Chiefs Mobilized to Silence Opposition – Eduzim News

Tinashe Sambiri– Critics warn that support for the Constitutional Amendment Number 3 Bill is being orchestrated from the top, with traditional leaders seemingly co-opted to pressure communities into backing a political power grab rather than genuinely consulting citizens.

Observers say the move risks undermining democratic participation and masks attempts to consolidate authority under ZANU PF.

Chiefs from Matabeleland North and South reportedly reached a unanimous position endorsing the Bill during a meeting in Bulawayo.

Chief Mtshane Khumalo stated that the two provinces “fully support the proposed amendments.”
In Mashonaland West, Chief Ngezi also backed the Bill, citing “stability” as a justification, while urging chiefs to mobilize grassroots participation.

“Your voice and influence are key in ensuring that people appreciate the importance of stability, unity and continuity,” said Mary Mliswa-Chikoka.

Critics argue that framing the amendments as a path to “stability and continuity” is a thinly veiled effort to extend political control. In the Midlands, Owen Ncube openly described the Bill as enhancing the role of traditional leaders while extending the terms of the President, Parliament, and local authorities, warning chiefs to “be very vigilant of enemies of progress who are bent on undermining the country’s progress through taking aim at the bill.”

Reverend Simbarashe Randazha reinforced ZANU PF’s position, saying: “We have come together as affiliates of the revolutionary party to express our support towards the bill… We are tired of people seeking the indulgence of the courts every time there are elections thereby hindering development. We want to see our country developing.”

Observers caution that the high-profile endorsements from chiefs may pressure ordinary citizens into compliance rather than genuine participation, raising concerns about manipulation of the consultation process ahead of public hearings set to begin on 30 March 2026.

Many fear that the Bill’s framing as a development tool masks its potential to consolidate power and diminish democratic accountability, particularly when traditional authority is leveraged to enforce political agendas.

Related