The Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) has raised constitutional and democratic concerns over key provisions in the proposed Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), warning that the changes risk undermining accountability, public participation and the rule of law.
Addressing the media on the Commission’s analysis of CAB3, ZHRC chairperson Jessie Majome said the Bill contains provisions that could weaken constitutional safeguards and concentrate executive power.
The Commission criticised the proposal to extend the presidential term to seven years, arguing it creates “a deliberate exception” to safeguards in Section 328(7) of the Constitution.
Majome said the clause would allow an incumbent to remain in office beyond limits ordinarily imposed by constitutional amendment procedures.
“Crudely, the clause extends the length of time of the incumbent, in stark contrast to the safeguard contemplated by Section 328(7),” she said.
“By carving out this exception, the Bill undermines constitutional supremacy and the integrity of amendment safeguards, raising serious concerns about adherence to both domestic standards and international norms on accountability and the rule of law.”
Keep Reading
- HZT predicts violent polls
- 'Govt averse to human rights reforms'
- Politicians giving us nightmares — Police
- Tsenengamu’s party dares CIO ahead of polls
ZHRC warned that extending presidential terms could delay citizens’ rights under Section 67 of the Constitution, including the right to participate in regular elections.
The Commission said this raises red flags under international law, citing the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasise periodic elections as the foundation of democratic governance.
“The potential negative effects are significant. Public trust in constitutional governance may erode if citizens perceive the law as pliable to political expediency,” Majome said.
“The balance of powers could be destabilised, marginalising Parliament’s oversight and the judiciary’s interpretive role, while concentrating authority in the executive. Zimbabwe’s international reputation may also suffer, as constitutional tampering without adherence to safeguards is often viewed as democratic backsliding.”
While acknowledging arguments by supporters of the amendment — including reduced “election mode toxicity” and improved policy continuity — ZHRC said these must be weighed against significant democratic risks.
The Commission also criticised proposals to remove citizens’ direct role in electing the President, shifting that power to Parliament.
While noting potential benefits such as fostering coalition-building and reducing populism, ZHRC said the move introduces a “democratic deficit.”
“Removing the electorate from directly voting for the President risks diminishing popular sovereignty and weakening public trust in institutions,” Majome said.
“Concentrating presidential selection within Parliament also raises the danger of parliamentary capture, where dominant parties manipulate Standing Rules and Orders to entrench power. Smaller parties and opposition voices may be marginalised, as coalition-building among voters is replaced by majoritarian control within Parliament.”