BULAWAYO – A Bulawayo-based activist, Mbuso Fuzwayo, who sought to challenge the proposed extension of President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s term of office to 2030 at the Constitutional Court (ConCourt), has found himself under intense scrutiny amid contradictory statements about his true intentions.
Fuzwayo, the coordinator of Ibhetshu LikaZulu, initiated legal proceedings aimed at compelling Zanu PF and the government to abandon plans to amend the constitution, which would pave the way for Mnangagwa’s term to be extended by an additional two years. This move followed Zanu PF’s resolution at its annual conference in Mutare last month, where the government was instructed to expedite the implementation of the ruling party’s 2024 conference resolution on the term extension.
However, the circumstances surrounding Fuzwayo’s ConCourt application have become increasingly murky. Fuzwayo initially claimed that he had been misled by Sengezo Tshabangu, the self-imposed secretary general of the Citizen Coalition for Change (CCC), to file the application. Tshabangu has been accused of collaborating with Zanu PF on the term extension bid, raising suspicions that Fuzwayo’s case may be a decoy designed to clear any legal obstacles to the extension.
Adding to the confusion, Fuzwayo directed The Standard to his lawyer, Nqobani Sithole, for comment. Sithole, however, contradicted Fuzwayo’s initial claims, stating that Fuzwayo had approached him seeking legal counsel, rather than the other way around. This discrepancy has deepened the mystery surrounding the court application and raised questions about Fuzwayo’s true motivations.
Constitutional lawyers have expressed concerns that Fuzwayo’s court challenge may be part of a broader political strategy rather than a genuine legal concern. Constitutional law expert Musa Kika argued that the case was premature and deliberately designed to fail, while still producing outcomes that benefit the ruling party.
“It is very clear that this is a political challenge because it is a premature decision,” Kika said. “You cannot challenge something that has not been started officially. The court is simply going to dismiss it. The draft is badly written, using speculation, media stories, and nothing official. Even if I were a judge, I would dismiss it.”
Kika believes that Zanu PF welcomes this case because it allows them to pre-empt any potential political challenges. “The court will dismiss, but in the process of dismissing, it will make pronouncements that become binding,” he explained. “This is counterintelligence. The other important reason why people are unhappy is because we all know that Agenda 2030 is a political issue that must be fought politically. Using the law in the government, it works for Zanu PF to legitimise unlawful and unconstitutional moves. And we know that the current government is very good at giving legal cover to their illegalities.”
Blessing Vava, director of the Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, acknowledged that every citizen has the right to approach the courts, but suggested that the application appears politically reckless. “It is everyone’s right to approach the court if there is an issue they feel needs to be addressed,” Vava said. “You can’t stop anyone from doing that. But I don’t think the court case has merit. There has not been any legal or parliamentary process regarding the 2030 agenda. It is just a resolution passed by Zanu-PF at their conference, and it is their right to make resolutions.”
Vava also warned that the court application may jeopardise any other credible legal challenge against the 2030 agenda. “It’s not in good faith,” he said. “It only affects us when the process starts happening in Parliament, when there are motions or legal processes or a Presidential decree on that matter, that’s when we can say, let’s react.”
Adding another layer of complexity to the situation, Fuzwayo is now campaigning to become a Member of Parliament, eyeing the Nkulumane by-election set for December 20. The seat became vacant following the death of the sitting MP, Desire Moyo, in October.
Prior to the controversy surrounding the ConCourt application, Fuzwayo had received campaign material that capitalised on the anti-2030 sentiment. “The proposed 2030 presidential term extension is a betrayal of the people’s struggles for democracy and accountability,” reads one of the campaign posters plastered around Nkulumane suburb. “It seeks to entrench corruption…we must reject it.”
Analyst Reason Wafawarova argued that Fuzwayo’s ConCourt application sought to rewrite the law to legalise an illegality. “At face value, it looks like civic courage,” Wafawarova said. “In reality, it bears all the hallmarks of a decoy suit — a legal case engineered to fail so that tyranny can claim a judicial blessing.”
He added that Fuzwayo is represented by Nqobani Sithole, “the same lawyer who has fronted several controversial cases on behalf of Sengezo Tshabangu, the government-sponsored opposition spoiler.” Wafawarova concludes that “the goal is simple: to create a Constitutional Court precedent legitimising Mnangagwa’s continued stay in power.”
The conflicting statements, the premature nature of the legal challenge, and Fuzwayo’s political ambitions have all contributed to a growing sense of unease and suspicion surrounding the ConCourt application. Whether it is a genuine attempt to challenge the term extension or a calculated political manoeuvre remains to be seen, but the controversy has undoubtedly cast a shadow over the proceedings.
Follow @MyZimbabweNews
