The recent proposal to amend the Zimbabwean Constitution to extend the term of President Emmerson Mnangagwa and other political office holders has sparked intense debate and controversy. On the one hand, proponents argue that such amendments are necessary to allow for continued economic development and stability, while on the other hand, critics decry the move as an effort to entrench political power at the expense of the country’s democratic processes.
Energy Mutodi, the Zanu-PF parliamentarian who confirmed the efforts to amend the constitution, has positioned himself as a key advocate for this change. However, his personal history adds a layer of controversy to his public stance. Mutodi, widely known for his serial womanizing and the scandal involving his forced marriages to both his wife and her sister, seems a polarizing figure within Zimbabwean politics. His endorsement of this constitutional amendment only heightens suspicions of a broader agenda within the ruling party to preserve its power indefinitely.
The supporters of the draft motion argue that extending the president’s term will allow for uninterrupted progress on the country’s development path, a claim that is heavily contested by Zimbabweans who feel the current leadership has failed to address pressing issues like unemployment, economic mismanagement, and crumbling infrastructure. The comparison to other failed states, such as Syria and Somalia, is an uncomfortable one for Zimbabweans, who point to the worsening economic and social conditions under Mnangagwa’s administration.
Critics like constitutional expert Lovemore Madhuku and opposition figures have strongly opposed the motion, urging the public to resist any attempts to modify the constitution to prolong Mnangagwa’s term. The push for such amendments, they argue, reflects the entrenched desire for a political elite to hold on to power rather than genuinely address the country’s challenges. The fact that some members of the opposition CCC, particularly from the faction led by Welshman Ncube, are allegedly supporting these amendments further complicates the situation and raises questions about the true nature of the opposition in Zimbabwe.
The leaked draft motion, despite the denials from some opposition figures like Charles Moyo, appears to be gaining traction within the corridors of power, with 22 CCC parliamentarians and numerous Zanu-PF lawmakers backing it. This suggests that a significant section of the political establishment is aligned with this push for an extended rule. However, as commentators have noted, constitutional amendments of this nature could face significant opposition in a national referendum, particularly in light of the widespread dissatisfaction with the current leadership.
The potential for a split within the ruling party, as highlighted by some of the responses, could indeed play a crucial role in shaping the 2028 elections. Zanu-PF’s historical struggle to handle its electoral victories, particularly in years ending in 3 and 8, could be exacerbated by internal divisions over the 2030 agenda. A failure to secure the necessary public support for these constitutional changes might create a fertile ground for the opposition to capitalize on the government’s vulnerability.
In conclusion, while the argument for constitutional amendments to extend presidential terms is framed as a means of ensuring stability and continued progress, the broader context of Zimbabwe’s political landscape paints a picture of a ruling elite desperately clinging to power. With a population disillusioned by the economic challenges they face and an opposition increasingly vocal about their discontent, this move could have the opposite effect, provoking public resistance and deepening political divisions. Zimbabwe’s future will hinge on whether the country’s leaders can recognize the importance of peaceful political transitions and address the underlying issues that continue to hinder the nation’s development.
