ZIMBABWE’S Parliament is a “circus,” with the controversial Constitution Amendment No 3 Bill (CAB 3) almost certain to become law despite growing criticism from opposition groups and constitutional experts, former National Healing and Reconciliation co-minister Moses Mzila Ndlovu has said.
The proposed constitutional changes, which recently passed in the National Assembly, have sparked fierce debate over their implications for Zimbabwe’s democratic governance.
Critics argue that the amendments can weaken constitutional safeguards and entrench political power, while supporters maintain they are necessary reforms. The Bill faces further legislative processes amid mounting public scrutiny.
In an interview with Southern Eye, the former Cabinet minister in the Government of National Unity said no realistic obstacles remained to stop the Bill from becoming law.
He argued that both the ruling Zanu PF party and sections of the opposition supported the constitutional changes.
“My take on CAB 3 is that it certainly will sail through and become law. It’s almost as certain as night and day,” said Mzila Ndlovu.
Keep Reading
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Letters: Ensuring Africa’s food security through availability of quality seeds
- Is military's involvement in politics compatible with democracy?
“I do not see anything that is going to hinder this process or derail it. The major hurdle was Parliament, but Parliament is now a circus.”
Mzila Ndlovu accused some opposition legislators of abandoning their watchdog role and working with Zanu PF in pursuit of personal political interests.
“The existence of the so-called opposition is an even bigger circus in the sense that they carry the tag of opposition and yet they are all agents of Zanu PF,” he said.
“They are conniving with Zanu PF clearly because they are attracted by the extension of their terms in office, something that is illegal in terms of the Constitution.”
Mzila Ndlovu said the amendments undermined the spirit of the 2013 Constitution, which he said was crafted through national consensus and reflected the wishes of citizens.
“If you remember how we arrived at the Constitution in 2013, it was by consensus and it was based on the wishes of the people,” he said. “Clearly this thing is a subversion of the wishes of the people of this country.”
The former minister also launched an attack on Zanu PF’s governance record, accusing the ruling party of repeatedly undermining democratic principles since independence.
“Zanu PF has never been there for the wishes of the people or for the interests of the people,” he said. “I don’t think we have seen the last of this cannibalisation of the Constitution. Worse is yet to come in order to secure the permanent stay of the Zanu PF elite in power.”
Meanwhile, Emakhandeni-Luveve legislator Discent Collins Bajila has apologised to his constituents and Zimbabweans at large following public outrage over his absence during the parliamentary vote on CAB 3.
In a public statement issued on Sunday, Bajila acknowledged widespread disappointment after records showed that 22 Members of Parliament did not vote during the contentious proceedings.
“I have listened carefully to the strong public reaction to my absence during the vote on Constitution Amendment No 3 Bill,” he said.
“While records indicate that 22 MPs didn't vote, there's a loud and clear nationwide disappointment that I am, indeed, part of this number.”
The opposition legislator admitted that he had fallen short of public expectations and said the criticism directed at him was justified.
“The level of disappointment and scrutiny shows the high trust and expectations placed in me. I do not take that lightly,” he said.
Bajila said his position on CAB 3 remained unchanged, adding that constituency consultations held in May showed overwhelming opposition to the proposed constitutional amendments.
“My absence created the impression of fence-sitting and that is something I deeply regret,” he said. “My position has not changed and will not change: I remain opposed.”
Although acknowledging that a single vote would not have altered the outcome, Bajila said every dissenting voice in Parliament mattered.
“One vote would not have altered the outcome, but every voice that stands with the people matters. I let you down by not being there to add mine,” he said.