Source: Mnangagwa’s 2030 bid fuels Zimbabwe’s constitutional crisis – CITEZW
Zanu PF’s latest move to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s stay in office until 2030 has deepened Zimbabwe’s crisis of constitutionalism and future of democracy while exposing widening rifts within the ruling party.
At its 22nd Annual National People’s Conference in Mutare last Saturday, the ruling party reaffirmed an earlier resolution to extend Mnangagwa’s current presidential term beyond 2028 to 2030, directing the Ministry of Justice to fast-track the necessary constitutional amendments by October 2026, according to Zanu PF’s legal secretary, Ziyambi Ziyambi, who also serves as Justice Minister.
If passed, the resolution would effectively cancel the 2028 presidential election, stretching Mnangagwa’s second term, mandated to end in 2028 to 2030.
The move is seen as part of a broader plan to align Mnangagwa’s presidency with his “Vision 2030” development agenda, which seeks to transform Zimbabwe into an upper-middle-income economy.
However, political analysts see this push as another attempt to undermine constitutionalism and entrench personal rule under the guise of policy continuity.
This current resolution comes after debates on how Mnangagwa, 83, would stay in power until 2030 as the constitution allows one to serve only two presidential terms.
Any change to the term limit would require a constitutional amendment and potentially two referendums, legal experts said.
In an argument that has set the tone for the ruling party’s legal reasoning, political commentator, Professor Jonathan Moyo previously stated Zanu PF could lawfully extend Mnangagwa’s current term without holding a referendum.
According to Moyo, the “term-limit” clause (Section 91 (2)) of Zimbabwe’s 2013 Constitution limits the number of terms a president can serve, not the duration of those terms, meaning Zanu PF could amend Section 95 (2)(b), which defines the presidential term length, through a two-thirds parliamentary majority as provided for under Section 328 (5), thereby changing the term length from five to seven years.
This interpretation, which CITE first covered here, appears to be the legal route that Zanu PF is likely to take, as it commands the necessary two-thirds majority in Parliament following by-elections and a fractured opposition, giving it both the political will and numbers to pass the amendment.
Critics argued this is a deliberate manipulation of constitutional semantics to achieve an outcome that violates the spirit of democratic renewal embedded in Zimbabwe’s 2013 constitution.
Analysts also warned that behind this narrative lies a deeper political motive, to consolidate power and continue looting.
“The resolution has nothing to do with the working class and peasantry, who constitute the majority,” said Ngqabutho Nicholas Mabhena, general secretary of the Zimbabwe Communist Party (ZCP).
“This resolution has everything to do with the looting class, which wants to entrench itself to continue to loot. We condemn this action. We want the working class and peasantry to have the right to elect a leader of their choice in 2028.”
Mabhena said no faction in Zanu PF represents the working class and peasantry, citing how those pushing for 2030 wanted to continue their elite self-preservation, rather than national interest.
“We must dismantle the looting class if we are to rebuild the economy in Zimbabwe.” he said.
For other observers, extending Mnangagwa’s presidency could be dire for both governance and social stability.
“Extending Mnangagwa’s stay in office is tantamount to prolonging the suffering of Zimbabweans and shows that the well-being of citizens means nothing to Zanu PF,” said political analyst Mxolisi Ncube.
Ncube described how “sad” it was that this resolution came at a time when “Zimbabweans are suffering both at home and in foreign lands, where they do menial jobs and go through all forms of exploitation and abuse.”
“We still have those responsible for their suffering seeking to consolidate their power instead of accepting their failures,” he added.
“Despite his many promises in 2017, Mnangagwa has failed to unite Zimbabweans, turn around the country’s economy, arrest state-sponsored political violence, reform state institutions, improve service delivery, democratise Zimbabwe and end corruption.”
Ncube said it was telling how President Mnangagwa “has been accused by many, including one of his two deputies, Retired General Constantino Chiwenga, of surrounding himself with corrupt people who are milking Zimbabwe dry.”
Zanu PF’s latest proposal has also re-ignited concern over constitutional mutilation, a process political commentator Dr Vusumuzi Sibanda said President Mnangagwa has perfected since taking power in 2017.
“This is a resolution that should be the downfall of Zanu PF,” Dr Sibanda said, warning that the amendment would mark “the beginning of the end.”
“We know things in Zimbabwe have always been done with impunity and nothing happens, but at this particular stage, we call on Zimbabweans and the international community to bring down the Zanu regime because the Constitution that is being amended came in after so many years of it staying the way it was.”
Dr Sibanda said it was known that “Mnangagwa has been busy mutilating this Constitution from the first amendment, changing it so that it could revert to the old Constitution where he was also involved in misgovernance. Now as the president he wants to continue unabated for longer.”
“That’s why he’s changing the presidential terms, despite the fact that when the Constitution came in 2013, it allowed furtherance for another two terms which should not have been the case because Zanu PF doesn’t want to leave power. Mnangagwa also wants to continue.
“Come 2030, something is going to happen. It would be very interesting to have a look and see what this proposed amendment would look like. We have had so many fights in Africa with African governments changing or amending constitutions to allow for term limits.”
Dr Sibanda’s warning situates Zimbabwe within a regional pattern of constitutional regression, echoing trends in countries like Uganda, Rwanda, Ivory Coast, Burundi, among others where leaders have extended their rule through technical amendments dressed as reform.
In Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni has been in power since 1986 and in 2005, he passed a constitutional amendment that removed presidential term limits, allowing him to run again after his initial two terms were ending.
In 2017, the Ugandan Parliament passed an amendment that removed the presidential age limit of 75, which would have barred Museveni, who was 73 at the time, from running again.
In Rwanda, President Paul Kagame has been the dominant political figure since 1994 and president since 2000.
In 2015, a national referendum approved a constitutional amendment that potentially allowed Kagame to stay in power until 2034.
The amendment reset Kagame’s term count, allowing him to serve seven more years after his term ended in 2017, and then two additional five-year terms.
In Ivory Coast, a new constitution in 2016 reset presidential term limits, allowing Alassane Ouattara to run for a third term in 2020, which he argued was legal under the new constitution.
In Burundi, a controversial constitutional change in 2018 extended presidential terms from five to seven years and allowed President Pierre Nkurunziza to run again (though he later died in office).
In the Republic of Congo (Congo-Brazzaville), a referendum in 2015 approved a new constitution that removed age limits and extended the term limit, allowing President Denis Sassou Nguesso, in power since 1979 (with a five-year break), to run again and win in 2016 and 2021.
In Chad, a 2005 referendum removed term limits, allowing President Idriss Déby to remain in power until his death in 2021 while in Guinea, a new constitution in 2020 was adopted via referendum, controversially resetting term limits and allowing President Alpha Condé to run for a third term, which he won amidst major protests and allegations of fraud. He was ousted in a coup the following year.
Dr Sibanda said it did not matter who has done well or not, when their term is finished, it should end there.
He stated the current five year presidential term limitation is sufficient and suggested that “in fact, it should go down to four years a term.”
“Five years is actually too much. It is simple, if you fail to do anything within your term, you can’t do it beyond it. You just failed. Go and retire. Zimbabweans have obviously suffered, they have been cowered and pushed to the end, but this is the beginning of the end,” Dr Sibanda said.
Religious voices have also entered the debate, framing Zanu PF’s term-extension resolution as a moral and constitutional crisis.
“Ordinarily, such a resolution would be ignored since it’s an internal party matter. But this one strikes at the very heart of our national unity and constitutional democracy,” wrote Reverend Kenneth Mtata on his X account.
“It must be clearly and firmly rejected, for many reasons, but here are three:
“First, no justification has been given to justify such a drastic decision. If the president accepts this change, he risks losing any legacy as a constitutionalist and will permanently weaken institutions beyond his tenure.
“Second, such a decision will break the spirit of the Constitution, even if some loopholes were to be found to legally implement the extension. Manipulating constitutional limits erodes public trust and weakens the foundations of democracy.
“Third, such a decision may risk national instability. Once we start setting aside the Constitution for political convenience, we normalise future unconstitutional power changes. Having entered this grey zone in 2017, Zimbabwe cannot afford to repeat the same mistake.”
Rev. Mtata warned constitutional manipulation for short-term gain could again plunge the country into instability.
“I hope the president rejects the offer to extend his presidential term. If not, he must be ready for uncertain times ahead,” he said.
From the opposition, politician Gladys Kudzaishe Hlatywayo, warned that allowing the 2030 plan to succeed would undo the democratic gains achieved after the late, Robert Mugabe’s ouster.
“The attempt by Zanu PF to extend President Mnangagwa’s term must be vehemently resisted!” Hlatywayo declared on her X platform.
“Following President Mugabe’s long and disastrous tenure, we pushed so hard to get to term limits and therefore never again must we allow any president or anyone to roll back these democratic provisions in our Constitution! We reject dictatorship and fascism in toto.”
The post Mnangagwa’s 2030 bid fuels Zimbabwe’s constitutional crisis appeared first on Zimbabwe Situation.