Yesha
Member
- Jan 28, 2026
- 46
- 35
Public hearings on the proposed Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No. 3 Bill have commenced across Zimbabwe, opening a critical phase in what is shaping up to be one of the most far-reaching constitutional reform efforts since the adoption of the 2013 Constitution.
The consultations, led by the Parliament of Zimbabwe, began on 30 March 2026, with outreach teams deployed nationwide to gather citizens’ views. Meetings are being held in both urban and rural areas, including Harare, Bulawayo, Midlands, Manicaland, Mashonaland provinces, Masvingo, and Matabeleland regions, as part of a constitutionally required public participation process.
At the centre of the hearings is a Bill that proposes sweeping changes to Zimbabwe’s governance structure, electoral system, and balance of power among State institutions.
One of the most significant provisions is the proposed removal of direct presidential elections. Under the Bill, the President would no longer be elected by popular vote but instead by Members of Parliament sitting as an electoral college. This represents a fundamental shift away from the current system established under the 2013 Constitution.
The Bill also seeks to extend the term of office for the President, Parliament, and local authorities from five years to seven years. Crucially, the amendment would apply to current office holders, effectively pushing the next general elections from 2028 to 2030. To enable this, the Bill proposes overriding an existing constitutional safeguard that prohibits extending the term of a sitting office holder — a move that has triggered significant legal and political debate.
Further provisions would expand executive influence within Parliament, including granting the President powers to appoint an additional ten Senators, increasing the size of the Senate. Changes are also proposed within the judiciary, where the Bill removes mandatory public interviews for judges and increases presidential discretion in judicial appointments, raising concerns about the erosion of transparency and independence.
The Bill also introduces a major restructuring of the electoral system. Key functions currently held by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission would be redistributed, with voter registration moving to the Registrar-General’s Office and constituency delimitation assigned to a new commission. Critics argue this could weaken the independence of election management.
In addition, the amendment proposes the abolition and consolidation of several independent commissions established under the 2013 Constitution. The Zimbabwe Gender Commission would be dissolved and its functions transferred to the Human Rights Commission, while the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission would be repealed. These changes are being viewed as a reduction in institutional oversight mechanisms.
Traditional leadership is also affected. The Bill removes constitutional provisions requiring chiefs to remain politically neutral, instead placing their conduct under ordinary legislation. Analysts warn this could expose traditional leaders to increased political pressure.
Other changes include a revision of the constitutional role of the defence forces — shifting their mandate from “upholding” the Constitution to “acting in accordance with” it — as well as adjustments to presidential succession procedures, giving Parliament a greater role in selecting a replacement in the event of a vacancy.
The breadth of these proposals has intensified debate across legal, political, and civic circles. Critics argue that the cumulative effect of the amendments could significantly centralise power within the executive and alter the foundational principles of the 2013 Constitution. Some legal experts have also questioned whether certain provisions, particularly those extending terms of office, may require a national referendum.
Government officials, however, maintain that the changes are necessary to address governance challenges and align constitutional provisions with practical realities, describing the Constitution as a living document that must evolve over time.
The public hearings themselves are structured to allow citizens to make oral submissions after presentations of the Bill, with written contributions also being accepted. Authorities have imposed strict rules prohibiting attendance in military uniforms, political party regalia, or with partisan symbols, in an effort to maintain neutrality.
Once the consultation process concludes, submissions will be compiled into a report for Parliament, where the Bill will proceed to debate and possible adoption.
As the hearings continue, the process is being closely watched as a test of Zimbabwe’s commitment to participatory democracy. At stake is not only the fate of Amendment No. 3, but the broader question of how constitutional change is negotiated between the State and its citizens.
