Former South African President Thabo Mbeki has delivered one of the clearest regional warnings yet against attempts by African leaders to manipulate constitutional limits to remain in power, in remarks that now resonate sharply with Zimbabwe’s deepening debate around Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB 3) and growing concerns over President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s long-term political ambitions.

Speaking at an event commemorating the legacy of NEPAD, Mbeki recalled how former Zambian President Frederick Chiluba once sought to secure a controversial third term in office, despite constitutional limits. According to Mbeki, regional leaders within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) quietly moved to stop the attempt in defence of constitutionalism and democratic order.

Mbeki said SADC leaders at the time deliberately searched for a figure with enough moral authority and political credibility to confront Chiluba directly. They eventually settled on former Botswana President Festus Mogae, whom Mbeki described as respected, principled and untainted. Mogae was then tasked with delivering a firm message that the region would not tolerate efforts to undermine constitutional term limits for personal political survival.

Though Mbeki never mentioned Zimbabwe directly, the parallels were impossible to ignore.

His reflections come at a moment when Zimbabwe is gripped by mounting controversy over CAB 3, which critics argue is part of a broader political strategy aimed at restructuring constitutional safeguards and creating conditions that could ultimately extend Mnangagwa’s hold on power beyond the spirit — and potentially the framework — of the current Constitution.

What made Mbeki’s remarks particularly significant was not simply the historical anecdote itself, but the deeper political challenge embedded within it.

Far from merely lamenting the decline of regional leadership, Mbeki appeared to be reminding Southern African leaders of a precedent: that there was a time when the region collectively acted to prevent constitutional overreach before it escalated into full democratic erosion.

In many ways, the former South African leader seemed to be posing an uncomfortable question to today’s SADC leadership: if regional leaders once found the courage to confront Chiluba over a third-term agenda, why should Zimbabwe’s constitutional controversy be treated differently?

Rather than declaring that no one can stop Mnangagwa, Mbeki’s remarks can be interpreted as a subtle but deliberate challenge to the region itself — a call for Southern Africa’s leaders to rediscover the political will, institutional courage and moral authority that once defined the bloc’s defence of constitutionalism.

The significance of the Chiluba example lies precisely in the fact that intervention happened before constitutional manipulation became irreversible. By revisiting that moment publicly, Mbeki was effectively reminding the region that silence is also a political choice.

As the debate over CAB 3 intensifies, his remarks may increasingly be viewed not as a nostalgic reflection on Africa’s past, but as a direct test of whether today’s regional leaders are prepared to defend democratic principles when they are under pressure from one of their own.