A high-ranking liberation war veteran has launched a blistering attack on the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill (No. 3), labelling it a “harmful” piece of legislation and a direct threat to democratic governance as public consultations in Bulawayo were marred by chaos and exclusion.
Andrew Ndlovu, a former Zimbabwe People’s Revolutionary Army (Zipra) zone commander, told a public hearing that the proposed changes undermine both the spirit and the letter of the country’s supreme law.
Ndlovu accused the authorities of pushing a politically motivated agenda designed to consolidate power rather than serve the national interest.
“There’s a saying… ‘elect a clown into office and the country becomes a circus.’ This is the current state of affairs in our beloved Zimbabwe,” he said, in a scathing assessment of the current political climate.
The veteran’s remarks came as the government moves to amend the 2013 constitution, a move critics argue is a calculated attempt to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure beyond the constitutionally mandated two terms.
Ndlovu argued that elected officials are bound by their oaths “to obey, uphold and defend the constitution,” and that the current drive for amendments represents a fundamental failure to honour those solemn obligations.
Keep Reading
- Liberation war stalwart pens political book
- Liberation war stalwart pens political book
- Zapu, CCC, Zanu PF in joint call for peace
- New perspectives: Why Zanu, Zanu PF were successful in the 1970s, 80s and 90s
“It is quite disappointing that we are gathered here because of individuals that have undermined the people of Zimbabwe and decided to not uphold, obey and defend the constitution,” he said. “This preposterous amendment is rather harmful to the nation… more of ‘a disaster waiting to happen.’”
At the heart of the veteran’s concerns is the contentious issue of presidential term limits. While acknowledging that Section 328 of the constitution allows for amendments, Ndlovu emphasised that the law explicitly bars any incumbent from benefiting from such changes.
“In layman’s terms, whoever is in office should not benefit from the term limit extension,” he said. “A ‘continuation’ in office till 2030 is simply inconsistent with the constitution.”
The bill also proposes expanding presidential powers, including the appointment of ten additional senators and more judges. Ndlovu warned that these provisions would erode institutional independence and further tilt the scales in favour of the ruling party.
“Having the president appoint 10 more senators simply gives the ruling party an upper hand in all matters concerning the nation,” he warned.
“If 10 more clowns are added to the circus then everyone is doomed.”
He cautioned that increased executive control over judicial appointments would inevitably weaken the rule of law and lead to a lack of accountability.
“To grant the executive such powers simply strips the judiciary of its powers… Who gets prosecuted on matters including corruption?” Ndlovu asked, adding that the bill concentrates power in the presidency while reducing its responsibility to the citizenry.
The veteran also raised the alarm over the proposed abolishment of independent commissions, particularly those focused on national reconciliation and gender issues.
He warned that removing these bodies would weaken oversight of human rights and negatively impact marginalized groups.
“The abolishment of commissions focused on reconciliation and gender issues… weakens oversight of rights issues and has a negative impact on already marginalised groups,” he said.
Calling for the immediate suspension of the bill, Ndlovu argued that Zimbabwe has more pressing, unresolved national issues that require attention. He suggested the amendment serves to give “criminals the upper hand” rather than improving the lives of ordinary Zimbabweans6.
Ndlovu’s testimony was delivered against a backdrop of disorder that has characterised the Bulawayo leg of the public hearings. At Nketa Hall last Monday, proceedings were disrupted when a woman was forcibly removed for wearing a T-shirt and head wrap with messages reading “No to 2030 agenda” and “No to Bill Number 3.”
The woman had challenged the legality of the amendments before being ejected, an incident that sparked a commotion among attendees.
Meanwhile, a separate hearing at the Large City Hall saw hundreds of citizens locked out due to limited space.
Concerns were also raised over the “organized” nature of the session, with allegations that some participants had been bused in to drown out genuine public sentiment78.
Observers noted that ruling party officials appeared to be directing proceedings, while prominent figures—including Bulawayo mayor David Coltart—were reportedly unable to make their submissions.
The growing tension around Amendment Bill No. 3 underscores the high stakes of what is seen as the most significant legal challenge to the 2013 constitution since its adoption. While the government maintains the hearings are a democratic exercise in gathering public input, critics like Ndlovu insist the process, and the bill itself, are designed to “bring harm upon the nation”