How can people who rejected a president in two elections now want him to extend his term?

There are stories that can be believed, and there are those that even five-year-olds know to be fairy tales.

The political narrative currently being spun by loyalists of President Emmerson Mnangagwa is as audacious as it is intellectually dishonest. 

If you value my social justice advocacy and writing, please consider a financial contribution to keep it going. Contact me on WhatsApp: +263 715 667 700 or Email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com

We are told that "the people" are so enamored with the President's performance and his "national development" agenda that they are practically begging for a constitutional amendment to extend his time in office. 

This supposed groundswell of public pressure has culminated in the so-called "Resolution No. 1" and the subsequent Constitutional Amendment (No. 3) Bill, which seeks to push his tenure beyond the current 2028 deadline. 

But if we move past the choreographed chants and the state-sponsored sycophancy, a glaring question remains. 

At what point exactly did the people of Zimbabwe, who have twice rejected this president at the ballot box, suddenly decide they cannot live without him?

Numbers do not lie, and in the case of the 2018 and 2023 harmonized elections, the raw popular vote numbers tell a story of profound rejection. 

It is crucial to look at these specific figures rather than obscured percentages or seat counts. 

In 2018, according to official ZEC data, ZANU PF Members of Parliament secured a commanding victory, yet Mnangagwa himself lagged significantly behind the party's collective performance. 

While ZANU PF candidates for the National Assembly secured a convincing majority with a massive popular vote, Mnangagwa narrowly avoided a run-off with 2,461,745 votes. 

In comparison, the total votes cast for ZANU PF MPs across the country reached approximately 2,477,708, meaning tens of thousands of ZANU PF supporters chose their local MP but explicitly refused to endorse the man at the top.  

Fast forward to 2023, and the trend solidified into a permanent feature of our political landscape. 

Despite the intense "ED Pfee" campaigning, the President once again trailed behind his own party. 

In the 2023 harmonized elections, Mnangagwa officially received 2,350,711 votes. 

However, the collective vote for ZANU PF parliamentary candidates was notably higher, with the party pulling approximately 2,501,475 votes in the National Assembly race. 

This means that even after five years in power, over 160,000 people who voted for ZANU PF candidates for Parliament pointedly refused to tick the box for the presidential candidate. 

This "split-voting" phenomenon is not a statistical fluke; it is a deliberate political statement repeated across two consecutive elections.  

This data is the most authentic set we have on public sentiment. 

It proves that even within the ruling party's own support base, there is a significant portion of the electorate that trusts the party's local representatives but fundamentally distrusts the man at the top. 

How can a president who repeatedly receives far fewer votes than his own party's MPs be said to be "doing a good job"? 

If "the people" were truly clamoring for him to "finish his programs," surely that enthusiasm would have reflected in a popular vote that at least matched, if not exceeded, that of his subordinates. 

Instead, the opposite is true. 

The people of Zimbabwe loudly and audibly spoke twice on how they truly felt about the president, and the verdict was far from flattering. 

When ZANU PF MPs were awarded convincing victories, the president barely scraped through. 

That should be clear enough evidence of what the public genuinely feels.

The claim by loyalists that the push for a term extension is "from the people" is a fallacy of the highest order. 

It suggests a magical, overnight conversion of the Zimbabwean soul. 

We are expected to believe that the same citizens who walked into polling booths in August 2023 and rejected Mnangagwa have now, less than three years later, decided that the supreme law of the land—a sacred document they voted for in 2013—should be mutilated just to keep him in power. 

Isn't it quite curious that the same people who twice rejected the president now allegedly want him to stay in power longer? 

At what point did these "people" decide that they not only wanted him as president but actually wanted the supreme law changed to facilitate his continued stay?

This is not public pressure; it is elite persistence. 

It is the work of a few who mistake their own proximity to power for the will of the nation. 

If those pushing for these constitutional amendments truly believe "the people" have changed their minds, then they should ask the people again in a national referendum. 

This would not be a favor or an act of benevolence from the state; it is something the Constitution itself demands.

The Constitution is particularly clear when the effect of an amendment extends the length of time that a person may hold or occupy any public office. 

Such an amendment should not benefit any person who held or occupied that office at any time before the amendment. 

The only legal and democratic way this can be changed is through a national referendum. 

If the proponents of this amendment are so confident that the public is behind them, why are they not rushing toward a referendum to validate their claims?

The reality is that any claims that "the people" are the ones who want the president to continue in office are unfounded and without merit. 

The track record of the last two elections serves as a standing rebuttal to the "Resolution No. 1" narrative. 

You cannot claim to lead by the will of the people while simultaneously avoiding the very mechanism—the direct popular vote—that allows them to choose their leader. 

The people have already spoken, and they did not ask for him to remain. 

If the loyalists truly believe they have the mandate of the masses, give the people a national referendum to prove me wrong. 

Until then, these constitutional maneuvers remain an affront to the democratic will of Zimbabwe.

© Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. To directly receive his articles please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08