Over the past week, President Emmerson Mnangagwa gave probably his most emphatic response to whether he would like to extend his term beyond 2028, reiterating that he would leave office in the next three years.
Mnangagwa has previously said he is a “constitutionalist” and will abide by the terms of the constitution.
His second and last term is due to expire in 2028, but there are some senior people within the government and the governing party who want the president to stay beyond his constitutional term and maybe serve up to 20230.
The president met with a group of editors last week, where he told them in no uncertain terms that he was a constitutionalist and did not wish to extend the constitution nor go beyond his term limit.
By saying he is a constitutionalist, Mnangagwa implies that he does not envisage a situation where the constitution is amended for his benefit.
Ironically, a day before his meeting with editors, Information minister Jenfan Muswere told the media that there was consensus in Zanu PF and the party’s top leadership was “unanimously supporting President Mnangagwa’s continued leadership up to 2030”.
“There is nothing unconstitutional about amending the constitution,” Muswere continued.
Now, excuse me for being confused.
- NoViolet Bulawayo’s new novel is an instant Zimbabwean classic
- Jah Prayzah, Zanu PF rekindles ‘lost love’
- Bank workers appeal to Ncube for tax relief
- Indosakusa marks 21-year anniversary milestone
Keep Reading
Mnangagwa says he is a constitutionalist who will not seek to extend his term beyond 2028, yet one of his lieutenants says they are “driving (sic) the boat” towards 2030.
This is quite a striking contradiction, considering that Mnangagwa has previously said he did not want to extend his term.
The president first publicly declined the offer to extend his term at the Zanu PF national conference in Bulawayo last year, despite the party’s resolution to do so.
However, in January Mnangagwa hosted a number of legislators who once again asked the president to extend his term beyond 2028.
Sengezo Tshabangu, who installed himself as the leader of the opposition was quite brazen, declaring that if their “presence [Precabe Farm] improves your stay in power and makes the people of Zimbabwe happy, then let it be”.
Quite a jarring statement from a person who claims to head the opposition, but that is a story for another day.
This was an opportunity to swat away Tshabangu’s overzealousness. It went begging.
There have been so many statements from the likes of Justice minister Ziyambi Ziyambi and his counterpart at the ICT ministry Tatenda Mavetera all on extending Mnagagwa’s term.
The usual retort is that there is freedom of expression in the country and people are allowed to say what they want.
But therein lies the problem, some of the high profile people backing Mnangagwa are ministers.
If the president says he is a constitutionalist, it infers that the ministers that are pushing for a term extension are not constitutionalists.
This begs the question, why does the president continue to associate with people that are calling for an amendment that is not in keeping with constitutionalism.
As the custodian of the constitution, there is no room for people who seek to mutilate the constitution in the vicinity of the president.
Muswere said there was “no noise in the cockpit” and there was “unity [and] singleness of purpose” within the leadership.
If that is the case, then why are the president’s lieutenants singing from a different hymn book when it comes to the term extension and the constitutional amendment that should go with it?
On his part, Mnangagwa said he will tell those that are trying to persuade him to stay on that he will not continue because he wants to remain a constitutionalist.
But so far, this approach has not worked because some of his ministers have only become louder since the December conference, while others have danced harder since then in an effort to cajole the president into staying longer.
I am sure I am not the only one confused by this.
At a time when we need a uniform message from the powers that be, we are getting mixed and contradictory messages and this is not helpful at all.
There have been efforts by the media to distil this issue and clear the confusion, but instead, we have seen unhelpful threats flying from George Charamba, a senior official in the president’s office.
I know the temptation is to say that the president has spoken and his word is final.
Fine and dandy, so in that case, the ministers and the supporters that have been pushing for the term extension should also respect the finality of the president’s word and not wear us down with their unending slogans.
The contradictory messages are only going to encourage further speculations and fuel doubts about the president’s term extension.
Charamba and his colleagues in the Office of the President should be pushing for uniformity of messaging, not this situation where the president says one thing and his trusted lieutenants say another.
I believe too much time has already been spent, and needlessly too, on the 2030 agenda. This time could have been used for more productive and pressing issues that face our country at the moment.
Now that the president has spoken, I pray that there is finality to this matter.
Zanu PF supporters and ministers who continue advocating for the term extension should be openly chastised as they are the antithesis of constitutionalism as so eloquently addressed by the president.
