Tendai Ruben Mbofana
This question is not merely a cynical observation of contemporary politics.
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
Instead, it is a harrowing indictment of a nation where the foundational pillars of democracy are being systematically dismantled through the weaponization of poverty.
The recent public hearings on the Constitutional Amendment (No. 3) Bill, or CAB3, have laid bare a disturbing reality where the destiny of millions is being bartered for a single meal of fried chicken and chips.
When the supreme law of the land is subjected to a process so clearly staged and choreographed, the very soul of the republic is at stake.
The scene at the limited venues allocated for these hearings was nothing short of a political theater of the absurd.
Rather than a genuine democratic exercise where citizens engage in robust debate over the merits of proposed legal shifts, the sessions were dominated by bussed-in crowds.
These individuals were not there to offer independent thought or nuanced critique.
They were participants in a scripted performance, arriving with coached slogans that favored a sweeping suite of amendments.
These changes include the extension of presidential, parliamentary, and local authority terms from five to seven years.
Furthermore, the Bill seeks to abolish direct popular elections for the President, replacing them with a selection process involving a joint sitting of Parliament.
Finally, it proposes the transfer of voter registration responsibilities from the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission back to the Registrar General’s office.
The optics were clear and the intent was undeniable.
This was an attempt to manufacture a facade of popular consent for a move that centralizes power and erodes the hard-won democratic safeguards established in the 2013 Constitution.
The tragedy of this scenario lies in the profound vulnerability of the participants.
Zimbabwe is a nation grappling with immense socio-economic challenges, where a significant portion of the population lives in a state of perpetual precarity.
In such an environment, food is not just sustenance—it is a tool of political leverage.
When a political establishment utilizes its resources to provide “incentives” like chicken and chips to impoverished citizens in exchange for their vocal support, it is not engaging in mobilization.
It is engaging in a form of predatory exploitation.
Most of those who flooded the hearing venues were likely semi-literate and lacked a comprehensive understanding of what CAB3 actually entails.
They may not grasp the long-term implications of removing term limits or the dangers of unchecked executive authority, but they certainly understand the immediate reality of hunger.
This dynamic creates a dangerous disconnect between the gravity of constitutional law and the motivations of the electorate.
A constitution is meant to be a permanent social contract, a shield against tyranny, and a roadmap for future generations.
It should not be treated as a flexible document that can be reconfigured whenever the ruling elite finds it inconvenient.
By making the “future” of the country dependent on those who can be easily manipulated through their basic needs, the state is effectively disenfranchising the informed and the independent.
The process becomes a mockery of civic duty.
Genuine stakeholders, including legal experts, civil society members, and concerned citizens who attempted to voice opposition, found themselves silenced.
Reports of intimidation and physical manhandling of those who dared to question the Bill, such as human rights lawyer Doug Coltart, reveal the violent underbelly of this “consultative” process.
The implications of CAB3 are profound and terrifying.
If passed, it represents a significant regression in Zimbabwe’s democratic journey.
The 2013 Constitution was the result of years of struggle and a rare moment of national consensus.
It sought to move the country away from a culture of personality-driven politics and toward a system of institutional accountability.
Extending term limits and removing critical rights is a direct assault on those principles.
It signals a return to a “big man” political culture where the law is a tool for the ruler rather than a protection for the ruled.
When such monumental changes are pushed through using crowds who were bought with a fast-food meal, the legitimacy of the entire constitutional order is called into question.
How can a nation have a future when its most important decisions are made in such a hollow manner?
A healthy democracy requires an informed citizenry capable of weighing the consequences of policy and law.
It requires a space where dissent is not only tolerated but protected.
What we witnessed during the CAB3 hearings was the exact opposite—a manufactured consensus achieved through the erasure of genuine public voice.
The use of bussed-in supporters creates a false narrative that the people are clamoring for these changes, while in reality, the people are simply clamoring for a way to survive the day.
The international community and domestic observers must see these hearings for what they truly are.
This is not a failure of the Zimbabwean people, but a failure of leadership.
It is a sign of a political class that has grown so disconnected from the true aspirations of the populace that it feels the need to choreograph “support.”
The “chicken and chips” strategy is a symptom of a deeper rot, where the state prioritizes the survival of the incumbent over the health of the nation.
It reflects a belief that the citizenry is a commodity to be bought, sold, and used to provide a thin veneer of legality to an otherwise illegitimate power grab.
Ultimately, the destiny of Zimbabwe cannot be decided by those who are coerced or incentivized into silence or support.
The future must belong to those who understand that a constitution is more valuable than a piece of chicken.
It must belong to those who are willing to stand up for the principles of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law, even in the face of intimidation.
If we allow the supreme law of the land to be bartered away for a meal, we are not just losing a battle over an amendment.
We are losing the very right to call ourselves a free and democratic people.
The tragedy of the CAB3 hearings is a wake-up call for all who believe in a Zimbabwe where justice is not a luxury for the few, but a right for all.
The cost of apathy is far higher than the price of a meal, and the price of this constitutional sacrilege will be paid by generations yet to come.
- 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