Members of Parliament have come under scrutiny for alleged unethical conduct after reports emerged that several legislators accepted luxury vehicles and cash gifts from a ‘controversial’ businessman, Wicknell Chivayo, during a period when they were publicly supporting the Constitutional Amendment Bill No 3 (CAB3), raising serious questions about compliance with Parliament’s own Code of Conduct and Ethics.
The controversy comes against the backdrop of heated discussions surrounding Bill 3, which has generated divisions within political, social and civic circles over its implications for governance and constitutionalism in Zimbabwe.
The gifting to MPs have prompted Bulawayo Mayor, David Coltart, a former Cabinet minister and opposition politician, to point to specific provisions in the code that explicitly prohibit MPs from promoting matters in Parliament in return for payment or personal benefit and require full disclosure of gifts exceeding US$4 500.
“Although Parliament is in breach of Section 198 of the Constitution it has enacted a Code of Conduct and Ethics for MPs,” Coltart said on the X platform.
On this topic
The Code, which establishes binding standards of correct behaviour for elected representatives, contains clear prohibitions against financial conflicts of interest.
Coltart said the Code had explicit prohibitions on acceptance of benefits and highlighted Section 6(1) of the Code, which states a “Member must not promote any matter in Parliament in return for payment or for a direct benefit to the immediate family of that Member or to a business partner of that Member.”
He further cited Section 6(3), which requires “where, in the pursuit of a Member’s Parliamentary duties, the existence of a personal financial interest is likely to give rise to a conflict with the public interest, the Member has a personal responsibility to resolve that conflict either by disposing of the interest or by standing aside from the public business in question.”
These provisions, Coltart argued, have been brought into sharp focus by recent events.
Part IV of the Code sets out what interests that must be mandatory disclosed, including gifts. Section 14 requires disclosure of “the receipt, description value and source of any gift with a value in excess of US$4 500 or gifts from a single source which cumulatively exceed the value of US$4 500 in any calendar year or hospitality intended as a gift in kind,” including such gifts to a spouse, permanent companion or dependent child of a Member.
Zanu PF’s Bindura South MP Remigious Matangira and Citizens Coalition for Change proportional representation legislator Samantha Murenyanyi reportedly received 2026 Toyota Fortuner vehicles and US$50 000 each from Chivayo, who has openly stated he rewarded them for their public support of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Bill (CAB3). Murenyanyi also received an additional US$50 000 reportedly for constituency projects despite not representing a geographical constituency.
Coltart noted that Part V of the Code establishes a Members’ Interest Register comprising both a confidential and public register, and that gifts fall within the public domain.
“Section 20(1) states ‘the public part of the register shall be open to inspection by members of the public,’” he said, also challenging the media to hold the MPs to account.
“I trust the Fourth Estate will now inspect the register following reports of cars and other gifts which have been given to a variety of MPs recently.”
Coltart has previously questioned Parliament’s failure to fully implement Section 198 of the Constitution, which requires legislation providing for the declaration of assets, interests and gifts by public officials.
“In the context of Members of Parliament recently receiving significant gifts, such as luxury cars, this point is significant because Parliament currently relies heavily on its own Code of Conduct and Register of Members’ Interests rather than a comprehensive Section 198 statute requiring public office holders to declare assets, gifts and interests across government,” said the politician.
“Why hasn’t Parliament enacted this legislation and why is it institutionally in such a flagrant breach of the Constitution?”
While Parliament enacted the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act in 2018, Coltart noted the legislation did not fully satisfy the constitutional requirements outlined in Section 198.
“Section 198 uses mandatory language (‘An Act of Parliament must provide measures…’), suggesting that Parliament’s constitutional obligation extends beyond corporate governance of public entities,” he said.
The controversy has drawn criticism from across the political spectrum.
Political commentator, Swithern Chirowodza, alleged Zimbabwe’s legal and parliamentary systems are vulnerable to political manipulation, arguing that lawmakers perceived to support CAB3 are unlikely to face scrutiny over gifts received from Wicknell Chivayo.
Chirowodza added Zimbabwe’s institutions do not always operate independently under the current political system.
“When it comes to law enforcement, Zanu PF adopts Greek philosophers like Solon and Anarcharsis whose approach is eloquently captured by the 18th century Scottish writer and poet Jonathan Swift in the simile ‘laws are like cobwebs, which may catch small flies, but let wasps and hornets break through,’” he said.
“Under a Zanu PF dictatorship, Zimbabwean legal systems do not always function as intended and can be manipulated.”
Chirowodza also argued MPs who oppose the proposed constitutional changes would likely be treated differently from those who supported CAB3.
“One can be sure that Susan Matsunga and Samantha Mureyani will not be compelled to declare Wicknell Chivayo’s gifts in terms of the parliamentary rules as long as they support CAB3,” he said.
The political commentator further alleged that lawmakers opposing the constitutional amendment would face disciplinary action under similar circumstances.
“One can also be sure that Innocent Zvaipa and Daniel Molokele will be taken to task for breaching the same parliamentary rules, say if they received US$200 000 each from Prof. Lovemore Madhuku for opposing CAB3,” he stated.
Former MP, Temba Mliswa, who supports CAB3, also condemned the gifting of vehicles to lawmakers during the critical constitutional debate, warning that such donations risk undermining democratic and constitutional processes.
“Parliament is an institution of the people. It represents the people and provides oversight over the Executive,” Mliswa said online, adding that lawmakers should not be exposed to inducements while performing their constitutional duties.
Chivayo rejected suggestions that the gifts constituted bribery, arguing the recipients had already publicly declared their support for the constitutional amendments before receiving any rewards.
“If I get impressed by an MP’s unapologetic support for CAB3 and President E.D. Mnangagwa, and personally choose to reward him or her, where is the problem?” he wrote on social media.
However, as stated, the Code of Conduct for MPs explicitly bars members from accepting gifts or rewards connected to parliamentary business.
Leave a Reply