HARARE – Political commentator Rutendo Benson Matinyarare has intensified his opposition to efforts to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure to 2030, arguing that the legal pathway underpinning Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 is fundamentally flawed.
In a detailed constitutional critique, Matinyarare said the proposed changes are unlikely to succeed in their current form, citing multiple legal and procedural hurdles embedded within Zimbabwe’s Constitution.
“Why 2030 cannot succeed,” Matinyarare stated, before outlining what he described as critical inconsistencies in the Bill’s structure and intent.
He pointed to Section 328(1) of the Constitution, arguing that its wording allows for the extension of a term limit for “a” person, which he interprets to mean that any such amendment must apply to a single office at a time. On that basis, he contends that the current Bill—seeking to extend both presidential and parliamentary terms simultaneously—is legally defective and would need to be split into separate pieces of legislation.
According to Matinyarare, the sequencing of such legislative changes further complicates the process. “Both Bills cannot be presented to Parliament simultaneously,” he argued, adding that one would have to be concluded before the other is introduced, effectively prolonging the reform timeline.
He also criticised what he described as an attempt to allow current office holders to benefit from the proposed extensions. Citing Section 328(7) of the Constitution, Matinyarare maintained that incumbents are expressly barred from benefiting from term-limit changes enacted during their tenure.
“The Bill is asking for a change to the term limits of the President and Parliament, but hoping that the current President and Parliament will both enjoy the extensions in this current term,” he said, warning that such an approach would likely face constitutional challenges.
Matinyarare further argued that additional amendments would be required to override existing constitutional safeguards. In his view, lawmakers would need to introduce separate legislation to amend Section 328 itself, in order to permit incumbents to benefit from revised term limits.
“This effectively means four separate Bills would be required,” he said, noting that each would need to go through parliamentary processes and, potentially, national referendums to be enacted.
He concluded that the cumulative legal and procedural requirements could delay any such constitutional overhaul by several years. “This will take at least three to four years to achieve, notwithstanding legal challenges,” Matinyarare said, doubling down on his rejection of what he characterised as a power extension bid.
The Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 has sparked growing debate across Zimbabwe’s political and legal landscape, with analysts and stakeholders divided over its implications for governance, constitutionalism, and the country’s democratic trajectory.
