Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission Flags Concerns During Controversial Constitutional Amendment Hearings

Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission Flags Concerns During Controversial Constitutional Amendment Hearings

Yesha

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2026
Posts
45
Reaction score
34
Zimbabwe’s Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) has raised serious concerns over reports of intimidation and restricted participation during nationwide public hearings on the Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), a proposed reform that could reshape the country’s political system.

Speaking at a press conference in Harare, ZHRC Chairperson Fungayi Jessie Majome said the commission monitored hearings held from 30 March to 4 April 2026. She praised strong engagement from diverse segments of society, including women, youth, older persons, and people with disabilities.

“While many participants supported the proposed amendments, we observed instances where those opposed to the bill were harassed, threatened, or prevented from speaking,” Majome said.

According to the ZHRC, some venues reportedly required participants to be vetted before entry, and in Mhondoro–Ngezi, there were reports of men wielding whips to control access. Such practices, the commission emphasized, violate constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, equality, and personal security.

The commission urged Zimbabwean authorities and stakeholders to ensure public consultations are conducted fairly and safely, allowing all citizens to participate without fear or coercion. Majome also stressed the importance of tolerance and respect for differing opinions during the process.

CAB3 has sparked national and international debate because it proposes major changes to Zimbabwe’s governance, including extending presidential and parliamentary term lengths, altering the method of electing the president, and restructuring independent commissions. Critics say some amendments could undermine democratic checks and balances.


The ZHRC’s statement underscores the need to protect human rights even amid reforms and highlights concerns about procedural fairness in Zimbabwe’s constitutional process.
 
Back
Top Bottom