Mashingaidze dismisses Muchena’s opposition to Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3

Gibson Mashingaidze addressing the media

HARARE, ZIMBABWE – Retired Major General Gibson Mashingaidze has publicly criticised Air Vice Marshal (Rtd) Henry Muchena over his opposition to the proposed Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 of 2026, deepening divisions among former senior security officials.

Muchena recently wrote to Parliament opposing the bill, arguing that the proposed constitutional changes should be subjected to a national referendum. In his submission, he claimed to represent a group of retired generals, ex-combatants, and former civil servants.

“Power belongs to the people,” Muchena said in his letter dated 12 March, warning that passing the amendments without a public vote could amount to a “constitutional coup”.

In a strongly worded response addressed to the Clerk of Parliament on 19 March, Mashingaidze rejected Muchena’s claims of representation, stating that he was speaking in a personal capacity.

“For him to purport to be speaking on behalf of all of us is not only unfortunate but regrettable,” Mashingaidze wrote.

He added that retired army generals and senior civil servants aligned with the ruling ZANU PF support the proposed amendments and have distanced themselves from Muchena’s position.

Mashingaidze said the proposed changes stem from internal party resolutions adopted at ZANU PF conferences held in 2024 and 2025, describing them as a long-standing collective position.

“We unreservedly and unapologetically reaffirm this longstanding commitment to the realisation of this unshakeable Resolution Number 1,” he said.

He further indicated that he was directly involved in consultations leading to the formulation of the resolution, both as National Chair of the Veterans of the Liberation Struggle Board and through his role in the War Veterans League in Masvingo Province.

The exchange highlights growing debate around the Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 of 2026, particularly over whether it should be decided through Parliament or a national referendum. Mashingaidze defended the parliamentary route, arguing that elected legislators represent the will of the people.

“The proposed Constitutional Amendments are being constitutionally and legally conducted through a Parliamentary process, where the people are ably represented by parliamentarians,” he said.

He also pointed to planned public consultations through the Parliamentary Outreach Programme as an avenue for citizens to express their views.

Mashingaidze dismissed Muchena’s assertion that he speaks on behalf of a broader group, describing it as misleading.

“Muchena did not consult either us or anyone on the matter… his views are personal and do not represent those of retired Army Generals or senior civil servants,” he said.

He urged Muchena to present his views independently rather than attributing them to a collective.

The dispute underscores differing perspectives within Zimbabwe’s former liberation war and security establishment over constitutional reforms and governance processes. Analysts say such divisions could shape public debate as the proposed amendments move through Parliament, particularly on issues of public participation and legitimacy.

Gibson Mashingaidze statement