Why no one trusts Mnangagwa’s words

0Shares

PRESIDENT Emmerson Mnangagwa reiterated at a hastily arranged meeting with editors that he will not be seeking term extension to 2030.

He said on several occasions that he was a constitutionalist, adding that as one of the people involved in the constitution-making process in 2013, he would not dare violate the supreme law of the land which he helped to craft.

This is not the first time he has said he will not seek a term extension.

Those allegedly pursuing the agenda, he said, were like barking dogs.

He is “unpushable”, he said, interestingly at a time when his loyalists are saying the exact opposite of what he is telling the world.

Ironically, while the national broadcaster, ZBC, was airing Mnangagwa’s meeting with media heads, it was simultaneously running a ticker of Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services minister Jenfan Muswere saying constitutional amendments to extend ED’s rule to 2030 are ready.

Who is ED trying to hoodwink with his rhetoric?

Muswere was quoted in the Press saying there was nothing unethical in amending the Constitution:

“There is nothing unconstitutional about amending the Constitution. The role of Parliament is multifaceted, encompassing oversight, representation and legislative responsibilities, which include amending the Constitution,” he said.

“Notably, our current Constitution is not the first we have had. We began with the Lancaster House Constitution and in 1999, a new Constitution was proposed, which went to a referendum where the majority voted against it.

“In 2013, under the inclusive government, we adopted our present Constitution. Parliament’s duty is to enact laws, including delegating legislative authority to other legally and properly constituted institutions. Therefore, it’s untrue to claim that a Constitution cannot be amended; after all, the Constitution is made for the people.”

This was a veiled statement implying that they have no problem in amending the Constitution to extend Mnangagwa stay in power to 2030.

His five-year two terms end in 2028 and even if the ruling party wants to forge ahead with the amendments, the supreme law of the land stipulates that Mnangagwa cannot be a beneficiary of the changes.

What is more baffling is that despite Mnangagwa maintaining several times that he will not seek to extend his tenure, he has not publicly chastised those insisting on him staying put.

Mnangagwa should have roasted those bringing up the subject for discussion within party channels, on Zanu PF social media handles or in the mainstream media.

Zanu PF secretary for war veterans Douglas Mahiya recently threatened war veterans opposing Mnangagwa’s extended stay in office, saying they could be “stopped from speaking indefinitely”.

His comments appeared to be directed at a group of war veterans led by Blessed Runesu Geza, who have vehemently and unequivocally opposed Mnangagwa’s rule, accusing him of nepotism, corruption and economic mismanagement.

Since Mnangagwa explicitly made it clear last year that he is opposed to a presidential term extension, by now, that subject should have been water under the bridge.

He should show sincerity by publicly telling those pushing the idea that they must cease and desist. Newsday