Rutendo Matinyarare doubles down on Mnangagwa's power-grab scheme

Political commentator Rutendo Benson Matinyarare has sharply criticised efforts linked to Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3, arguing that attempts to extend presidential and parliamentary terms to 2030 face significant constitutional and procedural obstacles.

Matinyarare said the proposed amendments are "fundamentally flawed," pointing to what he describes as inconsistencies in how the changes are being structured under Zimbabwe's Constitution.

He argued that Section 328(1) of the Constitution allows term-limit adjustments only in a manner that applies to a single office at a time, suggesting that combining presidential and parliamentary extensions into one legislative process is legally problematic.

"Why 2030 cannot succeed," he said, adding that the Bill would need to be separated into distinct legislative instruments to comply with constitutional requirements.

He further contended that the sequencing of amendments presents another challenge, claiming that Parliament cannot process multiple related constitutional changes simultaneously.

Matinyarare also cited Section 328(7), arguing that incumbents are barred from benefiting from term-limit extensions introduced during their current tenure. On that basis, he said any attempt for sitting officeholders to benefit from the proposed changes would likely face legal challenge.

According to his analysis, additional amendments would be required to alter Section 328 itself, potentially requiring multiple Bills and even referendums before any changes could take effect.

"This effectively means four separate Bills would be required," he said, warning that the process could take several years and face further legal challenges.

The debate comes as Zimbabwe continues nationwide consultations on Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3, which has sparked widespread political and legal scrutiny.

The proposed reforms have divided opinion across the political spectrum, with supporters arguing they are aimed at improving governance efficiency, while critics warn they could fundamentally alter the country's democratic and electoral framework.