Zimbabwe is not a monarchy-  Timba  says as he slams Mnangagwa for declaring his birthday a public holiday

By Jameson Timba

The declaration by President Emmerson Mnangagwa of 15 September as an annual public holiday called “Munhumutapa Day” raises serious questions about the growing personalisation of the Zimbabwean State.

According to Statutory Instrument 148 of 2026, issued under the Public Holidays and Prohibition of Business Act, the 15th of September every year will henceforth be a public holiday known as Munhumutapa Day.

There is an extraordinary coincidence which cannot simply be ignored:

15 September is President Mnangagwa’s birthday.

Indeed, there is nothing accidental about the association. Munhumutapa Day has previously been commemorated on the President’s birthday, and the celebrations have openly included celebrations of President Mnangagwa himself.

We therefore have to ask a simple question:

Are we commemorating Zimbabwe’s history, or are we using Zimbabwe’s history to commemorate a sitting President?

These are two very different things.

Zimbabwe is a constitutional republic. Presidents are elected to occupy public office for a limited period. They are temporary custodians of the State. The Republic belongs permanently to its citizens.

A TROUBLING MESSAGE OF PERMANENCE

This declaration becomes even more concerning when read alongside remarks made by President Mnangagwa during the official opening of the Sanganai/Hlanganani Tourism Expo in Masvingo.

The President made remarks projecting his presence well into the next decade, including reference to still being there around 2035.

The precise meaning he intended must not be exaggerated. But politics is also about the messages that public conduct communicates.

Zimbabweans are entitled to ask what message they are expected to take when, on the one hand, the sitting President speaks in terms suggesting his continuing presence far into the future while, on the other, his own birthday is transformed into a permanent national public holiday carrying the title of an ancient African monarch.

Each event might be explained separately.

Read together, however, they risk creating the public impression of a presidency increasingly presenting itself not as temporary constitutional stewardship, but as permanent political authority.

That should concern every republican democrat, regardless of political affiliation.

The issue is particularly sensitive because Munhumutapa is not merely the name of an ancient state. It was a royal title.

A President is not a Munhumutapa.

A President derives authority from the Constitution and the people. He serves for the period permitted by the Constitution and thereafter hands the office to another citizen.

A monarch, by contrast, represents dynastic continuity and permanence.

We should therefore be extremely careful when the symbolism of monarchy, the birthday of an incumbent President and suggestions of political longevity begin to converge.

Zimbabwe must never develop a cult of permanence around any political leader.

Robert Mugabe once appeared permanent. He was not.

Emmerson Mnangagwa is not permanent.

Jameson Timba is not permanent.

No political leader is.

Only Zimbabwe and its people are permanent.

That is the essence of republican government.

WHOSE HISTORY ARE WE COMMEMORATING?

There is an additional historical difficulty with this declaration.

If Government’s explanation is that Munhumutapa Day is genuinely intended to honour an important pre-colonial African kingdom, then Zimbabweans are entitled to ask why our extraordinarily rich pre-colonial history has been reduced to one kingdom and one royal tradition.

The Mutapa State was unquestionably an important part of our history. It deserves study, recognition and preservation.

But it was not the only important African state or kingdom in the history of the territory that became Zimbabwe.

The Rozvi State under the Changamire dynasty subsequently became a dominant political power across large parts of the Zimbabwean plateau. Changamire Dombo defeated Mutapa forces and established a formidable state which became central to the political history of this region.

Why, therefore, do we not have Changamire Day?

The Ndebele Kingdom subsequently became another major political formation in the history of what became Zimbabwe.

Why do we not have Lobengula Day?

And we could continue asking similar questions about other important leaders, states, kingdoms and communities which constitute Zimbabwe’s diverse historical inheritance.

If the purpose is genuinely historical commemoration, what objective historical criteria were used to select Munhumutapa above all these other traditions?

There is an even more obvious question.

Why 15 September?

What historically significant event in the history of the Mutapa State occurred on 15 September?

Why was a date associated with the Mutapa dynasty itself not chosen?

Why was a date connected to an identifiable historical event, ruler, foundation, victory or transition in the history of that State not selected?

Why not identify a historically defensible date associated with one of the later or final rulers of the Mutapa political tradition?

Instead, by remarkable coincidence, the date selected is the birthday of the sitting President of Zimbabwe.

That coincidence becomes still more difficult to dismiss when the political origins of the existing Munhumutapa commemorations are considered.

HISTORY BELONGS TO ALL OF US

Zimbabwe has many histories, but we have one Republic.

Our Shona, Ndebele, Kalanga, Tonga, Venda, Shangani, Nambya and other historical traditions are tributaries flowing into the same national river. None should be appropriated to manufacture a royal mythology around an elected political leader.

There is nothing wrong with celebrating the history of the Mutapa State. On the contrary, Zimbabwe should invest much more in teaching and preserving its pre-colonial African history.

But if Government wishes to establish national heritage days commemorating our ancient kingdoms and civilisations, then let historians, traditional leaders, universities, cultural institutions and citizens participate in developing an inclusive national framework for doing so.

Such a process could determine which historical events deserve national commemoration and which dates have genuine historical significance.

What we should not do is work backwards from the birthday of a sitting President and then search our ancient history for a royal title to attach to that date.

That is not historical preservation.

It risks becoming personality-cult politics dressed in the robes of history.

President Mnangagwa has every right to celebrate his birthday on 15 September. His family, political party, friends and supporters have every right to celebrate it with him.

But the birthday of an incumbent President should not, by presidential decree, become a permanent public holiday of the Republic.

Today it is President Mnangagwa.

Tomorrow another President may decide that his or her birthday also deserves national recognition.

Where does that end?

Zimbabwe has already travelled too far down the road where political leaders are confused with the State and political parties are confused with the nation.

Our constitutional democracy requires us to travel in the opposite direction.

We must build institutions greater than individuals.

We must preserve history without appropriating it.

We must ensure that constitutional office never becomes personal inheritance.

And above all, we must remember a simple constitutional truth:

Zimbabwe is a Republic.

We elect Presidents. We do not enthrone Kings