Chivayo CAB 3 'bribes’ backfire

A war veteran has filed an urgent High Court application seeking to stop the processing of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), arguing that Parliament's approval of the controversial legislation was tainted by allegations of corruption and unlawful inducements involving Members of Parliament.

Former freedom fighter Reuben Zulu lodged the application on Tuesday, asking the court to suspend the certification and transmission of the Bill for presidential assent pending the determination of the case.

The application comes as the Bill, which proposes significant constitutional changes, awaits the signature of President Emmerson Mnangagwa before it can become law.

Zulu, who was among six applicants that previously challenged the Bill before the Constitutional Court, argues that the parliamentary process was "contaminated" by allegations that legislators accepted luxury vehicles and cash while the Bill was under consideration.

Represented by constitutional lawyer Lovemore Madhuku, Zulu is seeking an interim interdict preventing the Speaker of Parliament, the Clerk of Parliament and other parliamentary officials from certifying, transmitting or presenting the Bill to the President until the matter is resolved.

According to the founding affidavit, two MPs - Samantha Mureyani of the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) and Remigious Matangira of ZANU PF - allegedly received 2026 Toyota Fortuner vehicles and cash from businessman Wicknell Chivayo while participating in parliamentary proceedings on CAB3.

The application further alleges that Mureyani received an additional US$50,000, reportedly earmarked for constituency development projects, despite serving as a proportional representation MP.

"It is not about whether the reward was paid before or after a speech. The question is whether a member accepted a reward for or in respect of the promotion of, support for, or conduct relating to a Bill," the affidavit states.

Zulu also alleges that cash payments of US$10,000 were distributed to legislators through parliamentary chief whips under the guise of constituency development funding.

The application contends that such conduct contravenes Section 18 of the Privileges, Immunities and Powers of Parliament Act, which prohibits MPs from accepting rewards connected to legislative business, as well as Section 170 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, which criminalises inducements intended to influence the exercise of official duties.

It further argues that legislators who allegedly benefited from the payments failed to declare their interests as required under Parliament's Standing Orders and the Members' Code of Conduct and Ethics.

Zulu's latest court challenge follows an earlier Constitutional Court application that was dismissed in May. In that case, the applicants had sought to invalidate the process on the basis that President Mnangagwa improperly chaired the Cabinet meeting that approved the Bill.

Delivering judgment, Bharat Patel ruled that the applicants had failed to establish any specific constitutional obligation breached by the President.

Unlike the earlier case, the current application focuses on the conduct of legislators and parliamentary officials during the legislative process.

In a certificate of urgency, legal practitioner Kudzanai Brian Munakamwe argues that allowing the Bill to proceed before the allegations are determined would result in irreparable prejudice.

"The constitutional process is continuing now. The risk is not remote. It is imminent," Munakamwe states in the court papers.

Zulu is asking the court to invalidate any votes cast by legislators found to have been unlawfully induced and to order Parliament to institute a formal privileges inquiry into the allegations.

CAB3 is among the most significant constitutional reform proposals since the adoption of the 2013 Constitution. Supporters argue the amendments are lawful and necessary for governance and development, while critics say the Bill would fundamentally reshape Zimbabwe's constitutional framework, including provisions relating to presidential tenure and electoral processes.

The proposed amendments have also drawn criticism from the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops' Conference, the Law Society of Zimbabwe and several civil society organisations.

The respondents have been directed to file opposing papers within three days. If the High Court grants the interim relief, implementation of the constitutional amendment process could be temporarily suspended pending a full hearing on the merits of the application.