Zimbabwe’s government has formally tabled a constitutional amendment that could extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure by at least two years, reigniting debate over executive term limits across Africa. The move, gazetted by Justice Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi on February 16, proposes shifting presidential elections from a direct popular vote to a parliamentary vote and extending all elected officials’ terms from five to seven years.
If passed, the changes would postpone the next scheduled presidential election from 2028 to 2030, allowing Mnangagwa to remain in office beyond the current two-term maximum established in the 2013 constitution. That charter, a product of negotiations with the former opposition Movement for Democratic Change, was designed explicitly to prevent third-term presidencies.
The ruling ZANU-PF party argues the amendment does not violate term limits because it uniformly “elongates the electoral cycle” for all offices, including local councillors. “In essence we elected to uphold the Presidential term limit in its entirety,” stated ZANU-PF Treasurer General Patrick Chinamasa on social media platform X.
Legal experts and opposition figures reject this reasoning. David Coltart, a constitutional lawyer and mayor of Bulawayo who helped draft the 2013 constitution, cited Section 328(7), which prohibits any amendment whose effect is to “extend the length of time that a person may hold or occupy any public office” from applying to an incumbent. He noted the amendment must also pass a referendum, a step Chinamasa has ruled out.
“The simple enquiry is whether the provision one seeks to change involves the length of time a person holds public office,” Coltart argued. He warned that accepting an extension of the electoral cycle could set a precedent for far longer extensions.
The proposal has unexpectedly united disparate groups in opposition, including the main Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), churches, labour unions, war veterans, and dissidents within ZANU-PF. Six war veterans filed a Constitutional Court challenge immediately after the amendment was gazetted. Notably, First Vice-President Constantino Chiwenga, a former army chief with his own presidential ambitions, is widely believed to oppose the move.
Analysts link the maneuver to a broader African trend of incumbents using legal and constitutional changes—often termed “lawfare”—to retain power, citing similar tactics in Zambia, Tanzania, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Togo.
The European Union’s ambassador to Zimbabwe initially described the amendment as a valid sovereign review of governance practices, but the EU mission later clarified that constitutional changes must align with “the letter and the spirit of the Constitution reflecting the will of the people.” Opposition figures note the absence of a planned referendum makes this impossible to verify.
Constitutional lawyer Justice Mavedzenge warned Mnangagwa that forcing through the amendment could erode his legitimacy and risk a fate similar to former ruler Robert Mugabe. He also urged regional bodies to intervene, cautioning that such “constitutional coups” could become contagious.
At 83, Mnangagwa has accumulated significant wealth in office. Observers note he may be inspired by other long-serving African leaders, such as Cameroon’s Paul Biya, who secured another term at age 93.
The amendment’s fate now hinges on parliamentary approval and potential court challenges, while the united opposition faces a state apparatus with a history of using force to suppress dissent. The outcome will test both Zimbabwe’s constitutional safeguards and the resilience of its fragmented political landscape.
