Chief Justice Malaba to Miss Landmark Constitutional Court Hearing on Amendment Bill

HARARE – Luke Malaba will not sit on the seven-member bench of the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe set to hear a high-stakes case challenging proposed constitutional amendments that could extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s rule to 2030. Malaba is expected to step down on May 14, just days before the matter is scheduled to be heard on May 20, effectively excluding him from proceedings in what is shaping up to be a landmark constitutional case.

The application was filed by a group of war veterans, including Reuben Zulu, Godfrey Gurira, Shoorai Nyamangodo, Joseph Chinyangare, Digmore Digmore, Knowledge Ndiya, and Joseph Chinguwa. The applicants are seeking to nullify the proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 3 Bill, arguing that it violates key provisions of Zimbabwe’s Constitution.

The case centres on whether the proposed amendments could unlawfully extend presidential term limits, a matter that touches on fundamental constitutional safeguards. In their court papers, the applicants argue that the President has already breached the Constitution by presiding over and advancing the amendment process.

“The complaint is that the first respondent has already failed to defend the Constitution by presiding over and being party to the Executive advancement of the impugned scheme,” Zulu said in his affidavit.

They cite Section 328(7), which bars the extension of presidential terms, and Section 88(1), which outlines the President’s duty to uphold the Constitution.

The Attorney-General’s Office Zimbabwe, through Attorney-General Virginia Mabhiza, filed opposing papers both on her own behalf and on behalf of the President. Mabhiza argued that the application is premature, as the Constitutional Amendment No. 3 Bill has not yet been enacted into law.

“The matter is speculative and does not present any foreseeable disputes of fact,” she submitted.

However, the applicants have challenged her authority to represent the President in the matter, adding another layer of legal complexity to the case.

Legal experts say the case is likely to test critical constitutional principles, including:

• Whether courts can intervene before a Bill becomes law

• The limits of executive authority in legislative processes

• The interpretation of constitutional safeguards on term limits

Constitutional lawyer Tapiwa Zivira said the outcome could set an important precedent.

“This case goes to the heart of constitutionalism in Zimbabwe. It will determine whether the judiciary can act proactively to prevent potential violations,” he said.

With Chief Justice Malaba set to exit before the hearing, attention now shifts to the composition of the bench that will preside over the matter. The ruling could have far-reaching implications for Zimbabwe’s political landscape, governance framework, and the interpretation of constitutional law. The case is expected to draw significant public and legal interest when it is heard later in May.

Malaba Constitutional Court case