By Agencies
President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s bid to remain in office beyond the two terms he previously pledged to serve faces a major legal test in November, when the Constitutional Court hears three challenges to Constitutional Amendment Act No. 3 of 2026 (CAA3).
The cases challenge the amendment’s enactment process, its application to sitting officeholders and its replacement of direct presidential elections with a system in which Members of Parliament elect the president.
Mnangagwa signed CAA3 into law on July 7, 2026. The legislation extended presidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years, applied the extensions to current officeholders and introduced presidential elections by a joint sitting of Parliament.
While the President’s supporters have defended the changes as the outcome of public consultation, critics argue that the legislation was rushed through Parliament to extend Mnangagwa’s tenure until 2030.
The first two cases, brought by National Constitutional Assembly member Vhurande Mahlupeko and former Binga MP Prince Dubeko Sibanda, are scheduled to be heard on November 11.
Mahlupeko argues that 10 provisions ultimately included in CAA3 were absent from the Government Gazette notice that initiated the mandatory 90-day public consultation process.
He contends that the omissions undermined citizens’ right to participate meaningfully in the constitutional reform process and is asking the court to invalidate the entire Act.
Sibanda’s challenge focuses on the extension of presidential and parliamentary terms and their application to incumbents.
He relies on section 328(7) of the Constitution, which provides that a constitutional amendment extending the period a person may hold public office does not apply to anyone who held that office before the amendment.
CAA3 expressly states that the extensions apply notwithstanding section 328(7), raising the question of whether Parliament can constitutionally override the safeguard.
Sibanda confirmed the scheduled hearing to The Standard.
The third case, filed by the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), led by Douglas Mwonzora, is set for November 25.
The MDC challenges the amendment to section 92 of the Constitution, arguing that replacing direct presidential elections with a parliamentary vote removes ordinary citizens’ right to elect the President directly.
The party contends that the change affects section 67(3)(a) of the Bill of Rights, which guarantees adult citizens the right to vote in elections, and therefore required a national referendum under section 328(6) of the Constitution.
No referendum was held before CAA3 was enacted.
The MDC further alleges that Mnangagwa breached his constitutional responsibilities under section 110(2)(f) by failing to call a referendum once the Bill of Rights was affected. It is seeking a declaration that the amendment is unconstitutional and invalid in its entirety.
The cases could have significant implications for Zimbabwe’s constitutional framework and the country’s political landscape ahead of the 2030 elections.
The court’s decisions are also expected to attract close attention from civil society organisations and investors concerned about constitutional safeguards, governance and the rule of law.
Mnangagwa became President in November 2017 following the military-assisted removal of the late former President Robert Mugabe.
