By Talkmore F Mapfumo
Opposition efforts to halt the progress of Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) have suffered a setback after the Constitutional Court struck off two separate applications challenging the proposed constitutional changes.
The court ruled that both matters were not ripe for determination, meaning the legal challenges were brought prematurely while Parliament is still processing the Bill and no final constitutional outcome has yet been reached.
One of the applications was filed by former MP Prince Dubeko Sibanda, who sought to interdict Parliament from continuing with CAB3 on the grounds that the amendment process was unconstitutional.
A second application, filed on similar grounds, also sought to block parliamentary progress on the Bill.
In both cases, the Constitutional Court declined to hear the merits of the arguments and instead struck the matters off the roll, reinforcing its position that it cannot intervene in an ongoing legislative process before it reaches a decisive stage.
Legal expert Lovemore Madhuku, who has been involved in related constitutional litigation, said the ruling does not settle the substantive constitutional questions raised by the applicants.
He said the issues remain open and could be revisited once the Bill progresses further or is enacted in a form that triggers judicial review.
Madhuku indicated that legal teams may now consider pursuing the matter in the High Court, where they are likely to reframe the challenge to focus on procedural aspects that the courts may consider justiciable at an earlier stage.
The ruling effectively allows Parliament to continue processing CAB3 without immediate judicial restraint.
However, the Bill remains politically and legally contentious, with critics warning it could significantly reshape Zimbabwe’s constitutional framework, while government argues the reforms are part of broader governance improvements.