By Kuda Pembere
The High Court last month delivered a landmark judgment declaring parts of Zimbabwe’s abortion law unconstitutional. The court ruled that provisions of the Termination of Pregnancy Act violate several fundamental rights, particularly those of women with mental illness and victims of sexual abuse within mental health institutions.
Justice Sylvia Chirawu-Mugomba found that section 4(a) of the Act, which sets the circumstances for lawful termination of pregnancy, fails constitutional scrutiny because it excludes mental health as a qualifying ground. That omission, she said, unjustifiably limits rights to dignity, equality, and access to healthcare.
The ruling reignited a long-running national fault line where law, faith, morality, and the lived realities of women violently collide. Within weeks, the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops Conference issued a fierce response, framing the judgment and proposed legislative amendments as a direct threat to the sanctity of life.
In a statement read in Catholic parishes nationwide on December 13, the bishops warned that the Medical Services Bill, due before the Senate, aims to legalise abortion through changes to the Termination of Pregnancy Act.
“As the Church, we are totally against abortion, and we would like to appeal to all people of faith and all those who value life to pray and speak against this evil,” the bishops said, urging Catholics and citizens to lobby Senators to reject the Bill.
They argued that expanding the law would represent moral decline, noting that while Zimbabwe abolished the death penalty, it now risked “sanctioning the massacre of the innocent.” They stressed that the sanctity of life from conception to natural death is both a Christian and cultural value.
The bishops’ stance is consistent with long-standing Catholic doctrine. Yet critics argue that when doctrine becomes law without context, it can erase the realities faced by women and girls navigating trauma, poverty, and limited access to justice.
For Mildred Mapingure, whose constitutional challenge helped shape this legal moment, the debate exposes a gap between religious preaching and practice.
“From my own perspective as a survivor, let’s live the truth that we preach and not the hypocritical way,” Mapingure told HealthTimes. “Those saying the Termination of Pregnancy Act should be guided by faith, are they faithful as they are preaching?”
She questioned the use of faith to restrict rights.
“To me, faith is just a biblical word until lived to its meaning. The Bible is there to guide us, not to suppress human rights. It’s a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body,” she said.
Drawing on scripture, Mapingure accused some religious leaders of selective morality.
“Jesus said, ‘Let anyone who has not sinned throw the first stone.’ He was talking to religious leaders who place heavy burdens on people but do nothing to help them,” she said. “That same issue is happening with the Termination of Pregnancy Act.”
Her critique is grounded in consequences. While church leaders say they are defending life, Mapingure asks whose lives truly matter.
“Yes, it’s good to protect life, but which life are we talking about?” she asked. “There is no life if you force someone to give birth to a child they do not love. A child needs a conducive environment where they are loved and cared for.”
She also revealed that she was excommunicated after reporting rape. For her, the experience represents how survivors are often treated within religious spaces.
“When I was raped, the church was the first to judge me. I was named and shamed,” she said. “They did not listen. They were too quick to judge.”
She later founded the Survivors Empowerment and Protection Advocacy Trust (SEPAT), which supports survivors of sexual abuse, particularly adolescents. Through this work, she sees the human cost of restrictive laws every day.
“Because of the churches and the poor implementation of the ToP Act, many women end up going to backyard abortions,” she said. “There is no post-abortion care there, and that is where lives are lost.”
Public health data reinforces this concern. Unsafe abortion remains a major contributor to maternal deaths in Zimbabwe. Health facility data from 2018 shows abortion-related complications accounted for roughly 25 percent of maternal deaths. In 2016, an estimated 65,300 induced abortions occurred, yet fewer than 40 percent of women accessed post-abortion care in health facilities.
Religious voices, however, are not unanimous. Some clergy argue that moral absolutism ignores reality and, at times, fuels harm.
One Pentecostal pastor, who requested anonymity and was given the pseudonym Pastor Bright, said he has witnessed deaths driven by silence and shame.
He recounted the case of a teenage girl thrown out by her family after falling pregnant. She later revealed she had been drug-raped.
“She wanted to terminate the pregnancy because she wanted to do nursing,” Pastor Bright said. “I opposed it at first and went to the parents. The father refused to take her back.”
The girl later attempted a clandestine abortion and died.
“At the funeral, it was clear that something could have been done to save her,” he said.
In another case, he said a pastor was falsely accused after a girl suffered severe bleeding following an unsafe abortion, which was later confirmed to have been a miscarriage.
“These cases show how fear and secrecy play out,” he said, noting that in some churches, pastors risk demotion if their daughters fall pregnant, promoting concealment instead of care.
“If women want to abort, they will, whether they are part of a church or not,” he said. “A law that allows safe abortion does not increase abortions. It gives people a chance to live.”
From the State’s perspective, the National Prosecuting Authority has acknowledged the difficulty of enforcing the current law. In 2020, Regional Prosecutor Mrs Kudzai Chigwedere said 22 termination-related cases were recorded in 2018 at Harare Magistrates’ Courts, but only 13 qualified under the law.
Some survivors presented late or declined termination. Others were blocked by partners, cultural pressures, or guardians. Narrow legal grounds and vague definitions, including what qualifies as unlawful intercourse, further complicate access.
Mrs Chigwedere also warned of false reports driven by attempts to secure termination unlawfully. This highlights ongoing tension between legal safeguards and lived realities.
Together, the court ruling, the Church’s resistance, survivor testimonies, pastoral dissent, and prosecution data show that this is not simply a debate about morality. It is a reckoning with how Zimbabwe responds to complexity, harm, and the realities women already face.
