Matabeleland South Senator Nonhlanhla Mlotshwa delivered a wide-ranging and cautionary contribution during the Senate debate on the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Bill, arguing that constitutional changes must undergo the highest level of scrutiny because of their long-term impact on the country’s democratic governance.
Although the Senate has since passed the Bill, Mlotshwa’s intervention focused on the broader implications of constitutional amendments, warning legislators against viewing the proposed changes through the lens of immediate political interests.
Addressing the Senate, Sen Mlotshwa said constitutional amendments differ fundamentally from ordinary legislation because they determine how power is acquired, exercised and constrained.
“This Bill is bigger than the Government of the day. It is bigger than the opposition. It is bigger than the individuals who occupy public office today,” she said.
On this topic
“The constitutional choices we make today will continue to shape the Republic of Zimbabwe long after today’s political contests have faded into history.”
Sen Mlotshwa said Parliament’s role is to hold the Executive accountable, not to facilitate its convenience, describing the Constitution as a document meant to protect citizens rather than those in power.
A key concern raised by Mlotshwa was Section 328(7) of the Constitution, which prohibits incumbents from benefiting from amendments that extend terms of office. She said the provision was deliberately crafted to prevent individuals from altering constitutional rules for personal gain.
“The Constitution anticipated the temptation of power. It therefore created guardrails against that temptation,” she said, warning that weakening such safeguards could undermine constitutional democracy.
Sen Mlotshwa also challenged one of the central arguments advanced in support of the Bill—that reducing electoral cycles and political contestation could generate savings and create a more stable environment for development.
While acknowledging the importance of peace, stability and economic progress, she questioned how any savings from reduced election-related expenditure would be used.
“If elections are expensive and constitutional changes are being justified partly on reducing those costs, then this House must be told exactly how much money will be saved and where those savings will go,” she said.
“We must know how those figures were calculated, how much will be saved over the proposed period, which ministries will benefit, which projects will receive those resources, and how Parliament will monitor the utilisation of those funds.”
She said Zimbabweans ultimately judge governance through service delivery, not constitutional theory.
“The people do not experience constitutional amendments in theory. They experience Government through roads, clinics, schools, water systems and completed infrastructure projects. That is where constitutional promises must ultimately be measured.”
Drawing attention to development challenges in Matabeleland South, Mlotshwa pointed to unfinished roads and infrastructure projects, including some linked to Independence legacy initiatives. She said citizens would only appreciate constitutional changes if they translated into tangible improvements in daily life.
“The people cannot drive on constitutional amendments,” she said. “They need roads, infrastructure and completed projects.”
The senator also called for annual reports detailing any savings generated through constitutional changes and how those resources are allocated, describing this as a matter of accountability rather than politics.
Beyond the Bill, Mlotshwa advocated broader electoral reforms aimed at reducing political polarisation.
She proposed that Zimbabwe consider adopting a full proportional representation electoral system, arguing that it would ensure every vote counts, broaden participation and reduce the winner-takes-all nature of elections.
“The answer to political tension is not concentration of power. The answer is broader participation in power,” she told the Senate.
Sen Mlotshwa also raised concerns over presidential appointments to the Senate, suggesting that if the practice is retained, appointments should reflect the political balance expressed by voters. She said this would strengthen inclusivity, public confidence and national cohesion.
On democratic institutions, Sen Mlotshwa said Zimbabwe must preserve the independence of bodies responsible for elections, voter registration and delimitation. She warned that public trust in democracy depends on confidence in the institutions that administer it.
“No democracy survives because leaders are good. It survives because institutions are strong,” she said.
While supporting the principle of automatic voter registration, Mlotshwa said any institution entrusted with responsibilities related to voting rights must command public confidence across the political divide.
In her closing remarks, Sen Mlotshwa urged fellow legislators to assess the Bill not through short-term political interests but by whether it strengthens Zimbabwe’s constitutional democracy in the long term.
“It must be reduced to one fundamental question: Will this amendment leave Zimbabwe with a stronger constitutional democracy than the one we inherited?” she asked.
Leave a Reply