The president doesn’t need to be protected, Mr. Mliswa, but held accountable by citizens

Tendai Ruben Mbofana

In a recent public statement, Temba Mliswa, a former independent MP, argued that any leader in office deserves public support and protection.

To directly receive my articles please join my WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08

He maintained that because the president represents the entire nation, citizens should defend the head of state regardless of their political affiliations.

The former ZANU-PF provincial chairman claimed his non-partisan stance compels him to defend the head of state just as he would any future leader.

​

The argument wraps itself in the lofty language of civic duty and patriotic unity.

Yet, when we examine it closely, it turns the moral order of society upside down.

​

The presidency is not a fragile institution vulnerable to public critique.

It is the most formidable concentration of power, authority, and public resources within the nation, backed by the judiciary, security organs, and tax revenues.

It is not the president who needs shielding from the populace.

Rather, it is the citizens who require robust protection against potential overreach, inefficiency, or corruption of executive authority.

To suggest that ordinary citizens must shield a leader from criticism is a dangerous inversion of conscience.

​

When we elect a leader, we do not appoint a monarch.

We hire a public servant.

A servant must answer to the household, not the other way around.

The moment we begin to treat power as fragile, we lose our ability to hold it accountable.

Framing unconditional defense as patriotism blurs a crucial line, erasing the distinction between loyalty to the state and loyalty to temporary custodians of state power.

​

Mliswa argues that a leader transcends party lines once in office, but his reasoning rests on a subtle confusion.

He mistakes loyalty to the nation for loyalty to the person in office.

But a country is not its ruler.

A country is its people, its values, and its collective dignity.

Defending a sitting power without demanding performance or transparency is not civic maturity.

It is an abdication of citizenship.

​

True patriotism does not mean protecting the powerful from uncomfortable truths.

It means demanding that power serves the moral good of every citizen.

When citizens question authority, they are not committing treason.

They are fulfilling a solemn moral duty.

Silence in the face of failure is not peace.

It is compliance.

If a leader cannot be questioned, then authority becomes absolute, and absolute authority always damages human dignity.

​

We have seen this pattern before.

Influential voices step forward to act as political shields, urging the public to be patient, silent, and compliant.

But uncritical support does not build a nation.

It only protects elite interests while ordinary people bear the burden of poor decisions.

​

An independent voice should stand for justice, not for the status quo.

If we truly love our nation, we must speak truth to power.

We must insist that leadership is measured by service, integrity, and humility.

​

If Mliswa truly wishes to serve Zimbabwe as an independent voice, his energy should go elsewhere.

His time would be far better spent championing institutional checks and balances rather than defending executive authority against citizen feedback.

The president already commands the vast machinery of the state and needs no political bodyguards among the public.

​

What our society desperately requires is an informed, courageous citizenry willing to speak truth to power.

True patriotism does not manifest in protecting the powerful from scrutiny.

It manifests in holding them strictly accountable to the people they were elected to serve.

• *Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. Please feel free to contact him on +263715667700 or *

  [email protected]