All eyes on ConCourt as CAA3 hearing begins

All eyes will be on the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) today as two legal challenges to the controversial Constitution Amendment Act No. 3 come up for hearing.

The apex court is expected to hear separate applications challenging the process through which the legislation was enacted and provisions extending presidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years.

The proceedings mark another major stage in the battle against CAA3, following its passage through Parliament and ultimate signing into law by President Emmerson Mnangagwa in July this year.

The cases raise questions about constitutional supremacy, public participation in law-making and whether elected public officials can benefit from extending their own terms of office.

A coalition of opposition politicians under the banner of Sungano yeVanhu – Ubumbano Lomphakathi, which has endorsed the litigation, yesterday rallied Zimbabweans across the political divide to attend the proceedings in solidarity, arguing that the challenges go beyond partisan interests and concern the constitutional rights of every citizen.

In a statement, the coalition said the cases were not merely disputes involving political parties or individual politicians, but raised questions about the country’s constitutional safeguards and democratic accountability.

“These cases are not simply disputes between political parties or individual politicians. They concern the constitutional rules governing every Zimbabwean, regardless of political affiliation,” the coalition said.

The coalition said the proceedings would test whether constitutional procedures were binding on those exercising political power and whether elected officials could lawfully benefit from extending their own mandates without seeking a fresh mandate from voters.

The first application, filed by Vhurande Mahlupeko under case number CCZ277/26, challenges the constitutionality of the process through which CAA3 was enacted.

Mahlupko argues that 10 provisions eventually incorporated into the legislation were not contained in the original Bill published for the constitutionally prescribed 90-day public consultation period.

The applicant is seeking the invalidation of the entire amendment legislation, arguing that the omission of the provisions from the original Bill undermined citizens’ right to participate in the constitutional amendment process.

The second application, filed by Prince Dubeko Sibanda (former Binga North MP) under case number CCZ271/26, challenges the extension of presidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years, particularly its application to incumbent officeholders.

The application centres on Section 328(7) of the Constitution, which provides safeguards against constitutional amendments extending the tenure of sitting public officeholders for their own benefit.

The applicants are challenging whether the extension can constitutionally benefit those already occupying the offices whose terms are being altered.

The opposition politicians said the two cases were a test of whether constitutional safeguards could be disregarded by those entrusted with exercising political authority.

“These applicants may come from within our coalition, but the constitutional rights they seek to protect belong to the entire nation,” the organisation said.

The coalition also wants the court to determine the arguments in accordance with the Constitution.

Constitutional lawyers Lovemore Madhuku and Lewis Uriri will be representing the applicants.