Ruffson

@NomalangaG1 @stendai_gondwe @VaMabhena263 @bashi92178 Is a term open ended or governed by period of time. Give us a definition of a term.

TERM LENGTH and TERM LIMIT are not one and the same. A longer term does not automatically mean more terms, because duration and limitation are separate constitutional matters. @stendai_gondwe @VaMabhena263 @bashi92178

@daddyhope @hbanhire While innocent citizens spend months in prison for crimes they didn't commit, some MPs are busy trying to extend their terms in office. Parliament should be focused on protecting citizens' rights, not politicians' careers. We need laws that protect us from politicians.

I have just been informed by Paida Surombe, the lawyer representing Madzibaba VeShanduko (real name Godfrey Karembera), that he has been found not guilty and discharged after spending months in prison for a crime he did not commit. This outcome raises serious questions about the cost of wrongful political incarceration, the impact on the lives of those accused, and the importance of ensuring that justice is not only done but is seen to be done.

@KMutisi Smugglers avoid these payments; mining royalties,export taxes,corporate taxes,licensing fees so the state misses out on revenue that could fund roads, hospitals, schools, and public services. Then a few vapositori get cars in the name of philanthropism, shame on you xaa!! .

For me, the most troubling thing is that we have grown men & women in Zimbabwe who think gold is “looted” somewhere & “smuggled”… Even if u choose to smuggle it, u have to MINE IT FIRST or u have to buy it from those who mined. It’s just common sense.

@NewsHawksLive @KMutisi @LynneStactia So if the courts eventually rule that a referendum is constitutionally required, will AG Mabiza resign for gross legal incompetence or will citizens just be expected to pretend her very clear interpretation was political fiction all along?

Zimbabwean Attorney-General Virginia Mabiza has further dismissed intensifying calls for a referendum on the current contentious constitutional amendments, insisting there is no legal basis for an "unconstitutional demand" completely devoid of legal basis and logic. Mabhiza has declared that there is no legal basis for demanding a referendum before passing the Constitution Amendment Bill N0. 3 Bill, 2026, in parliament, crossing swords with constitutional lawyers, opposition parties and civil society organisations. Speaking to journalists yesterday as the 90-day parliamentary consultations and public debate period draws to a close, Mabiza said section 328(6) of the constitution adopted in 2013 is unambiguous: a referendum is only required for amendments touching Chapter 4 (Declaration of Rights), Chapter 16 (Agricultural Land), or section 328 itself. “I said it before and I want to insist – section 328(6) is deliberate and precise in that it reserves the ultimate democratic veto – the national referendum – for only three narrowly defined categories of amendment,” she said "The constitutional basis for proceeding without a referendum is neither an option nor a loophole, section 328(6) is very clear on this aspect. “Any insistence on a referendum given the current scenario is devoid of any meaningful legal basis and logic. It is an unconstitutional demand.” According to Mabiza's legal interpretation, the constitution restricts the use of a referendum to very narrow parameters. She argues Section 328(6) is precise: The supreme law deliberately reserves the ultimate democratic veto of a national referendum for only three strict, narrowly defined categories. A referendum is only legally required, she says, if a bill seeks to amend Chapter 4 (Declaration of Rights), Chapter 16 (Agricultural Land), or Section 328 itself (which governs the amendment process). Because CAB3 does not touch these three protected segments, it only requires a two-thirds majority in parliament to pass, rather than public approval via a referendum. The Attorney-General's pronouncements have drawn sharp criticism from a broad coalition of civil society organisations, human rights groups, opposition parties, and activists. Activists argue that because the 2013 constitution was built on a nationwide referendum of over a million citizens, altering core pillars like presidential term lengths without universal public consent bypasses the true "shareholders" of the country. Critics also point out that as a direct presidential appointee, the Attorney-General faces a distinct conflict of interest when fast-tracking extensions to the executive's time in power.

@KMutisi @ThinkTa54628295 It suddenly becomes ‘a small economy’ only when it’s time to pay civil servants, yet it can afford a presidential motorcade more extravagant than those of much larger economies. Be serious bro

@ThinkTa54628295 Zimbabwe is a small developing nation…. You expect them to be paid the same as in a developed trillion dollar economy?

The Vice President is right on the INJUSTICE… but that’s a war Zimbabwe & other small economies can’t win. Human beings look for money, & the developed countries have it. I would adopt the Cuba approach: Produce LOTS OF DOCTORS & export excess.

@bester1966 @LynneStactia We come together in prayer for Zim, lifting up Gen Chiwenga. May God protect him, strengthen him, and guide him with wisdom and integrity. May he be led by truth, justice, and humility in every decision, and may his actions contribute to peace, stability, and freedom for all Zim

@LynneStactia Genroll vari paMoyo wemunhu we Zimbabwe anoda nyika yake . Everyone is praying for this man. He will lead Zim to freedom. Prayers are live 24/7 for Zim and this man. I am part of one group . God is not a man. Zimbabwe is free ..

Genroll Chete Chete #GCC 🔥

I have been made to understand that some Dzakutsaku, Patrick Chinamasa, @ChinamasaPA, who was never a member of Zanu, or Zanla, during the liberation struggle, has bizarrely declared that "how a President of the country was to be elected, whether by people or by parliament, was never an issue on the table during our liberation history." I am also made to understand that he dared "anyone to retrieve from NDP, ANC, ZAPU, ZANU, Zipra or Zanla pre-independence" literature any excerpts to the contrary Anyway, here you are Mr Dzakutsaku. I am fortunate that my father used to take me to Zanu night meetings in Mkoba in Gweru as a five year-old & I developed a keen interest in our liberation history & as soon as I learnt how to read English, I began to interact with literature on the liberation struggle which was available in the house. I have kept some of the literature. For the purposes of the discussion started by @ChinamasaPA, I am referring him to pages 11 & 22-23 of the November 27, 1973 "Mwenje No2 Zanu Political Programme." The "Zanu Political Programme" booklet makes it clear that in a free Zimbabwe, "EVERY CITIZEN of Zimbabwe shall have the right to exercise A FREE VOTE to elect members of the National Assembly and ALL OTHER STATE INSTITUTIONS." Surely, the office of the President is one of the most important parts of what the document here refers to as "ALL OTHER STATE INSTITUTIONS." In the spirit of the document, the occupant of that office should be elected by "Every citizen of Zimbabwe." The same document pledges that " the supreme legislative authority shall rest in the "MASSES OF THE PEOPLE" and that "usurpation of the POWERS OF THE PEOPLE will not be permitted." The Zanu policy document was even clear on subjecting "major policy issues" to "referenda." The document reads, "ALL CITIZENS of Zimbabwe shall participate in decision-making and policy formation through the Party, REFERENDA on major policy issues and effective use of the people's power in ALL institutions of the state." The document even mentions that terms of office were supposed to be 5 years for every office holder and that these office holders were not supposed to be imposed on the people by "Party bosses." The same document also proposed the abolishment of the colonial parliamentary system and all its discriminatory laws. So those arguing for taking us back to the colonial parliamentary election system are antithetical to the very transformation of the system that Zanu proposed in the policy programme. The document reads, " the present National Assembly will be abolished and all its discriminatory laws declared null and void" So the system of reserved seats for whites had to be abolished. The indirect election of MPs had to be abolished and the election of the Head of State by Parliament had to be abolished. Thats the transformation that Zanu promised and that's the basis on which cadres were recruited to fight the liberation struggle. So Mr Dzakutsaku, @ChinamasaPA be instructed accordingly. It's unfortunate you weren't part of the liberation forces, you were fighting to preserve the colonial system with other counter-revolutionaries like Mzorewa so you have no idea why the war was fought. Anyway, I am attaching the quoted pages for your own reading.

Hello Crime Watch. Pliz hide ID. On Tuesday night, around 10pm, I went down paFlat pangu Castel Court just by Total Garage located along Samora Machel Avenue, Harare CBD. Pane food court so I wanted to buy food. While I was inside the food outlet, I was approached by ZRP officers who then force marched me into a police truck that was parked outside. I kept on asking what mhosva yangu was but ndai haraswa and they ended up physically assauIting me. I was thrown in one of the cells at Harare Central and I spent the whole night. I was only released on Wednesday at around 7pm after being made to sign an admission of guilt form for public drinking and made to pay a fine of US$60 but on the receipt they wrote 378 ZiG. The night I was arrested, I was not even drinking when they arrested me.. I'm so so hurt. Is this what Zimbabwe has become. I now hate the police zvekutodaro. @PoliceZimbabwe

@JonesMusara This is a deliberate attempt to provoke engagement and draw out the strongest possible merits of the case against CAB3. So pliz don’t fall for it.

The court application against CAB3 which is set to be heard by the ConCourt on 26 May 2026 is very likely to be dismissed on any or all of the 3 grounds below: 1. The application is based on conjecture at law. It challenges the Bill on the basis that the President is a direct beneficiary which is mere speculation because hapana chinotaridza kuti mukuru is a direct beneficiary. Zvehu direct beneficiary can only be challenged in court if or when mukuru accepts election as president by parliament. We are not even there yet. Even if we get there we dont even know if mukuru or someone else will be elected by Parliament. The law does not operate on the basis of conjecture. 2. Ripe and Ready Doctrine The Bill has not even gone through the stages where applicants can argue to have no other recourse except the Court. It would set a very bad precedence of judiciary interference in the legislative process if the judiciary can come in at any time to abort a law being made by Parliament. The case is prematurely before the court. Nyaya haisati yaibva kuti ihwikwe nedare. 3. cab3 changes term duration(term tenure or electoral cycle) not term limit hence no need for referendum as would be the case if the bill was changing chapter 4, chapter 16 and s328 provisions. 4. The application ignores the incontrovertible fact that the President was exercising his constitutional duty to chair the Cabinet meeting which approved the Bill. There is no law which requires the President to recuse himself from chairing a Cabinet meeting on the basis of imaginary conflict of interest. The law of recusal was recently enunciated in the Malaba case(Mupungu v Minister of Justice) 2021 and there is absolutely nothing that warranted the President to abandon his constitutional duty to chair and preside over Cabinet when Cabinet approved CAB3.

@BaShonaBaShona @adv_fulcrum You don’t have to worship alongside someone to recognize what they stand for. People show their beliefs through their actions, words, and the choices they make. Someone’s deeds are often a clearer indicator than any label they claim or deny.

@adv_fulcrum “Devil worshippers ” how do you know they worship devil do you worship together with them?

Yesterday afternoon I was sitting at home after church thinking, “Great, Zimbabwe gets to rest today; its troublemakers are at church worshipping God in the manner they deem best.” My children were attending a church camp and there I was believing they were having a good time with the Lord. I was at peace for once—a rarity. A few minutes later I found out Kuda Tagwirei— who has nothing to do with the children’s department in my church — was at their camp, addressing my kids, having been smuggled in by a compromised, devil worshipping, greedy for filthy lucre bottom feeding leadership which has lost all sense of common decency and shame. I hear he was the GUEST OF HONOUR, whatever nonsense that is. These guys have no qualms about donating the innocence of our children to an unprincipled politician who is happy to make the church his primary political constituency. (We now know that a few hours later he was addressing AFM Youths at their own gathering. All political posturing being enabled by churches) There is need for these churches to be dealt with politically. They are playing politics and must be content with a political response. On my part, whoever took the decision to expose my children to this impurity will face my punishment before the year ends. It’s deeply personal. This no longer has anything to do with worship. Bloody Illuminati.

@1Mhizha @matinyarare What is he dies today? Aaaah stop this nonsense and use your brain.

@matinyarare But are you aware that there a semi finished Projects that HE has to polish before he leaves the Office??. We've a #Vision2030 that he started so let him complete his vision

𝗠𝗡𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗔𝗚𝗪𝗔 𝗜𝗦 𝗦𝗢𝗪𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗦𝗘𝗘𝗗𝗦 𝗢𝗙 𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗢𝗪𝗡 𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗜𝗦𝗘. Bete, under normal circumstances I would agree with you. However, in this case, over the past few months, I have been warning that President Mnangagwa is creating his own demise by undertaking the 2030 constitutional amendment, to stay in power instead of passing the baton. You see, President Mnangagwa has enjoyed a lot of goodwill from the East, the West, and internal stakeholders. Foreigners believed that he would be a departure from Mugabe, allowing both blocs (West and East) to do good business in Zimbabwe, albeit with each trying to get a monopoly. Local business people believed that he would open up space for meritocracy based wealth creation, while his political supporters expected rewards and political elites believed that he would pass the baton to those who enabled him to remove Mugabe, when his time was up. This is why, despite the coup and the shootings of protesters in 2018, everyone looked aside to pave his way, anticipating mutually beneficial business. This culminated in local and foreign investment increasing, the opening up of credit lines, easier trade conditions—even under sanctions—and the eventual removal of sanctions. All these were the ultimate confirmation of internal and Western support for the Mnangagwa administration. However, while the West reached out to his administration for access to minerals, and locals sought economic opportunities with his administration and political allies sought rewards, he continued to grant government-sanctioned opportunities to the Chinese and a small circle of business elites around him at the exclusion of most. This culminated in him publicising his rejection of Trump’s propositions to access Zimbabwe’s minerals through a health package and it also saw him halting the export of raw minerals, which pushed lithium prices up dramatically. This would not entirely be a bad idea, if only his government were not violating human rights by closing down democratic space, weakening the opposition, and arbitrarily arresting those opposing his bid—all while using state institutions to enrich a few who now want to use their wealth to succeed him and keep power within his camp. This has resulted in the West losing its tools—civil society organisations and the opposition—to influence politics in the country, destroying the chances of someone else ascending to give more favourable terms to them. Meanwhile, internally, doors have been shut on businesspeople and political actors who supported the President, as a result only the inner circle is eating. Those who were meant to succeed him are now seeing the door close as he seeks to stay in power indefinitely. Consequently, by excluding others from the trough and then attempting to stay in power by suppressing dissent through human rights violations—confirmed by the Chapter 12 institution (Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission), whose leadership he appointed—President Mnangagwa has created a convergence of foreign and internal interests who now have a justified basis to remove him in a 2017 style internal regime change coup. He has made the same mistake Mugabe made by not sticking to the succession plan agreed upon and eating alone, but his is only ten times worse.

@TanakaaGumbo @RuEmbZimbabwe @CMukungunugwa @ZANUPF_Official @shumba_zim @Tinoten53374277 @snowballOfficia @chrissy10charu @DeptCommsZW @ZECzim @ZimEye Presidential term limits (extending time in office beyond what is allowed) 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. You are trying your level best, but i am sure you’re even ashamed of yourself.

Good Morning Rutendo Matinyarare l hope you had a glorious weekend. 👏🏻👏🏻 Let’s get down to business now. Firstly the Ongoing Constitutional Amendment Bill Number 3 of 2026 is legal in all aspects of the Zimbabwean Constitution and legally its possible. If you open the Constitution of Zimbabwe you will find yourself coming across Sections and Clauses which will answer your questions. The Constitutional Term Extension Amendment only needs one bill to amend it. Had it been the Bill of Rights and the Bill of Land, maybe we could be talking about a REFERENDUM and all those 4 bills you have been bluffing about. BUT this case is different, this amendment has only a maximum of 120 days to be passed into law. Mr Rutendo Sir here is the Section 328 – Amendment of the Constitution Section 328 sets out how the Constitution can be amended: 1.Parliament can amend the Constitution •A Bill to amend the Constitution must be passed by at least two-thirds of the National Assembly and Senate. 2.Some amendments require a referendum A national referendum is ONLY required if the amendment seeks to change specific key provisions, including: •The Declaration of Rights (Chapter 4) •Presidential term limits (extending time in office beyond what is allowed) •The independence and functions of key constitutional bodies 3.Other amendments do NOT require a referendum •Any constitutional change outside the protected provisions listed above can be done solely by Parliament, provided the two-thirds majority is achieved. 4.Timing safeguard on presidential term limits •If a change affects term limits, it does not apply to the current office holder—only to future presidents. Why a REFERENDUM is NOT Be Needed at ALL? In legal terms: •Section 328 clearly gives Parliament power to amend the Constitution without a referendum, as long as the amendment does not touch protected areas. •Therefore, if proposed reforms are procedural, administrative, or outside the protected clauses, they are legally valid through Parliament alone. •A referendum is not a blanket requirement—it is only triggered for specific sensitive provisions. Then here is the Bottom Line Mr Rutendo: 👉 No referendum is needed if: •The amendment does not affect entrenched clauses listed in Section 328 •And Parliament secures a two-thirds majority 👉 A referendum is only required when fundamental constitutional protections are being altered like the Bill of Rights and Bill of Land. ANYWAYS VANGA VAMUKAWO SEI KUDZIMBA KWAMURI IKOKO MUVAKWAZISEWO?? 2030 NDEYA EMMERSON CHETE CHETE ‼️ @matinyarare @nelsonchamisa @enkudheni @Varakashi4EDmsv @wicknellchivayo @TateMavetera @edmnangagwa @Savheya_Happie @zanupf_patriots

Hon Nomsa Chaimvura is making headlines for insulting a fellow MP in Parliament. She is a MP representing the Hurungwe constituency under the proportional representation system. She attended Chitenje Primary & Mwami Secondary School but she failed her O level.

@KMutisi @ndues_boy Inzara here nhy @KMutisi

No @ndues_boy, the problem with you is that you don’t know the Difference between A TERM LIMIT & Term length… the discussion you blindly took on is about term limits…. It was about a THIRD TERM…. There is NO THIRD TERM, hence no referendum needed. That post is FACTUAL boy… The current amendment is focused on Election Cycles, the Minister explained THOROUGHLY… do no be misled by politicians who don’t know what they are doing

Can you kindly tabulate the most important projects which this government is seized with especially the once which will fail if the President leave office in 2028? I really need to appreciate the catastrophe to be suffered if another ZANU PF member like Chiwenga/Mohadi lead the country and guarantee ED that he needs not worry as his projects will be completed? Let's assume by tomorrow ED wakes up dead ,is it the end of Zim or the said projects?

@KMutisi @ZctuZimbabwe Since you are very good at defending nonsense can explain this @BaShonaBaShona @JonesMusara

Same @ZctuZimbabwe: Pay more money to Civil Servants…. Do you guys know that govt needs the taxes to fix the things you also whine about????

Term length and term limits... For example pakumhanya... 100m is the length.. 100m is the limit.. Unomhanya 100...kana woda kuenda ku 200m... Oto mhanya imwe race.. Hauti uri PA 75 meters ototi ini ndakumhanya 200 pano nekuti ndine speed kwazvo... 2028 race yapera.. Tatenda

@KMutisi Not everyone is paid but you are definitely paid

So those supporting are paid, and those opposing are not paid?? That’s kak logic, start again

This is what happens when you read the Constitution upside down or rely sorely on the Oxford English dictionary to interpret the law. Constitutional interpretation is a scientific discipline and people spend years being trained in that. But in the case of the dispute at hand, there is no need to bring a dictionary. One needs to just read the clear definition of a term limit provision provided for in section 328(1) as follows “a term limit provision means a provision of this Constitution which limits the LENGTH OF TIME that a person [Mnangagwa] may hold or occupy a public office”. With regard to your illustration of two water bottles, when you increase the size (length) of one bottle, you are increasing the length of time that one occupies a public office and thats amending a term limit provision, according to section 328(1). Also, instead of bringing water containers to this discussion, you might need to bring case law. We have Constitutional Court Judgments which say the term of office is 5 years[Jealousy Mawarire v Robert Mugabe-2013] and Parliament cannot change the 5 year term limit without a national referendum [Marx Mupungu v Minister of Justice-2021] @BitiTendai @DCPlatform25 @freemanchari @cdfzim @NewsHawksLive

🔴Former Air Vice-Marshal Henry Muchena's response to Temba Mliswa.