Nomuzikayise Ngwenya is a legal practitioner and the Group Strategy Lead at the International Centre for Political Campaigns. Her work spans political campaign strategy, political communications and war-room operations across Africa.
THERE is a quiet arrogance in declaring a Bill unconstitutional while refusing to confront the one judgment that settles the question once and for all.
The Zimbabwe Heads of Christian Denominations (ZHOCD), the Zimbabwe Council of Churches (ZCC) and the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops Conference (ZCBC) have mounted a serious challenge to the Constitution of Zimbabwe (Amendment No. 3) Bill, 2026.
Their strongest objection rests on section 328(7) of the Constitution. They argue that clauses 4 and 9—which extend the presidential and parliamentary terms—violate that section and therefore require a national referendum.
They present this view with the confidence of revealed truth. Yet it is mistaken. It collapses, brick by brick, under the binding authority of the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe delivered five years ago—an authority the church groupings neither cite, nor distinguish, nor appear to have read.
