Anger mounts over CAB3 as Justice Minister accused of pre‑empting Constitutional Court

Tensions surrounding the proposed Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Bill (CAB3) continue to rise, with critics accusing the government of attempting to push the controversial legislation through Parliament before the Constitutional Court has ruled on its legality.


The latest backlash came from veterans of the liberation struggle, who gathered outside the Constitutional Court in Harare this week to denounce the proposed amendments and what they described as an attempt to concentrate excessive power in the presidency. War veteran Sonny Manyande told demonstrators that the liberation war had not been fought “so one man would take Zimbabwe into his hands”.

CAB3 has triggered heated national debate due to proposals that opponents say would significantly alter Zimbabwe’s democratic framework. Critics argue the amendments would weaken constitutional safeguards, expand presidential influence and undermine the spirit of the 2013 Constitution.

The matter is currently before the Constitutional Court, where applicants are challenging the legality of the proposed changes. Central to the dispute is Section 328 of the Constitution, which outlines procedures for amending constitutional provisions, particularly those relating to presidential term limits and governance structures.

Despite the pending court case, Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi recently addressed Zanu PF supporters and explained how Parliament would handle voting on the bill once it reaches the House. He dismissed calls for a secret ballot, insisting that Members of Parliament would follow party directives. Ziyambi said MPs would vote according to the party’s parliamentary system, adding that “there will be no secret ballot”.

His remarks immediately drew criticism from opposition parties and civil society organisations, who accused him of interfering with parliamentary independence while the matter remains before the courts. The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), led by Douglas Mwonzora, had earlier written to Parliament requesting a secret ballot due to the sensitivity of the constitutional amendments.

MDC spokesperson Lloyd Damba said constitutional amendments were matters of national importance that required legislators to exercise independent judgment. He argued that the Justice Minister had no authority to predetermine parliamentary procedures or voting methods before Parliament itself had made a ruling.

Critics also warned that removing the possibility of a secret ballot could expose legislators to political intimidation and reduce Parliament to a rubber‑stamping institution. Civil society groups expressed concern over what they view as growing executive interference in both Parliament and the judiciary, saying the Constitutional Court should be allowed to independently determine the legality of CAB3 before any further legislative action proceeds.

The controversy has exposed deep divisions within Zimbabwe’s political landscape, with analysts warning that the debate around CAB3 could become one of the country’s most contentious constitutional disputes in years.

For now, national attention remains fixed on the Constitutional Court, whose ruling is expected to determine the future of the proposed amendments and potentially shape Zimbabwe’s political direction for years to come.