BY OWN CORRESPONDENT
The ruling Zanu PF party is aiming to amend the constitution to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s rule by two years, pushing the end of his term from 2028 to 2030.
Mnangagwa came to power in 2017 after a military operation against long serving ruler, the late Robert Mugabe.
He insisted he would not stay long in power like what Mugabe did and would respect the two term limit spelt out in a constitution adopted in 2013 through a popular vote.
But half way through his second and final term, a group in the ruling party has stepped up efforts to effect 21 changes on the constitution and reward Mnangagwa with two more years.
Political analysts and lawyers have vowed to block the amendments.
A group of war veterans, represented by university law lecture Lovemore Madhuku have already approached the Constitutional Court challenging the proposed amendments that were gazetted by Speaker of Parliament Jacob Mudenda on Tuesday.
Other opposition figures, Tendai Biti, who is former Finance minister and Jameson Timba have formed outfits, Constitutional Defence Forum and Defend the Constitution Platform respectively, in the fight against what they say is the mutilation of the constitution.
Although resistance is mounting, the move to extend rule is not isolated in Zimbabwe.
It echoes a growing global trend where leaders from various regions modify constitutional provisions or exploit legal loopholes to prolong their time in power.
While many countries face backlash for such changes, others have successfully resisted term limit alterations, leading to positive outcomes.
Notably, these contrasting trajectories illustrate the complex dynamics of governance in the world.
Africa has the largest number of presidents who extend their rule, others for the benefit of their countries and others for worse.
In Asia, significant term extensions have been executed, such as in China in 2018, when the National People’s Congress eliminated presidential term limits, allowing President Xi Jinping to remain in power indefinitely.
XI’s supporters argue that the move has brought economic and political
stability in the Asian giant by enabling long-term planning and decisive action.
China has been growing economically and could possibly have eclipsed the United States of America as world super power, thanks to Donald Trump’s disruptive leadership.
Similarly, Uzbekistan recently extended presidential terms to keep President Shavkat Mirziyoyev in power until 2037, a move proponents say fosters stability.
Many leaders who have extended their terms argue that their continued leadership has brought about positive outcomes.
In Africa, notable examples include Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, who has been in power since 2000.
Under his governance, Rwanda has experienced significant economic growth and development, with improvements in healthcare, education, and infrastructure credited to his stability-driven policies.
Similarly, in Ethiopia, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s leadership, which began in 2018, has been characterised by ambitious reforms leading to economic expansion and the signing of a peace agreement with Eritrea, improving regional stability.
In the West African nation of Côte d’Ivoire, President Alassane Ouattara has had his term extended following constitutional changes, which supporters argue have led to relative economic stability and growth since the civil conflict of the early 2000s.
Beyond Africa, leaders like Xi Jinping have seen their extended rule allow for long-term strategic decision-making. Xi’s leadership has been associated with significant advancements in infrastructure and a more assertive global presence for China.
In Russia, Vladimir Putin has used constitutional amendments to maintain his presidency, promoting policies that have been credited with maintaining national stability amidst international tensions.
In Azerbaijan, President Ilham Aliyev has overseen substantial economic growth following the abolition of presidential term limits in 2009, claiming that stable leadership has drawn foreign investment, enhancing the country’s development.
In Uzbekistan, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s extended leadership has evidently been linked to ongoing reforms and modernisation efforts that have garnered international recognition, contributing to the nation’s economic trajectory.
In Latin America, leaders like Hugo Chávez in Venezuela initiated social programmes that significantly reduced poverty levels, demonstrating that extended leadership could yield beneficial social outcomes, despite the controversies surrounding governance practices.
El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele has gained popularity by implementing decisive and often controversial reforms since taking office in 2019, arguing that his leadership is crucial for modernising the country and tackling crime effectively.
In stark contrast, Costa Rica has resisted such changes, maintaining its constitutional provisions.
This commitment to democracy has afforded the nation a stable political climate and high levels of public trust, contributing to consistent economic growth and social welfare.
Latin America showcases a blend of judicial interventions and successful resistance.
For instance, the Bolivian Constitutional Court’s 2017 ruling allowed former president Evo Morales to seek a fourth term, suggesting that extending leadership could yield positive results, such as social programs benefiting the marginalised.
Conversely, Argentina upheld its term limits through judicial measures, reinforcing democracy and preventing potential political instability, thereby ensuring robust governance.
In situations like Nicaragua in 2014, where term limits were removed, the action enabled President Daniel Ortega to consolidate power.
While this has driven economic initiatives, critiques remain regarding the balance of power and democratic integrity.
With Mnangagwa’s proposed amendment, there is a possibility for Zimbabwe to join nations that have leveraged extended leadership for stability.
Supporters argue that maintaining his presidency could facilitate economic reforms and governance continuity amidst challenging political climates.
However, Zimbabwe also serves as a cautionary tale. Historically, extended rule without appropriate checks can lead to corruption and authoritarianism.
Yet, in a country where stability is paramount, some suggest that this amendment might allow for the strategic execution of policies critical for national recovery.
The attempts by leaders like Mnangagwa to extend their terms highlight a broader trend reshaping political landscapes worldwide.
Countries that resist such changes, like Costa Rica and Argentina, often do so to preserve democratic integrity and foster stability.
In contrast, nations like China and Uzbekistan may yield positive outcomes, but risk paving the way for authoritarianism.
As Zimbabwe deliberates on this amendment, the potential for positive change exists, but it must be carefully weighed against the imperatives of democracy and accountability.
The future trajectory of Zimbabwean governance remains to be seen, intertwined with both local aspirations and global patterns.