DistantNews
Support us
🇿🇼 Zimbabwe /Elections & Politics

Why a Referendum On Constitution Amendment Bill No.3 Is Unavoidable

From AllAfrica Zimbabwe · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

Analysis Sources not specified Context piece
  • Zimbabwe's ruling ZANU PF party is attempting to amend the constitution, which critics argue requires a referendum.
  • The proposed amendment, concerning presidential elections, is seen by opponents as an indirect alteration of the Bill of Rights.
  • Legal experts contend that the change, which limits presidential voting to Members of Parliament, necessitates a public vote according to constitutional provisions.

A contentious attempt by Zimbabwe's ruling ZANU PF party to amend the constitution is facing strong opposition, with critics arguing that a referendum is unavoidable. The party is pushing for changes that opponents believe circumvent the democratic process and undermine fundamental rights.

What that means is that they agree that if the amendment were to amend the Bill of Rights, then a referendum will be necessary.

— Article authorInterpreting the stance of government ministers on the necessity of a referendum.

Ministers Ziyambi Ziyambi and Munyaradzi Paul Mangwana have argued that a referendum is unnecessary because the proposed bill does not directly amend the Bill of Rights. However, legal analysts point out that constitutional amendments can occur expressly or by implication. They argue that the current bill, by altering the method of presidential election, implicitly amends Section 67 of the Constitution, which guarantees every Zimbabwean citizen the right to free and fair elections for any elective public office, including the presidency.

The core of the dispute lies in the proposed change that would restrict presidential voting to Members of Parliament, effectively disenfranchising the general populace. This shift from universal suffrage for presidential elections to an electoral college system composed solely of MPs is seen by critics as a significant alteration of the Bill of Rights. According to Section 328(6) of the Constitution, any constitutional bill that amends the Bill of Rights must be subjected to a referendum within three months of receiving a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament.

This, by implication, fundamentally changes the law (Bill of Rights) as contained in Section 67 of the Constitution.

— Article authorArguing that the proposed amendment indirectly alters the Bill of Rights.

Opponents of the amendment assert that ZANU PF's reluctance to hold a referendum stems from a fear of public rejection. They maintain that the proposed changes fundamentally alter the electoral landscape and the rights of citizens, thus requiring a direct mandate from the people through a referendum. The debate highlights a crucial tension between the government's legislative agenda and the constitutional safeguards designed to protect citizens' rights.

By the very argument of Zanu PF, Mangwana and Ziyambi, the Bill must be subjected to referendum because it amends the Bill of Rights.

— Article authorContradicting the government's position based on their own stated criteria.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by AllAfrica Zimbabwe. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.

More Stories

From Our Blog