Reply To The Second Reading Debate of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3)…

HomeNewsReply To The Second Reading Debate of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment…NewsReply To The Second Reading Debate of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. Ziyambi ZiyambiByChief Editor-June 19, 2026 HomeNewsReply To The Second Reading Debate of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment… Speaker Sir, I rise to reply to the Second Reading debate on the Constitution of Zimbabwe (Amendment No.3) H.B.1.

Bill, 2026. Before doing so, may I thank Honourable Members for their spirited and constructive engagement of the Bill. Over seven sitting days, members from every province and both sides of the aisle rose to engage the Bill, with the energy that does credit to Parliament.

Whatever our differences, the people of Zimbabwe have watched their representatives debate the supreme law of the land with seriousness, and that in itself vindicates the institution which this Bill proposes to trust as the forum for selecting the country’s head of state and government. I’m also grateful for the invaluable, technically grounded, contributions by my colleagues Honourable Kazembe Kazembe, Minister of Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage; Honourable July Moyo, Minister of Energy and Power Development; and Honourable Virginia Mabiza; the Attorney General. The provisions that attracted the most comment were the election of the President through Parliament; the distinction between the length of the term and the term limit; the future of the Gender Commission; and the political status of traditional leaders.

[paywall]

I will address each in its place. Reflections on the Joint Committee ReportMr. Speaker Sir, I turn first to the report of the Joint Committee, presented by Honourable Zvobgo, its Chairperson.

I thank him and every member of that Committee for a report of genuine quality. The report is thorough, it is candid, and it carries the voice of the people in numbers that deserve to be read into the record; once more. The Committee received 540,037 submissions on this Bill.

Of these, 537,102 were in support and 2,935 were against. The provincial public hearings drew 54,231 citizens through their doors. Speaker, as I mentioned a little while ago, no amendment has been interrogated by so many of its citizens; in the recent constitutional history of the country.

The Joint Committee did not simply count these voices; it weighed them, clause by clause. In the main, the Committee recommended the adoption of the Bill’s provisions, and in respect of certain provisions it recommended refinements: for example, that the electoral commission retain the accreditation of observers; that the hierarchy of our two apex courts be better clarified; that the traditional leaders provision should not be adopted; that the leadership terms of the National Council of Chiefs be aligned to the new seven-year national electoral cycle, and that the Gender Commission remain in place. Government has studied each of these recommendations with the seriousness they deserve, and I will respond to each in the cluster to which it belongs; and more specifically during the Committee Stage.

The report of the Joint Committee is compelling evidence of what consultation means: not a ritual to be performed and forgotten, but a discipline that binds the framers of a Bill to listen to those who examined it. Speaker Sir, mark well what was not said. Members questioned the manner of the hearings; but not one rose to say that the Committee’s report was false, or its figures wrong.

The very members who challenge me, left the central record untouched. Their silence upon it is its endorsement, and it is the full answer to those who cry from outside this Honourable House that the figures were cooked, while saying nothing against them within it. And for support that named no single clause but embraced the entire Bill, I thank Honourable Mangondo, Honourable Tavaziva, Honourable Mapfumo, Honourable Marange and Honourable Dzidzai Butau.

Debate on Core AmendmentsMr. Speaker, I come to the debate on the Bill’s core amendments, which drew the heaviest debate: the election of the President through Parliament and the length of the national electoral cycle. I thank Honourable Matema for opening that debate with the reminder that this is not foreign terrain for Zimbabwe, because Parliament elected the President and the Prime Minister in this country before 1990.

In the same vein, I thank Honourable Chiduwa for situating the Bill’s reforms in the honest company of other nations that have amended their constitutions far more often than we have. In particular, I thank Honourable Togarepi for the clearest statement of the distinction on which so much of this debate turns. Also, I thank Honourable Mutodi for contrasting the histories of our deeply disputed presidential elections with the quiet of our parliamentary ones.

And I thank Honourable Sibanda, who rose from the opposition benches to eloquently endorse the spirit of these reforms. That took conviction, and the Honourable House noticed.

[/paywall]