Tuesday, 7 April 2026

The Church and Constitutional Amendment Bill Number 3: Leveraging Faith, Politics and Patronage.

By Takura Zhangazha*

The Easter holidays always make for interesting interactions between religion and politics in Zimbabwe.   Most times they are just more of political leaders looking for photo opportunities with religious congregations that they deem have large numbers. 

Or alternatively religious leaders who want to demonstrate either deliberately or by default how their church has close proximity to state power.  And by dint of the same, political protection in whatever businesses, properties they already own or endeavour to control (schools, small-medium scale mines, hospitals, residential stands, transport companies and agricultural land).  All with the permissions, sometimes at the highest levels, of a serving/sitting government.

This years Easter gatherings were not so different expect for the current controversial development  that the serving government intends to extend its term in office to 2030.  And in order to do so has tabled before the public and Parliament a constitutional amendment bill no 3 (CAB3).  A development that has raised public debate on not only its necessity but also its democratic value proposition. 

Especially given the general historical political culture since 2000 that major changes to our national constitution are done via a public referendum for the people’s consent or dissent. 

So this 2026 Easter holiday was not only about religion and culture. It had a definitive political hue to it. 

A number of African Apostolic or Pentecostal church religious leaders with large followings and associated large economic pursuits made clear their support of CAB3.  In fact the Zion Christian Church (ZCC- Mutendi) did so in the presence of president Mnangagwa.  

While other congregations had their leaders assert the same position at also equally large or important  gatherings of their own.

This was barring the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops conference (ZCBC) that had issued a statement that expressed concerns over the need for a referendum for the people to decide on the matter. While one of its also politically powerful congregants vice president Chiwenga attended an Easter service where he was silent on the matter.   

Other orthodox churches have not been as pronounced on the matter and are probably more cautious in their approach.

All of this is interesting because of at least three political factors.

The first being that CAB3 is ambiguous in its popular political import with the people of Zimbabwe.  It has taken on a highly partisan dimension with the ruling party supporters who gathered for hearings last week being clear on their hardline support of it. 

While in the process ensuring the limited input of those opposed to it, particularly in Harare where prominent opposition leaders were harassed and a human rights lawyer assaulted.  

The contentious issue here is the political choreography of it. From the limited Parliamentary four day period for public consultations to allegations of the bussing in of supporters to the same meetings.  Add to this the apparent resistance to it from factions of war veterans then one can understand why the church is being courted by the ruling party to take their side on it. 

The second significant issue is that  of the primary reason why the church is being courted in the first place.  Its not necessarily because they have much of an option because they have to remember the fact of their existence while guaranteed by the same constitution that is being amended is also subject to  specific state-church patronage systems.  

These systems touch on both the economic as well as the moral/social fabric of Zimbabwean society as they relate to not only the law but general government taxation policies for religious institutions and offshoot businesses that I have cited above.  In this what then obtains is an elitist symbiosis between church and ruling party leaders to create what can only become a ‘ruling establishment until 2030.  One that will continually owe each other ‘favours’.

The third and final element is that because of the paucity of the opposition political parties in Zimbabwe, alternative narratives to this immediate CAB3 are limited in their reach.  Therefore it appears simpler to go with the flow until such a time the opposition movements to this become once again more structured and organic in national politics and issues related thereto.   In this, even where religious leaders were to oppose CAB3, they would quite literally become the opposition itself given the fact that they are well organized and in most cases have a significant national moral reach on at least a weekly basis. 

And in becoming as such the main opposition, they would be in violation of the constitution that retains Zimbabwe as an officially secular state with a liberal bill of rights that recognizes the right to freedom of worship of all religions. 

In conclusion however there is a growing tendency for religious leaders to want to play the ‘numbers game’ where it comes to our national politics.  Because there will least likely be a national referendum, religious leaders that are in support of CAB3 are dangling numbers in order to help the current government control the narrative.  They will get their ‘favours’ in return.  But its an exercise that remains patently elitist, undemocratic and self-centered/absorbed by the ruling establishment. Both in intent and result.   

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment