Zimbabwe’s proposed Constitution Amendment Bill (No. 3) has ignited intense debate over the country’s political direction, with critics warning it could concentrate power in the presidency and weaken democratic safeguards.
The Bill seeks to extend the electoral cycle from five to seven years and introduce the indirect election of the president by Parliament. Supporters say the reforms would reduce election frequency and promote stability, while opponents argue they risk undermining the democratic order.
Dr Justice Mavedzenge, a comparative constitutional law expert and international human rights lawyer, described the proposals as a “planned constitutional coup” during a live discussion hosted by Bulawayo-based media outlet CITE on X on Thursday.
Responding to former cabinet minister Professor Jonathan Moyo, who has defended the amendments as lawful, Dr Mavedzenge said: “We must agree, out of decency as a society, that people without legal expertise should not be driving something as serious as a constitutional amendment. It is like asking a lab technician or a nurse to perform heart surgery.”
He added that the reform process should be led by seasoned legal practitioners and accused the government of packaging sweeping changes under the guise of a technical amendment.
Dr Mavedzenge said the Bill must be assessed in a wider political context, which he described as one of shrinking democratic space under President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
“Critics of the president face threats of arrest, detention, torture, and even extrajudicial killings,” he said, citing the alleged harassment of journalist Blessed Mhlanga following remarks at the Geneva Summit and the bombing of SAPES Trust offices in October 2025 after a press conference opposing the amendments.
He also raised concerns about online campaigns and civic groups targeting government critics. The government maintains that it respects constitutional rights and denies systematic repression.
At the centre of the disagreement is Section 328(7) of the Constitution, which prevents amendments affecting presidential term limits from benefiting an incumbent without additional safeguards.
Prof Moyo argues that the Bill does not alter term limits and therefore does not require a referendum. Dr Mavedzenge contends that extending the electoral cycle effectively lengthens the tenure of the sitting president, making a referendum legally necessary.
“The only way he can get an extension is by sidestepping what the Constitution already says,” Dr Mavedzenge said, suggesting political motivations behind the avoidance of a public vote.
The exchange highlights deep divisions over the Bill. Prof Moyo frames the amendments as institutional reforms to reduce the “toxicity” of constant elections and improve governance stability.
Dr Mavedzenge, by contrast, warns that they represent “a fundamental restructuring of the democratic order” in a climate where dissent is limited.
Parliament is expected to debate the Bill in the coming months. If approved by a two-thirds majority in both houses, the amendments would mark the most significant constitutional overhaul in Zimbabwe since 2013.
Support CITE’s fearless, independent journalism. Your donation helps us amplify community voices, fight misinformation, and hold power to account. Help keep the truth alive. Donate today