CAB3 Debate: CCC MP says amendment to Defence Forces clause has ‘hidden agenda’

THE opposition has vowed to reject the Constitution Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3) in its entirety, with legislators raising fresh concerns over proposed changes to the constitutional role of Zimbabwe’s Defence Forces. Contributing to the debate on the controversial Bill in the National Assembly on Thursday, CCC Ruwa MP Thomas Muwodzeri singled out Clause 16 as the most dangerous provision in the proposed law. Clause 16 seeks to amend Section 212 of the Constitution, which outlines the functions of the Defence Forces. “Clause 16. Mr Speaker, Sir, I come now to what I regard as the most constitutionally dangerous provision in the entire Bill. Clause 16 proposes to amend Section 212 of the Constitution governing the functions of the Defence Forces,” Muwodzeri told Parliament. “Section 212 of the current Constitution mandates that the Defence Forces of Zimbabwe exist to defend Zimbabwe, protect its integrity, territory and sovereignty, and uphold its Constitution. That fidelity obligation is not incidental. It is fundamental.” The opposition legislator argued that removing the military’s constitutional obligation to uphold the Constitution would have far-reaching implications. “A government that disempowers its own military from the constitutional obligation to defend the Constitution is a government that has something to fear from a constitutionally faithful military. And a government that fears a constitutionally faithful military is a government that intends to act unconstitutionally. This House will reject Clause 16 in its totality,” he said. Muwodzeri dismissed arguments by supporters of the amendment that the changes are intended to reduce military influence in civilian governance. “I put it to you and to this House: this amendment does not reduce military influence in governance. What should alarm every member, regardless of political affiliation, is that it strips the Defence Forces of their constitutional mandate to uphold the Constitution itself. “Consider what that means in practice. The obligation to uphold the Constitution is the legal basis upon which the Defence Forces may, in extreme cases, resist unconstitutional conduct, including unconstitutional conduct by the Executive. It anchors the military to a constitutional, rather than purely political, framework. “Remove that obligation and you have a Defence Force whose loyalty runs not to the Constitution of Zimbabwe, but to whoever issues the command. “This is dangerous. This is not military theory. This is constitutional architecture. A Defence Force no longer constitutionally mandated to uphold the Constitution becomes, by necessary implication, a force accountable only to its command hierarchy. Command hierarchies are appointed by and answerable to the President. The consequence is the transformation of a constitutionally anchored military into an instrument of executive will.” According to Muwodzeri, submissions opposing the clause during public consultations correctly warned that the amendment would weaken the military’s commitment to safeguarding the country’s supreme law. He further argued that the rationale advanced by the Bill’s proponents was misplaced, insisting that the Constitution already provides adequate safeguards to ensure civilian control of the military. “The principle of civilian supremacy over the military is already embedded in our constitutional order,” he said. Debate on Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 continues Friday amid growing tensions surrounding the proposed legislation and heightened security concerns among legislators. The post CAB3 Debate: CCC MP says amendment to Defence Forces clause has ‘hidden agenda’ appeared first on NewZimbabwe.com .