence over the appointment of judges by removing the public interview process, a key safeguard introduced by the 2013 Constitution to promote transparency and judicial independence.
Equally concerning is the proposal to transfer voter registration from the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (Zec) to the Registrar-General's Office. The 2013 Constitution deliberately assigned voter registration to an independent electoral body to strengthen public confidence in elections. Reversing that reform will take Zimbabwe backwards and risk reopening old controversies over electoral credibility.
Keep Reading
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Letters: Ensuring Africa’s food security through availability of quality seeds
- Is military's involvement in politics compatible with democracy?
The Bill also seeks to dissolve the Zimbabwe Gender Commission and transfer its functions to the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission. While institutional efficiency is important, such changes should only be pursued after thorough consultation and careful assessment of their implications for the protection of rights.
Taken together, these proposals point in one direction: the concentration of greater power in the Executive at the expense of the checks and balances carefully negotiated and entrenched in the 2013 Constitution.
For Zanu PF lawmakers, the temptation to support the Bill may be strong. The party commands a comfortable majority in the National Assembly and is seeking opposition support in the Senate to secure the amendments.
But parliamentary power comes with a duty to exercise restraint. Legislators are custodians of the Constitution, not merely agents of party directives.
History is littered with examples of governing parties that used parliamentary majorities to weaken constitutional safeguards, only to discover later that the precedents can be used against them when political fortunes changed. Constitutions are not written for today's leaders alone; they are designed to protect future generations regardless of who occupies public office.
The Constitution adopted in 2013 was the product of years of negotiation, consultation and compromise. It reflected a shared national aspiration for accountable governance, separation of powers and stronger democratic institutions.
Zanu PF legislators face a defining choice: to place national interests above partisan considerations or to use the tyranny of the majority to push through changes that many fear will weaken democratic institutions.
The wisest course is to withdraw the most contentious provisions of CAB 3, facilitate a broad national dialogue and ensure that any constitutional reforms command genuine public support. Anything less risks undermining the democratic values Zimbabweans sought to entrench in the 2013 Constitution.
There may be political incentives to support CAB 3. But while political rewards are often temporary, the consequences of constitutional change can endure for generations. Posterity has a long memory.