ZIMBABWE may be slowly edging towards a life presidency and a possible kingdom if Zanu-PF manages to railroad another controversial push to have the next general elections suspended until 2037, analysts say. President Emmerson Mnangagwa recently signed the Constitutional Amendment Act (No. 3) (CAA3), which suspended the next scheduled 2028 elections until 2030.
The CAA3 also scrapped direct presidential elections, shifting that authority to parliamentarians, and overhauls key sections of the 2013 constitution.
Last week, Zanu-PF held ‘thank you’ rallies in support of CAA3, where its Harare and Masvingo provincial executive members said suspending elections until 2030 was not enough.
Zanu-PF Harare provincial chairperson, Godwills Masimirembwa, said they would table a resolution at the party’s next annual conference to retain Mnangagwa until 2037.
Masvingo province also suggested the same.
The 2030 Mnangagwa term extension first surfaced as a rumour, coated in party songs and slogans in support of him by his loyalists.
At the time, Mnangagwa insisted that he was a constitutionalist and would step aside when his term of office expires in 2028.
If the proposed 2037 resolution is adopted, Mnangagwa would be 95 years old when his term of office expires.
He would have been president for 20 years, having assumed office in 2017.
The late president, Robert Mugabe, was 93 years old when he left office, having ruled Zimbabwe for 37 years. Mugabe died aged 95.
Analysts said the 2037 call was not incidental or surprising, but tragic. “The motivation behind CAA3 has always been to pursue an open-ended rule for Zanu-PF and its leader by evading electoral accountability,” analyst Vivid Gwede told The Standard.
“That opposition to both the process and content of this Act (CAA3) was ignored betrays the arbitrary nature of the process.”
Analyst Pride Nkomo added that Zanu-PF members were showing there is no limit to the efforts by Mnangagwa’s loyalists to have the president at the helm of the country beyond what is constitutionally guaranteed. “Thus, what we see with the recent utterances by Zanu-PF structures in Harare and Masvingo is a clear indication that Zimbabwe is now dangerously being pushed towards an individual life presidency where elections are virtually banned,” Nkomo said.
“This is as worrisome as it is untenable.”
Opposition leader Jameson Timba said the 2037 call suggested that CAA3 was not the destination, but merely another step in a broader constitutional project.
“If those calls are genuine, they reinforce concerns that many Zimbabweans expressed during the debate over CAA3—that repeated constitutional amendments are being driven by political expediency rather than the long-term interests of the nation,” Timba said.
“Whether they amount to a proposal to abolish elections, extend presidential tenure further, or pursue yet another constitutional amendment will depend on whether they become official government policy or remain the views of provincial party structures.”
He said the constitution was designed to provide certainty, predictability, and limits on the exercise of political power.
“Continually revisiting fundamental constitutional provisions for short-term political objectives undermines public confidence in the constitution and weakens constitutional democracy,” Timba added.
“A constitution should be a restraint on political power, not an instrument that is repeatedly reshaped to accommodate it.”
Another analyst, Reuben Mbofana, said the 2037 call must be taken seriously.
“The rapid escalation from party structures in Harare and Masvingo to push the horizon even further to 2037 serves as a strategic probe,” Mbofana said.
“It tests intra-party alignment, gauges opposition and civic resistance, and establishes a new baseline for internal party bargaining ahead of future transition talks.
Regarding whether this represents a plan to ban elections altogether, it is more accurate to view this as a move toward structured executive consolidation rather than a complete abolition of elections.”
Mbofana added that modern authoritarian systems rarely ban elections outright, but alter the rules to ensure predictable outcomes.
“By shifting the presidential selection process to parliament and restructuring administrative safeguards, the system moves away from competitive direct suffrage toward a managed electoral framework,” he added.