Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chef Court Reporter
THE Constitutional Court has struck off a challenge by war veterans opposing proposed amendments to the Constitution that would extend presidential terms from five to seven years, allowing President Mnangagwa to remain in power until 2030.
The court ruled the application lacked merit, citing the veterans’ failure to substantiate claims of presidential misconduct.
“The application was struck off the roll after consideration of the fact that the applicant failed to set out or particularise any misconduct, error or mistake that the President had made in chairing the Cabinet which discussed the Bill,” said Advocate Sylvester Hashiti, the President’s lawyer.
“At that stage, they failed to locate in the law anything that the President had done wrong, and therefore, the President’s conduct stands as lawful, valid and extant.”
The six veterans, led by Professor Lovemore Madhuku, argued the proposed changes in particularly the provision to extend presidential and parliamentary terms and shift the presidential election system to a parliamentary vote from direct popular election violated constitutional norms.
Central to their case was the accusation that President Mnangagwa had a conflict of interest by participating in Cabinet deliberations that advanced a Bill directly benefiting him.
Prof Madhuku contended that the President’s involvement violated Section 196(2) of the Constitution, which requires public officials to act with integrity and avoid conflicts of interest.
He described the proposed electoral system as a betrayal of the liberation struggle’s core values, including the principle of universal suffrage.
However, Adv Hashiti delivered a forceful rebuttal, emphasising that the claims were speculative and unsupported by evidence.
“Nowhere does the pleaded case allege that the President initiated this Bill or acted unlawfully,” Adv Hashiti said during the hearing last month.
He dismissed suggestions of constitutional violations as baseless, adding that the Constitution did not explicitly define the liberation struggle’s values as binding legal principles.
Adv Hashiti also rejected arguments that the changes undermined the democratic process. Comparing different branches of government, he noted that power derived from the people did not mandate direct elections.
He called the timing of the lawsuit premature, emphasising that the Bill was still under legislative scrutiny and subject to parliamentary debate.
The court’s decision represents a significant setback for the veterans, whose challenge sought to block what they claimed was an unconstitutional attempt to entrench President Mnangagwa’s tenure.
