News

Prof Moyo says constitutional proposals cannot be unconstitutional, but critics reject his defence

Political scientist and former Cabinet minister, Professor Jonathan Moyo, has weighed in on the heated debate surrounding the alleged โ€œ2030 proposalโ€ to amend Zimbabweโ€™s Constitution, dismissing claims that such a move would be unconstitutional.

Prof Moyo said proposing amendments to the Constitution is both a legal and democratic right, asserting such proposals cannot inherently be deemed unconstitutional, as he called out critics for their contradictions and misinterpretations.

โ€œIt is an oxymoron, that is a contradiction in terms, to claim or to assert that the so-called 2030 proposal to amend the Constitution of Zimbabwe allegedly being mooted by some sections of the governing Zanu PF is unconstitutional,โ€ he stated.

โ€œA proposal to amend the Constitution is just that; a proposal, nothing less and nothing more. It is not a crime or a civic wrong for anyone to want or to seek to amend the Constitution of Zimbabwe. A constitutional proposal cannot be unconstitutional.โ€

The Constitution of Zimbabwe, like other democratic constitutions globally, provides clear mechanisms for amendments, Prof Moyo added, and cited Sections 328 and 131 of the Constitution, which outline the procedural requirements for constitutional changes.

โ€œAll that matters is that proposals to amend the Constitution of Zimbabwe must be done and must proceed in terms of Section 328 of the Constitution, as read with Section 131. That is all. The rest is mumbo jumbo,โ€ he said.

Prof Moyoโ€™s apparent defense over constitutional amendments has sparked significant public political discourse, with another political commentator, Mxolisi Ncube, countering his sentiments, arguing the alleged proposal is a self-serving move by Zanu PF that undermines democratic principles.

โ€œI respect his opinion, but I have mine too. We donโ€™t have to do things just because they are not illegal or are not unconstitutional. We must do things because they are progressive and beneficial to the country, its general populace and future generation,โ€ Ncube said.

Ncube said whether constitutional or not, the current push for the term extension is self-serving for President Mnangagwa and his Zanu PF faction.

โ€œZimbabweans benefit nothing in this bid to entrench oneself. Term limits are a crucial aspect of democratic governance, making sure that leaders do not become too powerful or entrenched,โ€ he said.

โ€œBy extending Mnangagwaโ€™s rule, Zimbabwe will be undermining this principle, potentially paving the way for future leaders to also seek their own extensions, or other self-serving constitutional amendments. This would erode the checks and balances designed to prevent authoritarianism.โ€

However, Prof Moyo further argued that critics opposing an alleged proposal that has neither been formulated nor tabled were engaging in baseless fear-mongering.

โ€œIt is therefore an oxymoron to describe or characterise as โ€˜unconstitutionalโ€™ a proposal that is allegedly being mooted but which has neither been formulated nor tabled. There is no proposed amendment to a democratic constitution that can be said to be unconstitutional in advance,โ€ he said.

Critiquing the oppositionโ€™s stance, Prof Moyo questioned how individuals claiming to champion democracy could oppose potential amendments when the Constitution itself permits amendments to all its provisions.

โ€œThere is nothing in the Constitution of Zimbabwe that cannot be amended. Nothing,โ€ he reiterated.

Prof Moyo suggested that โ€˜ferventโ€™ opposition to an unformulated proposal may stem from ulterior motives.

โ€œThe only reason why some people are falling on each other to oppose something that is not even there, but something which, if there, would be permissible in terms of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, could be perhaps because those with something to hide tend to be very afraid, fearing fear itself,โ€ he concluded.

Meanwhile, Ncube also highlighted the potential impact of these proposed amendments on public trust and governance.

โ€œIf Zimbabweโ€™s constitution, the supreme law of the land, is amended to specifically extend Mnangagwaโ€™s rule as is being pushed for, it would damage the documentโ€™s credibility and integrity. Citizens may further lose trust in the constitution and the institutions that govern the country,โ€ he warned.

He also cautioned against the broader implications of prolonged executive power, including repression of opposition, voter apathy, social unrest and international isolation.

โ€œExtending Mnangagwaโ€™s rule will most likely be accompanied by increased repression of opposition parties and dissenting voices. The Zanu PF government, as has always been the case, would continue to use various tactics to silence critics, further undermining Zimbabweโ€™s already fragile democratic institutions,โ€ he warned.

A prolonged rule by President Mnangagwa could foster a culture of โ€œstrongman politics,โ€ which would reduce Zimbabweโ€™s chances of transitioning to a pluralistic and inclusive political system, Ncube said.

โ€œThis could lead to increased authoritarianism, repression, and human rights abuses, meaning Zimbabwe is completely shut out of doing business.โ€

Ncubeโ€™s concerns extended to Zimbabweโ€™s reputation and economic prospects, stating moves to extend Mnangagwaโ€™s rule could deepen international isolation, prolong sanctions and deter foreign investment.

โ€œZimbabwe will definitely continue to face more diplomatic isolation, with countries and international organisations already viewing the country as an authoritarian state,โ€ he said.

โ€œOur country may face prolonged economic sanctions, reduced foreign investment, and decreased access to international credit facilities, further exacerbating Zimbabweโ€™s already fragile economy and the suffering of the masses.โ€

Lulu Brenda Harris

Lulu Brenda Harris is a seasoned senior news reporter at CITE. Harris writes on politics, migration, health, education, environment, conservation and sustainable development. Her work has helped keep the public informed, promoting accountability and transparency in Zimbabwe.

Related Articles

One Comment

  1. While democracy allows amendments to the constitution it is the “strongman politics” that we’re opposed to….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button