GENERAL
CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 3) UNDER LEGAL SCRUTINY
On 17th February 2026, six liberation war veterans filed a court application challenging the proposed Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3). They argued that President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s participation in the process raised constitutional concerns because the proposed changes could extend his time in office. They also argued that the amendments, including replacing direct presidential elections with election by Parliament, required constitutional safeguards and a referendum.
On 17th June 2026, the Court struck out the veterans’ application, finding that it did not meet the requirements for the Constitutional Court to exercise its jurisdiction directly. The Court did not decide the substantive constitutional arguments. The applicants indicated that they would pursue the matter through the High Court.
On 22nd September 2026, the Court heard case CCZ 273/26, in which the veterans sought permission to challenge CAB3 directly before the Constitutional Court. They argued that removing citizens’ direct vote for the President affected constitutional rights and required a referendum. The government opposed direct access, arguing that the case should begin in the High Court.
Association
NEW PVO REGULATIONS EXPAND OVERSIGHT AND CREATE POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO FORMATION
On 5th June 2026, Zimbabwe’s Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare gazetted the Private Voluntary Organisations (Board and General) Regulations, 2026 (Statutory Instrument 97 of 2026) under section 28 of the Private Voluntary Organisations Act [Chapter 17:05]. The Regulations establish a framework for risk-based supervision and protection against terrorist financing abuse.
The implementation of the PVO Act has produced differing outcomes for civil society organisations, with some receiving registration approval, others awaiting decisions, and others facing rejection.
These developments raise concerns for civil society regarding registration procedures, regulatory oversight and the potential administrative burden placed on organisations. Uncertainty surrounding registration decisions and the grounds for denial may affect organisations’ ability to operate, access funding and deliver programmes. The implications for freedom of association will depend on how the regulations are implemented in practice, including whether registration and oversight processes are transparent, proportionate and consistent with constitutional protections.
Peaceful Assembly
ACTIVIST ACQUITTED AFTER MORE THAN SEVEN MONTHS IN DETENTION
Godfrey Chidhau Karembera, popularly known as “Madzibaba veShanduko,” was acquitted and released on 3rd June 2026 after spending more than seven months in pre-trial detention. He was arrested on 20th October 2025 over allegations that he distributed political flyers encouraging people to attend an anti-government protest planned for 17th October 2025.
Karembera’s lawyer and family alleged that he was abducted and assaulted before being taken to Harare Central Police Station. His bail applications were reportedly unsuccessful, resulting in prolonged detention while awaiting trial. On 3rd June 2026, a Harare magistrates’ court acquitted him after the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to require him to enter a defence. Two other activists, Jim Kunaka and Jestere Malcom Masarira, were also acquitted.
CSOs criticised the case as an example of the criminal justice system being used against government critics and called on Zimbabwean authorities to respect freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, personal liberty and fair-trial rights.
GOVERNMENT CLAMPS DOWN ON ANTI-CAB3 PROTESTS
On 31st July 2026, Zimbabweans were called upon to participate in protests and a nationwide stay-away against Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), under the slogan “No to 2030.” The campaign opposed amendments that critics argued would extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure to 2030 and replace direct presidential elections with election by Parliament.
Ahead of the planned protests, government ministers, accompanied by military and police officials, warned citizens against participating in protests and urged businesses to operate normally. Ministers Marian Chombo and Owen Ncube accused activists of promoting disruption, while police announced nationwide deployments to maintain law and order.
The protests received support from the opposition party ZAPU, which argued that the constitutional amendments required a referendum under Section 328 of the Constitution and undermined citizens’ political rights. National Constitutional Assembly leader Professor Lovemore Madhuku also endorsed the planned peaceful demonstrations, calling on citizens to oppose CAB3.
However, widespread street protests did not materialise. Reports described largely quiet streets and a heightened police presence. The government’s response raised concerns among critics about restrictions on freedom of assembly, political participation and civic space in Zimbabwe.
HRD DETAINED FOR CALLING FOR PROTESTS
On 10th July 2026, Zimbabwean human rights defender Bhekimpilo Mbedzi was arrested and detained after posting a video on Facebook urging the public to participate in the protest planned for 31st July against Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (discussed in incident above). In the video, he allegedly held a placard reading “NO TO 2030” and encouraged participation in the protest without notifying the relevant authorities. He was charged with incitement to conduct an unlawful gathering under Section 187 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, read with Sections 7(1)(a) and 7(5) of the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act.
On 3rd August 2026, the High Court of Zimbabwe, sitting in Masvingo, granted Mbedzi bail after overturning the Beitbridge Magistrates’ Court’s earlier refusal. Justice Christopher Dube-Banda found that the lower court had misdirected itself and that the prosecution’s concerns could be addressed through bail conditions. These included US$200 bail, surrender of his passport, regular police reporting, residence at a specified address, and non-interference with witnesses or investigations.
Mbedzi’s release was delayed by difficulties complying with the passport-surrender condition. On 13th August, Mbedzi was released from prison. The bail ruling did not resolve the criminal charges.