By Lawrence Tafadzwa Chabata| Amending a nation’s constitution to extend the tenure of a president is not only a dangerous precedent but also a betrayal of the democratic principles upon which the nation stands. The notion that President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s perceived success is a valid justification for amending the constitution to allow him to serve beyond the two term limit is deeply flawed and must be challenged.2. Firstly, the constitution is the supreme law of the land, designed to provide a framework for governance that ensures stability, fairness, and the protection of citizens’ rights. It should not be subject to manipulation for the benefit of any individual, regardless of their achievements or popularity. If we argue that a “good job” by a president warrants an extension of their tenure, we open the door to the dangerous possibility of indefinite rule, which undermines the very essence of democracy. 3. Moreover, this line of reasoning raises a critical question: if we are willing to amend the constitution to keep a successful president in power, what happens when a president is failing? Should we then amend the constitution to remove them prematurely or prevent them from serving at all? Such a perspective risks turning the constitution into a tool of convenience, bent and reshaped at will to suit current circumstances rather than standing as a solid foundation for governance. This not only erodes public trust in the legal framework but also destabilises the political system by making it subject to the whims of those in power.4. Vision 2030, the national aspiration for Zimbabwe to become an upper middle income country by 2030, is not a personal project of any single individual, including President Mnangagwa. It is a collective goal, a national vision that transcends individual leadership. As such, the success of Vision 2030 should not hinge on one person remaining in power but rather on the commitment of the nation’s leadership whoever they may be to uphold and pursue this shared goal. Any competent and dedicated leader who assumes office after 2028 should be fully capable of carrying forward the mandate of Vision 2030. To suggest otherwise is to imply that the vision is fragile and dependent on one individual, which undermines the collective spirit and ambition that the vision represents.5. The proposal to amend the constitution in this manner is not just misguided, it is ridiculous and fundamentally undemocratic. Constitutions are designed to endure, to outlast the leaders who govern under them, and to protect the nation from the dangers of power consolidation. It is both silly and reckless to tamper with this foundational document for the sake of one person’s extended rule. This approach contradicts the very purpose of term limits, which is to prevent the emergence of autocracy, ensure regular leadership renewal, and promote the healthy functioning of democracy.6. In conclusion, the idea of amending the constitution to allow President Mnangagwa to serve beyond the two-term limit, no matter how “good” his performance is perceived to be, is an affront to democratic principles. The constitution is a safeguard for all Zimbabweans, not a tool for personal gain. Vision 2030 belongs to the people, not to any one individual, and it is the collective responsibility of the nation’s leaders to ensure its realization. Therefore, any attempt to amend the constitution in this way should be resisted as a grave misstep and an act of folly that threatens the very fabric of Zimbabwe’s democracy