President Emmerson Mnangagwa, in a moment draped in irony—if not contradiction—on Monday appeared on Zimbabwe’s state broadcaster, ZBC, and used a media question from the floor to repeat his claim that he will step down at the end of his second term in 2028.
His office had organised a presser with handpicked editors in an obviously choreographed PR stunt that, clearly, was meant to deflate mounting noise mostly from internal critics regarding the systematic campaign to keep him in office beyond his second and last term.
The president also took advantage of the briefing to placate the senior newsroom managers, most of who were sold a political bubble, expressing his eagerness to ensure media viability and sustainability.
It is true that media violations and persecutions under Mnangagwa are less than during his predecessor’s (Robert Mugabe’s) reign, but the whole briefing was a mess!
The editors let the president off the hook by allowing him to dismiss their questions with stretched humour, but then, more was expected from them as they failed to ask hard questions.
As Mnangagwa spoke, a news scroller at the bottom of the screen flashed details of a proposed constitutional amendment to extend his presidency.
The juxtaposition was almost too perfect, underscoring the deep contradictions and political machinations at play regarding Agenda 2030.
While Mnangagwa insists he is a “constitutionalist” committed to democratic principles, the actions of his loyalists and the structures of power he oversees tell a different story.
Mnangagwa’s declaration that he will not seek a third term comes amid a growing push by his supporters, including cabinet ministers like Daniel Garwe, Ziyambi Ziyambi, and Jenfan Muswere, to amend the constitution and remove presidential term limits.
These figures, who have been vocal proponents of Mnangagwa’s Agenda 2030, have a blank cheque, though un-bankable, to ratchet on with the agenda.
Their persistence raises serious questions about Mnangagwa’s sincerity.
If he is truly committed to stepping down, why has he not publicly and unequivocally instructed his allies to abandon their campaign?
Why has he not used his authority as head of State and ruling party first secretary to ensure that no such bill goes to parliament?
Why did he preside over the Zanu PF conference last December in Bulawayo and allowed the extension of his term to pass as the first and most important resolution?
Mnangagwa wields significant control over Zimbabwe’s legislative process.
Every bill that comes before parliament passes through cabinet, which he chairs. And, as Zanu PF first secretary, he would have easily shot down the 2030 agenda, least because it seeks to benefit him personally.
It takes just a brief directive from him as party leader to silence the agenda, so the fact that he has not caused that to happen can only imply one thing: he is speaking with a forked tongue and is highly unlikely the constitutionalist that he professes to be.
If Mnangagwa is serious about upholding democratic principles, he must do more than make vague and ambivalent statements. He must take concrete action to ensure that the constitutional amendment is not pursued.
That’s because the buck starts and stops with him.
We are all too familiar with this ambivalence: “I want to go, but the people want me to stay.”
Information for Development Trust (IDT) is a non-profit organisation enhancing access to information on corporate and political governance transparency and accountability.
Born a dictator and cannot overnight be a democratic constitutionalist..