1.     Right now, Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 is still              with the portfolio committees, which are reviewing the            written submissions and comments presented during              the public hearings.

2.     From there, the Parliamentary Committee will compile            their findings and recommendations for presentation to          the House of Assembly and the Senate.

Second Reading.

3.    Once Ziyambi is satisfied that the reports are done, he              will present the Bill to the House of Assembly for a                    second time after its first introduction in March 2026.

Here, he will outline the purpose of the Bill and the principles upon which it is founded. This presentation will essentially open the Bill up for debate on its principles, but not on its specific clauses.

 

4.     MPs will then debate the rationale and principles, and provide their comments.

This is where parliamentarians should debate issues such as who initiated the Bill, whether it was initiated properly, and where the rationale that the amendment will bring peace to the country must be interrogated. If our parliamentarians are diligent, this is where they should produce scientific evidence to challenge or support assertions.

Thereafter, the Parliamentary Committee will present its report, findings, and recommendations arising from the hearings and written submissions.

5.     From there, a further debate on the Bill takes place.

6.     The Bill is then read again, and MPs may request amendments. This may result in the Bill being referred back to the Parliamentary                           Committee for further consideration and amendment.

Committee Stage.

7.     At this point, the entire House forms a committee that gives detailed consideration to the Bill, clause by clause.

It is at this stage that members must examine issues such as whether the indirect selection of the President is constitutional and whether it is indeed the most common system in the world.

The purpose of this process is for the committee to make amendments to the Bill that are more acceptable and that better align its principles with the wishes of the people.

Reporting Back.

8.      The Chairperson of the Committee must then report back to the House of Assembly on the changes that have been made. The                                recommended changes will be interrogated and either accepted or rejected by majority vote.

Vote By Lower House.

This is often referred to as the Third Reading, even though it is not really a reading but rather the stage at which the Bill is put to a vote in the Assembly/Lower House. No debate takes place at this stage unless a member has notified the Speaker in advance of their intention to make a submission.

Senate Vote.

The Bill is then sent to the Senate, where it may be accepted or rejected, with or without amendments.

If the Senate accepts the Bill, it is returned to the lower house from where it came. If amendments are proposed, the Bill goes back to the lower house and may (but not necessarily) follow a process similar to the committee stage outlined above.

The Bill may spend up to ninety days being deliberated in the Senate, after which it returns to the House of Assembly, where it originated. If there are differences between the Senate and the Lower House, the Lower House—which has greater influence—may accept or reject the issues raised by the Senate before submitting the Bill for Presidential assent.

Submission To The President.

Once the Bill has been passed by Parliament and signed by the Clerk of Parliament, the President may sign it into law, reject it, call for a referendum, or refer it to the Constitutional Court to determine its constitutionality.

However, the process does not necessarily end there, as the law can still be challenged before the Constitutional Court.
Already, the war veterans and Lovemore Maduku have challenged the constitutionality of the Bill in the Constitutional Court. Judgment has been reserved and is likely to be delivered at the end of this process if it is not handed down earlier.

The current perception is that the Constitutional Court has withheld judgment on the war veterans’ challenge in order to avoid overstepping the boundaries of the separation of powers by interfering with the parliamentary process.

However, once the parliamentary process is complete, the Court is likely to release its judgment to determine whether the Bill is constitutional or not.

There are, however, many who believe that the Constitutional Court is in dereliction of its duties, considering that it is the court of first resort on all constitutional matters and that, with the Bill already in existence, it should have made a determination on its constitutionality accordingly.

In the event that the law, once passed and assented to by the President, survives the courts, the next test will be whether the people of Zimbabwe, the international community, and, more importantly, the army, feel that the Constitution was upheld or mutilated.

That conclusion will determine whether the people and the army uphold law and order or upend it—through civil disobedience, revolution or coup—against what they believe to be an unacceptable mutilation of the Constitution.

Written by Rutendo Matinyarare, Chairman of ZASM.