A proposal to extend Zimbabwe’s presidential term from five to seven years has been defended as a governance reform rather than an attempt to remove term limits.
Communication consultant Mabasa Sasa says the debate around the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill No. 3 (CA3) has been clouded by fears that term limits could eventually be scrapped, a claim he argues is misplaced.
“In reality, what we are facing right now is a simple extension of a term from five years to seven years,” Sasa said during a discussion on This Morning on Asakhe, a current affairs programme hosted by CITEZW. “There cannot be a single standard on how long a presidential term should be. It cannot be a one-size-fits-all model.”
Listen here: https://x.com/citezw/status/2046120230481441190
The bill, gazetted on 16 February 2026, has triggered a mandatory 90-day public consultation process. It proposes amendments to Sections 95, 143 and 158 of the Constitution.
Mr Sasa said the key question for Zimbabwe was what kind of electoral cycle best supports effective governance while preserving democratic accountability.
“The main concern is what kind of an electoral cycle we need in Zimbabwe — what system best supports effective governance while at the same time preserving democratic accountability,” he said. “At this point, we should ask ourselves what kind of vision we have for our country.”
Supporters of the amendment argue that extending the presidential term would reduce the frequency of elections, ease political tensions associated with prolonged campaign periods and allow more time for policy implementation.
Zimbabwe’s Constitution currently limits a president to two five-year terms. The proposed amendment does not seek to remove the two-term limit, but to change the duration of each term.
However, the proposal has sparked concern among some citizens and legal commentators.
Some have questioned the transparency of the drafting process, asking who was involved in crafting the amendment. Others say the public should have been more involved from the outset.
Legal debate has also centred on the interpretation of term limits. The 2021 Mupungu judgment clarified that Section 328(7) of the Constitution applies specifically to term limits — the maximum number of terms a person may serve — rather than to the length of each term.
As the consultation process continues, the proposal has prompted wider national discussion about governance, accountability and the future structure of Zimbabwe’s electoral system.