Jonathan Moyo denies advising Zanu-PF '2030ists'

Professor Jonathan Moyo has issued a detailed clarification over a leaked audio clip initially believed to be a recording of him outlining a legal strategy to leaders aligned to ZANU PF regarding President Emmerson Mnangagwa's reported 2030 plan to extend his rule.

The circulating audio, which has generated widespread debate on social media, purportedly features Moyo outlining a political and legal "strategy" to assist pro-2030 actors in triggering what critics described as a collusive early Constitutional Court process to facilitate anticipated constitutional amendments.

However, Moyo has strongly denied the interpretation, insisting that he was not speaking to ruling party officials but to lawyers, namely Zibusiso Ncube and Method Ndlovu. According to Moyo, the call took place on December 16, 2025, after the lawyers contacted him to discuss a court application filed by Ibhetshu LikaZulu and one of its leaders, Mbuso Fuzwayo, challenging anticipated constitutional amendments before they were formally introduced.

Moyo maintains that the conversation was recorded without his knowledge or consent via speakerphone and later edited before being circulated. He alleges that the audio was distorted to create the impression that he was advising "2030ist leaders" on how to suppress media coverage and opposition to Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3.

In a strongly worded response, Moyo described the allegations as "pure fabrication" and dismissed the circulating claims as "brazen inveracities" based on what he called an illegally recorded and "surgically edited" clip. He said the discussion focused on legal questions surrounding term-limit provisions and the timing of potential constitutional litigation, rather than any plan to silence media or opposition voices.

He further argued that the objective under discussion was the possibility of using what he termed a "credible organisation" to seek judicial clarification on constitutional term limits and the 2030 agenda before any formal amendments were enacted. According to Moyo, this was framed as a matter of legal timing and procedural strategy, not political suppression.

Challenging the social media narrative, Moyo said no part of the audio references suppressing the media, opposition parties or the proposed Bill. He characterised the leak as a desperate smear campaign, alleging that those behind it resorted to unlawful recording and manipulation to manufacture a political scandal.

The controversy comes amid heightened debate over the 2030 agenda and speculation about possible constitutional amendments that could affect presidential term limits. While critics have interpreted the audio as evidence of coordinated manoeuvres to influence the courts, Moyo insists the conversation has been deliberately misconstrued.

As political tensions rise around the issue, the leaked audio continues to fuel public discourse, with supporters and detractors offering sharply divergent interpretations of its contents and implications.