The draft legislation, which Justice Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi presented to journalists following the cabinet meeting, includes provisions that would replace direct presidential elections with a parliamentary vote — a change that critics say would insulate the ruling party from popular accountability in a country with a history of disputed elections.
“These amendments will enhance political stability and policy continuity to allow development programs to be implemented to completion,” according to a cabinet statement released after the meeting.
The bill will now be sent to parliament’s speaker and published in the official gazette before lawmakers consider it — a process that could move swiftly given the governing ZANU-PF party’s commanding legislative majority.
Breaking With Constitutional Limits
Under current law, Mnangagwa must step down in 2028 after completing two five-year terms. The president came to power in 2017 following a military intervention that ended Robert Mugabe’s 37-year rule, raising hopes among some Zimbabweans for democratic reforms and economic revival.
Instead, Mnangagwa was elected in 2018 and re-elected in 2023 in contests that international observers said fell short of democratic standards. His administration has faced accusations of enabling widespread corruption and suppressing civil liberties while Zimbabweans endure persistent economic hardship despite official claims of growth.
The proposed changes have ignited a succession battle within ZANU-PF, where rival factions had been positioning themselves to take over when Mnangagwa’s second term expires. The “2030 agenda” — as the plan to keep Mnangagwa in office has become known — had circulated informally for months before becoming official party policy.
Opposition Vows Constitutional Defense
Jameson Timba, a senior leader in Zimbabwe’s fractured opposition movement, condemned the cabinet’s approval as “politically destabilizing.” In a statement, he said the newly formed Defend the Constitution Platform would immediately consult with attorneys and brief regional and international partners as part of efforts to block the changes.
“Any amendment which has the ‘effect’ of extending an incumbent’s tenure should be subjected to a referendum,” said David Coltart, an opposition politician and constitutional lawyer. “They know that if that happens, they will fail, so they will do all in their power to prevent a referendum from happening.”
Legal analysts and opposition figures have argued that constitutional changes of this magnitude require approval through a national referendum — not just parliamentary votes — to maintain democratic legitimacy. However, ZANU-PF’s supermajority in both houses of parliament could allow the party to bypass such requirements.
The party has governed Zimbabwe since independence from Britain in 1980 and controls more than two-thirds of the lower house. It also dominates the upper chamber through traditional leaders and other aligned members who typically vote with the government, giving ZANU-PF the constitutional threshold needed to amend the nation’s charter.
Crackdown on Dissent
Efforts to organize public demonstrations against the constitutional changes have met with police crackdowns in recent months, with numerous activists detained. Human rights organizations have documented a pattern of suppression targeting opposition voices, civil society groups, and independent journalists.
The proposed amendments come as Zimbabwe grapples with chronic economic instability, currency volatility, and deteriorating public services — challenges that have persisted despite government assurances of economic recovery. International financial institutions and Western governments maintain sanctions against certain Zimbabwean officials and entities, citing concerns about governance and human rights.
Regional bodies, including the Southern African Development Community, have previously expressed concern about Zimbabwe’s adherence to democratic norms, though the 16-nation bloc has stopped short of imposing meaningful consequences on Harare.
If enacted, the constitutional changes would represent the most significant alteration to Zimbabwe’s governance structure since the 2013 constitution, which was approved by referendum and included term limits designed to prevent the concentration of executive power that characterized the Mugabe era.
Critics say the proposed amendments would effectively reverse those democratic safeguards, returning Zimbabwe to a system where power is concentrated in the ruling party with minimal public accountability — a prospect that has alarmed pro-democracy advocates both within the country and across the region.
