Tendai Ruben Mbofana
The political landscape in Zimbabwe has often been a theater of the absurd, but the latest narrative emerging from the corridors of power in Harare borders on the insulting.
If you value my social justice advocacy and writing, please consider a financial contribution to keep it going. Contact me on WhatsApp: +263 715 667 700 or Email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com
We are being asked to believe that the sanctity of our Constitution, specifically the hard-won presidential term limits, should be sacrificed on the altar of “lost time.”
The argument being peddled by ZANU-PF and government apologists is as flimsy as it is audacious: that because the COVID-19 pandemic and various cyclones “stole” two years of development, President Emmerson Mnangagwa is entitled to a two-year extension to his term, effectively moving the goalposts from 2028 to 2030.
This logic is not only a brazen assault on democratic principles but a clear admission of a deep-seated insecurity within the ruling elite.
If the party were truly confident in its record and its prospects for the 2028 general elections, why the frantic obsession with a constitutional amendment now?
The pretext of the COVID-19 pandemic is particularly galling.
While it is true that the pandemic brought the world to a standstill, Zimbabwe was hardly the only nation affected.
In fact, compared to global giants, Zimbabwe’s health and economic disruptions, while significant, were not unique in their severity.
Consider countries like India, the United States, France, Brazil, and Mexico—nations that were ravaged by the virus, recording staggering death tolls and economic paralysis.
Yet, in not one of these nations did a leader suggest that the pandemic warranted a unilateral extension of their tenure.
In the United States, the 2020 presidential election proceeded exactly on schedule on November 3, despite the country being the global epicenter of the pandemic at the time.
Brazil held its high-stakes general elections in October 2022, even as it grappled with the world’s fourth-highest death toll and a fractured economy.
France successfully conducted its presidential and parliamentary elections in April and June 2022, while India, the world’s largest democracy, did not skip a beat, holding critical state assembly elections throughout 2020 and 2021 before its massive general election in 2024.
They understood a fundamental tenet of governance that seems to elude ZANU-PF: that leadership is about navigating crises within the framework of the law, not using crises to rewrite the law for personal benefit.
These countries proceeded with their electoral cycles as scheduled, respecting the mandate of the people rather than manufacturing excuses to cling to power.
The same applies to the cynical use of natural disasters as a justification for term extensions.
To hear government mouthpieces speak, one would think cyclones had leveled every inch of Zimbabwean infrastructure.
In reality, while devastating for the communities involved, these disasters affected specific regions.
Compare this to countries like Mozambique, Japan, or the Philippines, which face the relentless fury of nature on a near-annual basis.
These nations do not stop the clock of democracy when the winds howl.
Mozambique held its general elections on 15 October 2019, a mere few months after the catastrophic impact of Cyclones Idai and Kenneth which displaced hundreds of thousands and devastated the nation’s infrastructure.
Similarly, the Philippines proceeded with its high-stakes presidential election on 9 May 2022, despite the massive destruction left by Typhoon Rai only months earlier in December 2021.
In both instances, the natural disasters were never used as a pretext to postpone the will of the people or “give back” lost time to a leader.
Japan provides a stinging rebuke to the Zimbabwean narrative; Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae, who took office only in October 2025, did not ask for “lost time” to deal with the archipelago’s perpetual seismic and climatic challenges.
Instead, she called for a snap election held just last week on February 8, 2026, which she won with a landslide victory.
Her mandate was renewed through the ballot box, not through the manipulation of the constitution.
This is how a functional democracy operates.
What makes these other countries different from Zimbabwe?
The answer lies in the strength of their functional governance systems and institutions.
In a healthy state, national development is an institutional process, not a personal one.
If a bridge is being built, its completion should not depend on whether the man who laid the first stone is still in the State House.
Development programs are meant to be national visions, supported by a civil service and a governing framework that ensures continuity.
By claiming that President Mnangagwa needs “two more years” to finish his programs, ZANU-PF is inadvertently making a devastating admission: that the state has no capacity beyond the individual.
If the realization of “Vision 2030” is entirely contingent on one man’s physical presence in office, then we are looking at the textbook definition of a failed state.
A functional country does not collapse, and its projects do not rot, simply because a leader’s term has ended.
The logical fallacy here is glaring.
If ZANU-PF were confident that it would win the 2028 elections, there would be no need for this constitutional gymnastics.
If they believed the “Second Republic” was as popular as their propaganda suggests, they would simply run in 2028 and win a fresh mandate for whatever candidate they field, ensuring the continuity of their programs.
The push for an extension suggests a terrifying realization within the party: that they cannot guarantee a win in 2028, or perhaps they fear that a transition—even an internal one—would expose the fragility of their grip on power.
It suggests an assumption that any successor, or even the prospect of an opposition victory which they clearly dread, would lead to the immediate ditching of ZANU-PF’s programs.
But let us be honest: I do not believe for a second that this is about “development programs” at all.
This is about the retention of power for a ruling elite that has turned the looting of national resources and the refinement of patronage into a high art form.
The “two lost years” narrative is merely a smokescreen for “two more years of looting.”
While the elite talk of development, the lived reality of the Zimbabwean citizen tells a vastly different story.
If we look at the data—and as a social justice advocate, I believe the data is the only honest witness we have—the so-called “development” under the Second Republic has been a catastrophic failure for the poor.
Since 2017, the economic trajectory for the average Zimbabwean has been downward.
Extreme poverty, defined as living on less than $2.15 a day, has surged from 34.2% in 2017 to a staggering 42% today in 2026.
General poverty, those living on $3.65 a day, has climbed from 61.6% to 64.5%.
Even the upper middle-income poverty, living on less than $6.85 a day, rose from 83% in 2017 to today’s 85%?
These are not just numbers; they represent millions of families who cannot afford basic nutrition, healthcare, or education.
If this is the “development” that the President needs two more years to “finish,” then the people of Zimbabwe should be terrified.
At this current trajectory, we will not be a middle-income country by 2030; we will be a nation of paupers.
What “development” are they talking about when the local currency has repeatedly collapsed, wiping out the savings of pensioners and the wages of hard-working civil servants?
What “development” exists in a country where hospitals lack basic painkillers and schools are shells of their former selves?
The only things that have developed are the private bank accounts of the politically connected and the sheer audacity of their lies.
To claim that more time is needed to fix a mess that has only worsened under their watch is a slap in the face of every Zimbabwean.
The proposal to extend the presidential term is a confession of failure and a declaration of intent to continue the plunder.
It signals that the ruling party views the Constitution not as a sacred social contract, but as a minor inconvenience to be brushed aside whenever the appetite for power grows too large.
If the country truly had strong institutions, we would be discussing policy continuity and institutional reform, not the lifespan of a single politician’s career.
ZANU-PF’s “two lost years” excuse is a shameful attempt to gaslight a nation.
Zimbabweans do not need a leader who asks for more time; they need a leadership that respects the time it was given and the laws that govern it.
Anything else is just a slow-motion coup against the future of the country.
- Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. To directly receive his articles please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08
COMMENTS
My biggest concern here is “Where are the opposition parties”. You mention ZanuPF are afraid of losing the election. Losing to who? I truly believe our so called opposition are merely ZanuPF lackeys . Aluta Continua.