Mixed reactions over proposed Constitutional amendment

LIVINGSTONE MARUFU

Analysts and economists have expressed sharply mixed reactions to the proposed Constitutional Amendment Bill, warning that the changes could either entrench political continuity or trigger economic instability and renewed international scepticism.

Cabinet this week backed the proposed Constitutional Amendment Number 3, setting the stage for a 90-day consultation period during which stakeholders are expected to submit their views.

Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi said the consultation window would allow broad-based engagement before the Bill proceeds further.

Among the key proposals are extending the Presidential and Parliamentary term of office from five to seven years, providing for the President to be elected by Parliament rather than through a direct popular vote, allowing the Head of State to appoint 10 additional senators, increasing the Senate to 90 members, and transferring custody and maintenance of the voters’ roll to the Registrar-General.

The Bill also seeks to establish the Zimbabwe Electoral Delimitation Commission, among other changes.

The sweeping nature of the proposed amendments has sparked debate over their potential political and economic consequences.

Former Harare Mayor Muchadeyi Masunda described the move as both political and economic suicide.

“The Constitutional Amendment Bill will inevitably plunge our beloved and yet beleaguered country into a debilitating and retrogressive crisis which will have a devastating impact on our nascent economy that has been perpetually under siege since 11 November 1965 following the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI),” Dr Masunda said.

He warned that altering foundational governance provisions at a time when Zimbabwe is seeking to rebuild international credibility could further complicate efforts to re-engage with global creditors and investors.

Economist Titus Mukove also raised concerns about the broader governance and economic implications of the proposed changes.

“But the main criticism or the criticism against this long-term constitution of power is that it might reduce accountability at state level. It significantly reduces accountability and it may actually potentially lead to poor governance and economic mismanagement. Because the systems and those around will know that there may be no checks and balances in the long term,” Mukove said.

“So this might actually affect accountability and may lead to poor governance and serious economic mismanagement.”

Mukove argued that prolonged concentration of power could narrow opportunities for new leadership and fresh policy ideas.

“And my concern also is that it gives fewer opportunities of influential leadership to people who may be actually good in terms of governance. Because remember as an economy we moved from 1980 to around 2017 with one president and now a very long term again with one president. It may reduce the opportunity of the country to have a president who is very good and comfortable and come up with better reforms that may move the economy from where it is to an even better level,” he said.

He added that governance systems should not be overly concentrated in a few hands, particularly in an already fragile economy.

“And remember Zimbabwe’s economy is already a bit fragile. Yes, inflation has come down but we know that it has come down because of serious management of money supply, serious control of reserve money growth. And yes, of course inflation is coming down but is it on good terms? And we need to still look at other aspects other than the presidential terms. But that’s my general view. It is two-sided. Yes, it may bring better stability because of co-existence in policy implementation and the like. But the main challenge is accountability,” Mukove said.

“Because if someone stays in power for too long it does really have an impact on accountability as well as economic management and aspects of governance.”

He said he would have been more comfortable with maintaining the current structure of two five-year terms.

“Most economies that are doing well have such governance structures. These long-term presidential terms we may need to research a bit on,” Mukove added.

However, not all economists view the proposed extension as inherently problematic.

Economist Vincent Musewe said the duration of a presidential term in itself is not the decisive factor in economic performance.

“There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Remember there’s no magic wand regarding the current five-year term. Somebody just came up with it and it became the norm. What matters is what is done and achieved in those seven years,” Musewe said.

Economic analyst Trust Chikohora cautioned that the proposed changes could once again place Zimbabwe under intense international scrutiny.

“This issue is going to affect Zimbabwe going forward. It will put Zimbabwe on the international spotlight once again,” Chikohora said.

He noted that Government has argued that the amendments are meant to ensure policy continuity and give the President sufficient time to complete Vision 2030 for Economic Development (ED).

“The Government’s argument is that they want continuity and they want to give the President enough time to complete his Vision 2030 for Economic Development (ED). So now you have so many things ‘for ED’. Unfortunately, it seems that the Government seeks to do this without going through a Referendum for the people of Zimbabwe to decide if they want these earth-shattering amendments,” he said.

“Surely, you cannot have about 300 lawmakers deciding to extend the President’s term and their own term as well unilaterally without the people voting in a Referendum. That would definitely plunge the country into a perpetual crisis of illegitimacy and work to derail any envisaged Economic Development (ED).”

Chikohora warned of potential social unrest and strained relations with the international community.

“You are likely to have endless demonstrations and a huge disconnect between Government and the ordinary people of Zimbabwe – even some who had always given them the benefit of doubt. We also do not know what new punitive measures it may invite from the international community, especially in this new hawkish global dispensation,” he said.

“Yes, a Constitution can be amended, but when it comes to such wholesale changes which include extending a term which was supposed to expire in 2028 with no option for renewal – you must go back to the people who put the Constitution with those limits in the first place to make sure that you have their blessings and also to ensure that we have a chance to pull together as a nation.”

“Such huge changes cannot be imposed on the country by the leadership who are the incumbents and who stand to benefit directly from the amendments themselves,” he added.

As the 90-day consultation process unfolds, the debate is likely to intensify, with the proposed amendments emerging as one of the most consequential political and economic questions facing Zimbabwe ahead of 2028.