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
