Ruwa legislator Thomas Muwodzeri has voiced strong opposition to key provisions contained in the proposed Constitutional Amendment Bill warning that some of the changes could weaken democratic safeguards and concentrate excessive power in the Executive.
Contributing to parliamentary debate on the Bill, Muwodzeri took aim at proposed amendments affecting the role of the defence forces and the appointment of judges, arguing that the current constitutional framework already provides adequate checks and balances.
Addressing Clause 16 of the Bill, which seeks to amend constitutional provisions relating to the defence forces, Muwodzeri said the proposed changes should be rejected in their entirety.
He argued that the Constitution already clearly defines the military’s mandate and safeguards the principle of civilian control over the armed forces.
“The existing constitutional framework already delegates the proper role of the defence forces. The principle of civilian supremacy over the military is already embedded in our constitutional order,” Muwodzeri told Parliament.
The legislator said concerns over alleged military interference in civilian affairs should be addressed through existing accountability mechanisms rather than by altering constitutional provisions governing the defence forces.
According to Muwodzeri, Parliament, the courts and other oversight institutions already possess the powers necessary to investigate and address any misconduct by members of the security services.
He further warned that removing or weakening the military’s constitutional responsibility to defend the Constitution could create unintended risks.
“A Government that disempowers its own military from the constitutional obligation to defend the Constitution is a Government that has something to fear from a constitutionally faithful military,” he said.
Muwodzeri also raised objections to Clause 15, which proposes that judges be appointed by the President in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
He argued that the amendment could undermine judicial independence by giving the Executive greater influence over the appointment process.
“The word ‘consultation’ in constitutional law carries a specific and well-understood meaning. It does not mean concurrence, it does not mean approval,” he said.
“It means the President must hear the views of the JSC, but he is entirely free to disregard them.”
The MP said the proposed arrangement created only the appearance of institutional oversight while failing to provide a meaningful check on presidential authority.
He warned that the amendment could weaken public confidence in the independence of the judiciary and erode important constitutional safeguards designed to separate powers among branches of government.
Muwodzeri urged fellow legislators to carefully examine the long-term implications of the proposed constitutional amendments before adopting them.
He argued that constitutional reforms should strengthen democratic institutions and accountability mechanisms rather than diminish them.
The remarks come as Parliament continues debating the Constitutional Amendment Bill, which has generated intense public and political discussion over its potential impact on governance, judicial independence and constitutional democracy in Zimbabwe.
