> Let's Forward this Post Everywhere ❕ *Zanu PF’s controversial 2030 plot a calculated* https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaDkMuTFCCoNC13vvo2V _*©Eragon Online News*_ *_(Follow this channel to read more...)_* *Group Link:* https://chat.whatsapp.com/CDyzvhE1ey5H89lorhyIvn By The Standard Reporter - A controversial plot by President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s loyalists to extend his term of office from 2028 to 2030 is not merely a political issue, but a fundamental test of constitutionalism, according to a latest report. Mnangagwa has publicly indicated that he is not interested in having his term of office extended by two more years despite spirited efforts by his loyalists. Under the current constitution, a referendum must be held to amend the country’s charter to extend presidential term limits, but excluding Mnangagwa as a beneficiary. Zanu PF now plans to extend his term of office by suspending the 2028 elections to 2030. Reports indicate that Zanu PF and the opposition led by selfstyled Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) member, Sengezo Tshabangu, are allegedly planning to bring a motion in Parliament for the amendment of the constitution in order to extend presidential term limit. The proposed bill, according to the draft motion, will seek to also amend Section 91(2) of the constitution of Zimbabwe to allow parliament to determine an additional period of time the president may continue to hold office at the expiry of his or her second term. Critics, however, view the move as an attempt to erode democratic principles and entrench power. Opposition voices argue that the amendments would undermine the integrity of the constitution and set a dangerous precedent for governance in Zimbabwe. An analysis by the Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (CiCZ), however, shows that any amendments to extend Mnangagwa’s term of office illustrate a deliberate weakening of the constitution and constitutionalism with the executive increasingly encroaching on the functions of both the judiciary and the legislature. The CiCZ report compiled by Amanda Sihle Ndlovu argued that this undermines the checks and balances necessary for a functioning constitutional democracy. Ndlovu is a registered legal practitioner practicing as an advocate of the superior courts of Zimbabwe. She is a member of the de facto bar, with The Chambers: Advocates of Zimbabwe. Ndlovu is also a part-time lecturer at the University of Zimbabwe and acts as a legal consultant and advisor to various organisations in Zimbabwe. “Presidential term limits are a cornerstone of democratic governance, designed to prevent the consolidation of power and promote regular leadership renewal,” the report titled State of the Zimbabwean constitution and constitutionalism in the Post-2017 Political Transition era reads in part. “They serve as a safeguard against authoritarianism, ensuring that no single individual can dominate the political landscape indefinitely. “In Zimbabwe, the 2013 constitution enshrines these limits to foster democratic principles and accountability.” Zimbabwe’s constitutional development has been shaped by its colonial past, liberation struggle, and post-independence challenges. The country’s first constitution, commonly referred to as the Lancaster House constitution, was negotiated in 1979 at the Lancaster House Conference in London. Over two decades, the document was amended numerous times, often to centralise power in the executive, Ndlovu argued. She argued that these amendments have fuelled concerns about the “weaponisation” of the law, whereby constitutional and legal provisions are manipulated to consolidate political power and suppress dissent. Ndlovu said any attempt to amend presidential term limits must adhere to section 328 of the constitution of Zimbabwe, which governs constitutional amendments. Section 328(5) explicitly prohibits any amendments that benefit an incumbent by extending their tenure. It states that “an amendment to a term limit provision does not apply to anyone holding the office when the amendment. This means that even if Parliament were to pass an amendment extending term limits, such a provision could not legally apply to the current president unless additional changes were made to override this safeguard. “The debate on extending presidential term limits in Zimbabwe is not merely a political issue — it is a fundamental test of constitutionalism,” Ndlovu argued. “If Zimbabwe were to amend its constitution to allow an incumbent to extend their stay in office, it would set a dangerous precedent that could irreversibly weaken constitutional governance. “Term limits were introduced precisely to prevent lifetime presidencies and ensure that power remains accountable to the people. “Any attempt to remove them would mark a return to a system where leaders govern indefinitely, institutions are hollowed out, and the democratic process is undermined.” Ndlovu said Zimbabweans must resist regressive constitutional changes and uphold the principles of regular leadership renewal, legal certainty, and the rule of law. “As history has shown, countries that disregard term limits often face long-term political instability, loss of democratic legitimacy, and weakened public trust in governance,” she argued. “The commitment to constitutional democracy requires that term limits be protected rather than eroded.” The Standard