By Agencies
HARARE,— In a dramatic legal challenge that could reshape Zimbabwe’s political landscape, a group of war veterans has filed an urgent application at the Constitutional Court to block constitutional amendments that would allow President Emmerson Mnangagwa to remain in power until 2030.
The veterans are represented by constitutional law heavyweight Lovemore Madhuku, signalling the seriousness of the challenge.
The case centres on Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3, which critics say is designed to entrench Mnangagwa’s incumbency. In their court papers, the war veterans argue that by presiding over Cabinet deliberations on the bill and approving it, Mnangagwa violated multiple constitutional provisions, including Sections 90(1), 90(2)(b), and 196(2), which require the President to uphold, defend, and respect the Constitution at all times.
The applicants are seeking a declaratory order stating that any attempt to extend the tenure of a sitting president through constitutional amendments, transitional arrangements, or other mechanisms is “invalid and of no force or effect” under Section 328(7) of the Constitution.
“This is not just a legal argument; it is a defence of Zimbabwe’s constitutional order,” said Madhuku. “Any amendment aimed at conferring an incumbency benefit upon a sitting President undermines the rule of law and the principle of democratic transition.”
The move by the war veterans is particularly significant given their historical influence in Zimbabwean politics. War veterans were instrumental in shaping past political outcomes, including during the contentious period following President Robert Mugabe’s resignation in 2017. Their involvement adds both legal weight and political pressure on Mnangagwa’s administration.
Observers say the challenge could trigger intense debate within ZANU-PF, as well as across civil society and opposition circles, on the limits of presidential power and the integrity of constitutional reforms. Analysts note that if successful, the case could set a precedent preventing any future attempts to manipulate the Constitution for personal political gain.
As Zimbabwe edges closer to contentious constitutional debates, the outcome of this case is likely to have far-reaching implications for governance, the rule of law, and the country’s fragile democratic institutions.
