Political Actors Dialogue (Polad) member and oppositon National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) leader Lovemore Madhuku has been critical of constitutional amendments which seek to grant President Emmerson Mnangagwa powers to unilaterally appoint judges and chief justice, among others. A constitutional law expert, Madhuku (LM) last week spoke to NewsDay (ND) senior reporter Cliff Chiduku on Polad, recalls of MPs, the proposed Patriotic Bill and the state of affairs in opposition politics, among other issues. Read on… ND: You have been a Polad member since its inception. So many things were promised when it was launched. Looking back, what have you achieved? LM: Polad’s biggest achievement is its mere existence as a platform where political leaders and parties from different backgrounds and persuasions are able to exchange ideas on how best to move the country forward. Political tolerance has already been born, it is now growing. Its irreversible fruits will be felt with time. To be sure, because of Polad, the political environment under which the 2023 general elections will be held will be the best since independence in 1980. ND: Why has progress been limited in terms of reforms? Is it lack of leadership or political will? LM: I think by limited progress, you are referring to the absence of immediate electoral and political reforms that we can point to as Polad outcomes. In that respect, I would agree that there is indeed limited progress. However, in the economic terrain, some Polad proposals have been implemented such as on currency reforms. In the political and electoral arena, we have set a solid framework for dialogue. We have many proposals that are nearing fruition, particularly our setting the stage for changes to the Electoral Act ahead of 2023. ND: The platform has been criticised in various forums for being a talkshow and praise choir for Mnangagwa’s administration. This criticism may be extreme, but what in your opinion could be done by Polad to improve its work and offset the negative perceptions in the public? LM: That criticism is not only extreme, but is also totally without foundation. Polad has been lacking a vigorous communication and information desk. Polad has to improve its information dissemination approach. Once the public is given access to the intense debates in Polad, the perceptions will disappear. ND: You have publicly criticised Constitutional Amendment No 2 Bill. What are the specific things that you want changed and how? LM: My criticism against Constitutional Amendment Bill (No 2) is from two fronts. First, as NCA, we believe the whole current Constitution was not people-driven and that Zimbabweans were cheated by the inclusive government to vote “yes” in the 2013 referendum. From that front, we see Constitutional Amendment Bill (No 2) as the continuation of the imposition of a Constitution on the people by ruling politicians. Secondly, I have spoken against the Bill on behalf of Polad. In Polad, we recommended that the Bill be withdrawn to give room to Polad and other stakeholders to f