HARARE-(MaraviPost)-Zimbabwe’s ruling party, ZANU PF, has launched a wholesale rewrite of its own constitution to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure as party president, a move that will either block the party’s elective congress scheduled for 2027 or allow him to contest instead of stepping aside.
The move is expected to complicate the succession race inside the former liberation movement.
The proposed amendments to the party’s founding document are expected to be tabled for adoption at ZANU PF’s 23rd Annual National People’s Conference to be held at Chinhoyi University of Technology from October 12 to 17.
ZANU PF Secretary for Legal Affairs, Justice Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi, said the objective, is mainly to align the party constitution with recent changes to the national Constitution brought about by the Constitutional Amendment Act number 3 which extended President Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa’s term of office to beyond 2028.
“The review of the ZANU PF Constitution was one of the resolutions passed by the membership to align it with amendments effected through Constitution Amendment No. 3,” Ziyambi said. “We have started the process, and our Legal Standing Committee has been working on the adjustments over the past week. We are reviewing our constitution to align it with the National Constitution.”
Ziyambi added that the party had already resolved that President Mnangagwa will remain its presidential candidate whenever the next congress is convened, effectively making the 2027 congress non-elective.
The announcement was made after a tour of the conference venue by the Provincial Coordinating Committee, a day after the National Conference Coordinating Committee led by National Chairperson Oppah Muchinguri-Kashiri inspected preparations.
Provincial chairperson Mary Mliswa-Chikoka said Mashonaland West had already raised more than US$100,000 against a target of US$75,000 for hosting the conference.
For many analysts, the internal party change is the inevitable domestic consequence of a far more controversial national process – the birth of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No. 3 Act, or CAA3, from its incarnation as Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3, CAB3.
CAB3 was first gazetted in February 2026 and subjected to a flawed 90-day consultation period that included public hearings by Parliament in all ten provinces, which were reportedly stage-managed. It was reported that during the public consultation process those opposed to the idea were not given the opportunity to air their views.
By law, those hearings are supposed to test public opinion before a Bill that amends the Constitution is taken to Parliament.
In meetings from Bulawayo to Mutare, citizens who managed to speak rejected core proposals of the Bill, particularly the plan to extend presidential and parliamentary terms and to remove the right of Zimbabweans to directly elect a president.
The process itself was heavily contested. Opposition parties announced boycotts, civil society groups complained of heavily choreographed meetings packed with ZANU PF supporters, and human rights monitors warned that participants should be able to speak without fear of intimidation, harassment or assault.
Despite the pushback on the ground, ZANU PF, which commands a two-thirds majority in both houses after benefiting from controversial recalls of opposition MPs, used its numbers to push CAB3 through Parliament in June.
President Mnangagwa then assented to it on July 7, gazetting it as Act No. 6 of 2026, now known as CAA3.
CAA3 is the most far-reaching rewrite of Zimbabwe’s 2013 Constitution since its adoption. It does not merely extend Mnangagwa’s second term from 2028 to 2030. It fundamentally restructures how power is acquired and held.
First, it extends the terms of office for the President, Parliament, Senate, National Council of Chiefs and local authorities from five years to seven years. That single clause shifts the next general election from 2028 to 2030 and automatically prolongs Mnangagwa’s current term by two years.
Second, it abolishes direct presidential elections. Since 1987, Zimbabwe’s president has been elected by direct popular vote under Section 92 of the Constitution. CAA3 repeals that provision and replaces it with election by Parliament sitting jointly as an electoral college.
The president will now be elected if he or she secures more than half of valid votes cast by MPs and senators, a model that makes the ruling party’s parliamentary arithmetic decisive.
Third, it alters key institutions. It expands the Senate from 80 to 90 members by allowing the President to appoint ten additional senators on the basis of professional skills and competence.
It strips the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission of its voter registration function and hands responsibility for preparing and maintaining the voters’ roll to the Registrar-General’s Office, and creates a separate Delimitation Commission to draw electoral boundaries.
It also removes public interviews in the appointment of judges and gives the President power to appoint the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice and other judges after mere consultation with the Judicial Service Commission.
The core of the legal and political uproar is that CAB3 became law without going to a referendum, let alone two.
Section 328 of the Constitution sets out special procedures for amending entrenched provisions and requires a national referendum when amendments affect the Bill of Rights.
Section 67 of the Bill of Rights guarantees every Zimbabwean citizen political rights, including the right to vote freely in elections. Lawyers challenging the law argue that CAA3 directly infringes on that right in two distinct ways, each of which should have triggered a referendum.
By removing the direct election of the president and replacing it with election through Parliament, the state has taken away a fundamental political right. By extending terms of office from five to seven years, it has also altered the people’s right to regularly choose their leaders.
Parliament, critics say, failed to follow the constitutional safeguards required when changing the country’s supreme law.
COURT CHALLENGE
That argument is now before the courts. CAA3 faces multiple active challenges in the Constitutional Court.
The lead case is being brought by six war veterans who previously challenged CAB3 while it was still a Bill. Led by prominent constitutional lawyer Lovemore Madhuku together with Lewis Uriri and Tawanda Zhuwarara, they have returned to the Constitutional Court seeking direct access to challenge the new presidential election model.
Madhuku said the application argues it was unconstitutional to effect such a fundamental shift in how the head of state is chosen without first being put to a referendum, describing the move as a violation of the Bill of Rights.
A second prong of litigation targets the immediate consequences of CAA3. Following the enactment, Mnangagwa appointed ten new senators under the new provision expanding the Senate. That appointment is also being challenged in the ConCourt as unconstitutional, with applicants arguing the appointments were made under a law that itself did not comply with referendum requirements. If successful, the cases could unravel not only the term extension to 2030 but the entire new electoral architecture that now makes Parliament the kingmaker for the presidency.
For now, however, ZANU PF is moving ahead.
By aligning its internal constitution with CAA3, the party is ensuring that its own structures reflect the national extension.
For Vice President Constantino Chiwenga, who is widely reported to have been positioning himself as Mnangagwa’s successor at the 2027 congress, the rewrite closes a once-open door.
Leave a Reply