Please follow and like us:

THE PRESIDENCY: TOO MUCH POWER IN ONE OFFICE?

By Princess Eugene Majuru

At the centre of Zimbabwe’s constitutional structure stands the Presidency—an office designed to embody the authority, unity, and executive power of the state. The 2013 Constitution attempts to balance this authority with democratic principles and institutional checks. Yet a closer reading reveals a persistent concern: the Presidency remains one of the most powerful offices in the constitutional order, raising questions about concentration of power and the effectiveness of oversight.

1. The Constitutional Position of the President

The scope of presidential authority begins with Section 88(1), which provides:

“The President is Head of State and Government and Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Forces.”

This is a significant concentration of roles in a single office:

Head of State (symbolic authority)

Head of Government (executive authority)

Commander-in-Chief (military authority)

What this means:

The President is not just a political leader, but the central node of state power.

2. Executive Authority and Control

Section 89(1) further defines the President’s responsibilities:

“The President must uphold, defend, obey and respect this Constitution as the supreme law of the nation…”

While this frames the President as a constitutional guardian, it also places executive authority within that same office.

More importantly, Section 110(1) outlines extensive powers, including:

“to direct the national executive;

to appoint and dismiss Ministers and other public officers;

to conduct foreign affairs;

to conclude and execute international treaties…”

Key implication:

The President has significant influence over:

government composition

policy direction

international engagement

3. Appointment Powers: Control Over Institutions

One of the most consequential areas of presidential power lies in appointments.

Under Section 110 and related provisions, the President appoints:

Ministers and Cabinet members

senior government officials

key institutional leadership

Why this matters:

Appointments shape institutions. When concentrated in one office, this power can:

influence institutional independence

affect oversight effectiveness

shape the broader governance environment

4. Legislative Influence

Although Parliament is constitutionally independent, the President plays a significant role in the legislative process.

Section 131(1) provides:

“An Act of Parliament must be assented to and signed by the President in order to become law.”

This means:

The President has final approval over legislation

Laws cannot take effect without presidential assent

This creates a point where executive authority intersects directly with legislative power.

5. Security Authority

The President’s role as Commander-in-Chief extends into the security sector.

Section 213(1) provides:

“The President as Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Forces has power—

(a) to determine the operational use of the Defence Forces…”

Implication:

Control over military deployment lies with the President

Security authority is centralised

While necessary for national command, this further consolidates power within the executive.

6. The Intended Checks on Presidential Power

The Constitution does not leave presidential authority completely unchecked.

For example:

Section 90(1) provides:

“The President must exercise his or her powers, perform his or her duties and conduct himself or herself in a manner that is consistent with this Constitution…”

Section 97 allows for removal from office:

“The Senate and the National Assembly… may resolve that the question whether or not the President… should be removed from office…”

On paper:

The President is accountable to the Constitution

Parliament has oversight and removal powers

7. The Structural Tension: Power vs Oversight

Despite these safeguards, a structural imbalance remains.

Why?

The President controls key appointments

Parliament’s oversight depends on political composition

Removal processes are complex and politically demanding

This creates a situation where:

oversight exists, but is difficult to exercise effectively

8. The Core Constitutional Question

The issue is not whether the Presidency should be powerful—it must be, to govern effectively.

The real question is:

Has the Constitution concentrated too many forms of power—executive, military, and institutional influence—into a single office?

9. Comparative Insight

Many modern constitutions attempt to separate:

Head of State and Head of Government

Executive authority and legislative influence

Zimbabwe’s model combines these roles, which increases efficiency—but also centralises authority.

A Strong Presidency in a Balancing Act

Zimbabwe’s Constitution creates a Presidency that is:

central to governance

essential to state functioning

but structurally dominant

Sections 88, 89, 90, 110, 131, and 213 collectively position the President as the most powerful constitutional actor.

While checks exist, they are often indirect, complex, or dependent on political conditions.

The result is a constitutional design where:

power is clearly located, but not always equally balanced

The challenge moving forward is not to weaken the Presidency entirely, but to ensure that its strength is matched by equally strong and practical systems of accountability.

Until then, the question remains open:

Is the Presidency a necessary centre of power—or an office that concentrates too much of it?

Please follow and like us:

Comments

comments