
Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu PF party is accused of eroding democratic principles to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure until 2030. Critics, including the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission, argue that the party is prioritizing the President's ambitions over the country's constitution and the will of the people. The debate surrounding Constitutional Amendment No 3 Bill CAB3 highlights a shift where power is reconfiguring rules for self-preservation, blurring the lines between governance and the interests of those in control. The article emphasizes that democracy is not merely a procedural ritual but a covenant rooted in public participation and the sovereign will of the people. Calls for a referendum on CAB3 are seen as democratic necessities, with opposition figures like Job Sikhala and Douglas Mwonzora stressing the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest and upholding foundational legal and democratic truths. The erosion of trust, where citizens feel excluded from decisions, risks fracturing the social contract. Historical warnings from activists like Judith Todd suggest that such actions by those in power can leave lasting scars. The article concludes that democracy requires leaders to recognize that authority is borrowed and legitimacy flows from the people, not from office, and that CAB3 tests the principle that the people come first.
Free daily or weekly digest of the most important stories from across 10 countries. No spam, unsubscribe any time.
This summary was AI-generated from a story originally published by NewsDay Zimbabwe.

The Karo Platinum Project is progressing as planned, with the group actively clearing the open-pit area and advancing crucial infrastructure works. These efforts are aimed at mitigating execution and operational risks, thereby ensuring the project remains on schedule for its anticipated production start in 2027.
Must ReadThe 2026 conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran has revealed that hosting American military bases in Gulf nations like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait no longer guarantees national security. Instead, these bases have made host countries prime targets for retaliatory strikes, challenging the long-held belief that a US military presence deters regional threats. During the conflict, Iran targeted infrastructure within Gulf states housing US troops, including radar installations, personnel sites, data centers, energy facilities, and desalination plants, rather than directly attacking the US homeland. This created an asymmetric security dilemma where Gulf populations bore the consequences of US policies. The conflict also led to significant economic disruption, with multinational corporations withdrawing from the Middle East, projected GDP losses of $120 billion to $194 billion for Gulf states, and a 27% drop in international tourist arrivals. The redeployment of US THAAD and Patriot anti-missile systems from Gulf states to Israel further exposed the conditional nature of US alliance commitments, leaving Gulf airspace vulnerable. The article suggests that Israel's asymmetric influence on US Middle East policy prioritizes Israeli security interests, often at the expense of Gulf states. A comparison of security strategies shows that Kuwait, with full alignment to the US, suffered extensive damage, while the UAE, balancing it