By Lindie Dube
Tensions flared in Parliament today as debate over the controversial Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) intensified, with opposition legislators accusing parliamentary authorities of stifling dissenting voices.
Marondera Central legislator Caston Matewu claimed he was removed from Parliament after speaking for only two minutes during debate on the bill. Matewu said parliamentary rules entitled him to a longer speaking time and vowed to remain opposed to CAB3 regardless of any consequences.
He alleged that his speaking time was cut short because of his strong opposition to the proposed constitutional amendments.
Meanwhile, Fadzayi Mahere criticized what she described as a culture of political favors and vote-buying in politics, arguing that public debate was increasingly being replaced by loyalty driven by financial incentives.
The debate has also been overshadowed by allegations that some politicians and public figures received vehicles and cash gifts ahead of the parliamentary vote on CAB3. Among those named in social media discussions is CCC legislator S. Mureyanyi, who has been linked to reports of receiving a vehicle and cash. Similar claims have also been made involving social commentator Rutendo Matinyarare.
On the other side of the debate, opposition legislator Ellen Shiriyedenga was praised by fellow critics of the bill after delivering a speech opposing the proposed amendments. Critics argue that CAB3 primarily benefits individuals in positions of power rather than the broader public.
Opponents of the bill are now calling for a national referendum, arguing that Zimbabweans should be given an opportunity to directly decide on any constitutional changes.
The Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 continues to generate intense political debate, with supporters arguing it will improve governance, while critics warn it could undermine constitutional principles and democratic accountability.
@changeradiozw MPs Clash Over CAB3 as Bribery Allegations Stir Debate Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) continues to spark heated debate in Parliament and across the country. During parliamentary proceedings, Marondera Central legislator Caston Matewu claimed he was removed from the chamber after speaking for only two minutes while opposing the bill. He argued that parliamentary procedures entitled him to more speaking time and maintained his opposition to the proposed amendments. Fadzayi Mahere also raised concerns about what she described as a growing culture of political patronage and vote-buying, warning that public debate risks being overshadowed by financial incentives. The controversy has been further fueled by allegations circulating on social media that some politicians and public figures received vehicles and cash ahead of the parliamentary vote. Individuals mentioned in these discussions have been linked to the claims, although the allegations remain contested and have not been independently verified. Opposition legislator Ellen Shiriyedenga was praised by critics of the bill after delivering a speech opposing the proposed constitutional changes. Opponents argue that CAB3 primarily benefits those in positions of power and are calling for a national referendum to allow Zimbabweans to directly decide on the proposed amendments. Supporters of CAB3, however, argue that the bill will strengthen governance and improve the country’s constitutional framework. What do you think? Should constitutional changes be decided through Parliament alone or put to a national referendum? #Zimbabwe #CAB3 #Parliament #Politics #ConstitutionalAmendment
