Common Law with Mike Murenzvi
“If they are opposed to abortion, they should be for preventing unintended pregnancies.” – Louise Slaughter
After a two-week break, Parliament resumed this past week. Debate continued with significant changes made to the motion moved by Sen. Bertha Chinyanga and Sen. Annah Rungani to expand safe, legal abortion access in the Senate.
In fulfilment of his debate speech, Sen. Kucaca Phulu gave notice of his proposed amendments to the motion, and that’s where the week began.
[See also: Column | Zimbabwe’s Abortion Law Debate: Between Public Health, Rights and Religion Part 3
Zimbabwe’s Abortion Law Debate: Between Public Health, Rights and Religion – Part 2
Zimbabwe’s Abortion Law Debate: Between Public Health, Rights and Religion
COLUMN | After landmark ruling, a major update is coming to Zimbabwe’s Abortion Law]
Continued debate
Debate Day 7 – 10 June 2025
Sen. Kucaca Phulu (Male) (CCC) gave notice of amendment of motion and allowed the House to acquaint itself with the amendment before debating. The effect of the amendment is to speak directly to the existing Termination of Pregnancy Act (TOPA) by either amending the Act or replacing it with a new one.
Original prayer text:
“NOW therefore, calls upon the Ministry of Health and Child Care to:
- enact legislation that provides for appropriate safeguards and allows or legalises the termination of pregnancy during the first trimester of pregnancy in cases of unwanted pregnancy; and
- ensure that access to abortion services is available nationwide.”
Amendment text:
“NOW therefore, calls upon the Ministry of Health and Child Care to:
- amend the Termination of Pregnancy Act [Cap. 15:10] enacted in 1978 to align it with the Constitution of Zimbabwe and to ensure that it is consistent with all other relevant laws
- to ensure that the procedures and facilities to enable victims of unlawful intercourse to access the right to terminate a pregnancy expeditiously and in a victim-friendly manner.
- to ensure that all persons entitled to terminate pregnancies in terms of the Act have easy access to these services without unnecessary delays or unduly arduous procedures.
- alternatively, to repeal the Termination of Pregnancy Act [Cap. 15:10] enacted in 1978; and consider bringing a new Bill which is fully aligned to the Constitution of Zimbabwe (2013)”
Debate Day 6 – 11 June 2025
Sen. Kucaca Phulu (M) (CCC) advocated for his amendments. He rose “not simply to speak but in order to plead for the countless women and young girls whose cries echo in the silence of our outdated laws.” While reiterating his support for the original motion, he noted that his proposed amendments were to home in on existing legislation and how it should be changed to meet the needs of today and address its shortcomings.
He zeroed in on the facts that the existing TOPA was enacted before independence, at a different time and has now reached the stage where it must speak to current circumstances and address things like marital rape as a specific element of concern. He rounded off his motivation argument by linking it to the Constitution by advocating for a rights-based approach that focuses on healthcare and dignity. In closing he said, “This outdated law is not just outdated in my submission, it is actively harmful. It traps women in cycles of violence and despair. It forces medical professionals into impossible ethical binds. It fosters a system where justice is miscarried as women and girls are denied access to termination of pregnancies that have been cruelly forced upon them.”
Sen. Nonhlanhla Mlotshwa (F) (CCC) took a second bite at the cherry by bringing up the issue of unnecessary bureaucracy that currently exists when an order of termination of pregnancy is sought, even in the most obvious of circumstances. She reiterated that this bureaucracy has led many women to illegal abortions and the TOPA must be amended or replaced.
Sen. Angeline Tongogara (F) (ZANU-PF) added further support for the motion, looking at the matter holistically outside the lenses of culture, tradition, and religion. Family dynamics have changed significantly from the 1970s when the TOPA was enacted. She called on health centres to have a one-stop shop approach to victims of sexual abuse. She called on the Ministry of Justice to craft the necessary amendments to the TOPA.
Adoption of motion
Following the submissions by Sen. Tongogara, the originator of the motion, Sen Chinyanga, called for its adoption by the Senate. This was over the objections of Sen. Sem Chapdudza (M) (CCC) who wanted more time to digest the amendments and debate them. These objections were overruled by the Temporary President of the Senate, Sen. Alice Dube.
The exact motion adopted by the Senate reads as follows:
NOTING with grave concern the alarming rate of unsafe and illegal abortions occurring across Zimbabwe, often putting the lives of women and young girls at risk;
RECOGNISING that the criminalisation of abortion has not deterred the practice but has instead driven this practice underground resulting in the unnecessary loss of life;
ACKNOWLEDGING that access to safe, legal abortion services is a fundamental reproductive right to young girls and women;
NOW, THEREFORE, calls upon the Ministry of Health and Child Care to:
- Amend the Termination of Pregnancy Act [Chapter 15:10] enacted in 1978 to align it with the Constitution of Zimbabwe and to ensure that it is consistent with all other relevant laws;
- To ensure that the procedures and facilities to enable victims of unlawful intercourse access the right to terminate a pregnancy expeditiously and in a victim-friendly manner;
- To ensure that all persons entitled to terminate pregnancies in terms of the Act have easy access to these services without unnecessary delays unduly arduous procedures; and
- Alternatively, to repeal the Termination of Pregnancy Act [Chapter 15:10] enacted in 1978, and consider bringing a new Bill which is fully aligned to the Constitution of Zimbabwe (2013).
Flipped script
During the bulk of the debate, it looked very much like the motion was going to fail. The Senator Chiefs and religiously focused senators had the upper hand in the discourse with their dissent towards the motion.
However, most votes in Parliament are by acclamation, a simple cry of aye or no. Out of the 58 voting senators present, the motion carried. The concessions provided by the amended motion assuaged the concerns of the dissenting camp.
Lost opportunity
By calling upon the Ministry of Health and Child Care to craft and bring an amendment Bill to Parliament, the Senators wasted an opportunity to directly craft the legislation that they are calling for.
Our Parliamentarians have decidedly left the role of crafting legislation to the Executive. This often leaves vulnerable groups at the mercy of slow bureaucracy that has no feelings towards victims and no urgency to act on crucial matters.
Given the instigating factor of the High Court judgment declaring section 2(1) of the TOPA unconstitutional, it would have been more prudent for the senators, Chinyanga, Rungani, and Phulu, to bring in a Private Member’s Bill that addresses all aspects of the motion. There is still room to do that and they should definitely consider it.
_______________________
Mike Murenzvi writes in his personal capacity and his views are not associated with any organisation he is, or may be, affiliated with.
