A group of retired generals and senior civil servants has vowed to wage a "relentless, but lawful" campaign against the newly enacted Constitutional Amendment No 3, declaring they would "not just watch" as the country's supreme law is being dismantled.
Speaking on behalf of the group, retired air marshal Henry Muchena launched a blistering attack on the amendment, which President Emmerson Mnangagwa signed into law last after Parliament approved the controversial bill.
The intervention by former senior security and government officials has added a significant new dimension to the growing resistance, which has already drawn opposition from lawyers, churches, civil society organisations and political parties.
Legal challenges are also expected against the new provisions that mean Mnangagwa would rule until 2030.
"Our collective conscience will not allow us to remain silent while the constitution is dismantled in silence by a few," Muchena said in a strongly-worded statement.
"This is not a minor amendment. It is not an administrative adjustment. It is an assault on the constitutional covenant made in 2013 by the people of Zimbabwe, through negotiation, national consensus and referendum."
Muchena insisted the constitution belonged exclusively to Zimbabweans, not to those exercising political power.
"That constitution belongs to the people. It does not belong to a president,” he said.
- ED2030: Zanu PF feels the heat
- Constitutional Amendment No. 3 Bill: Clipping citizens’ power
- Diaspora group demands referendum clause in 2030 Bill
- Amendment No 3 amounts to ‘retrospective power grab’
Keep Reading
“It does not belong to Parliament. It does not belong to any political party, faction, benefactor or unelectable cabal seeking refuge in legal manipulation."
In one of the statement's most striking comparisons, Muchena likened the amendment to the principles underpinning Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in 1965.
"Zimbabwe has, in spirit if not in form, returned to the dark logic of 11 November 1965, when a small circle abrogated to itself the power to redefine the law without reference to the governed," he said.
"Today it wears the clothing of constitutional amendment. The principle is the same: power has placed itself above the people."
The group described Constitutional Amendment No. 3 as "vulgar" and "an abomination", arguing it overturned the spirit of the negotiated 2013 constitution, which emerged after years of political negotiations and was overwhelmingly endorsed in a national referendum.
"CAB 3… offends the spirit of liberation, the discipline of constitutionalism, and the promise made to every Zimbabwean that never again would the destiny of this nation be arranged by a few men and women behind closed doors," Muchena said.
The retired officials accused lawmakers who backed the amendment of betraying the mandate they received from voters.
"They sold vinegar as wine. They sat in the shadows, drafted this thing, voted it into law, and betrayed the constituencies that sent them to Parliament on a different mandate," Muchena said.
Without prescribing a specific political strategy, the group called on Zimbabweans to oppose the changes using lawful means.
"Zimbabweans must now organise, mobilise and use every lawful method available to resist and reject this constitutional abomination. Silence is no longer neutrality. Silence is complicity."
Muchena said the former generals would not stand aside while institutions they had spent their careers defending were weakened.
"We did not spend our careers defending this nation's institutions to now watch them destroyed under colour of legality,” he said.
“Our resistance must be disciplined. It must be lawful. It must be relentless."
"History is watching. Let it record that when the hour came, we did not flinch, and we did not break the law to save it."
Mnangagwa assented to Constitutional Amendment No. 3, ending months of fierce political contestation over legislation critics say fundamentally alters key provisions of the 2013 constitution without first seeking citizen approval in a referendum.
The amendment was pushed through Parliament despite sustained objections from constitutional lawyers, civil society organisations and opposition legislators, who argued that some provisions affect the foundational architecture of the constitution and should have been subjected to a popular vote.
Lawyers are understood to be preparing court challenges seeking to nullify the amendment, arguing that both the legislative process and some substantive provisions violate the constitution.
The government has defended the amendment, insisting it is intended to strengthen governance and improve the functioning of state institutions.
