Zimbabwe’s High Court has upheld legal provisions requiring people under the age of 18 to obtain permission from a parent or guardian before accessing sexual a...
Zimbabwe’s High Court has upheld legal provisions requiring people under the age of 18 to obtain permission from a parent or guardian before accessing sexual and reproductive health services, following a constitutional challenge by the Legal Resources Foundation (LRF).
The case focused on sections of the Public Health Act that require minors to secure parental or guardian consent before receiving such services. LRF argued that the rule limits access to healthcare and does not reflect the realities faced by many adolescents.
Advertisement
The organisation relied on national data, including a 2023 Government-supported report which found that more than one in five pregnancies in Zimbabwe involved adolescents.
LRF told the court that these figures showed many young people were navigating reproductive health issues in secrecy and were unable or unwilling to involve adults, leaving them without timely medical support.
The State defended the law, saying the consent requirement exists to protect children who may not yet have the maturity to make independent decisions on complex health matters.
Justice Sylvia Chirawu-Mugomba, who heard the matter, said the case involved difficult legal and social questions where public expectations and legal principles may differ.
“Any judge presiding over a matter that borders on law and morals is no doubt in an unenviable position,” she said.
The court accepted that adolescents have constitutional rights to healthcare, including reproductive health services, and acknowledged that the consent rule can create barriers.
However, the judge ruled that although the law limits certain rights, the restriction is legally permissible because it is aimed at protecting children.
“While the impugned sections breach sections 76(1) and 81 of the Constitution, the limitation is saved by section 86(2),” the judgment stated.
The ruling noted that Zimbabwean law already places limits on decisions minors can make independently, including matters involving contracts and travel documents.
The court said there was no sufficient basis to create a separate exception for sexual and reproductive health services without broader legal reform.
Justice Chirawu-Mugomba also highlighted that sexual activity involving minors can amount to criminal conduct under existing laws.
She said removing adult involvement in related health services could weaken safeguards designed to detect abuse or exploitation and hold offenders accountable.
“The limitation is meant to protect children not only from sexual exploitation, but also to ensure that perpetrators are brought to book,” she said.
At the same time, the court recognised evidence that some adolescents avoid seeking consent and instead turn to secrecy, which can lead to serious health risks.
Despite this, the judge said the matter required careful policy solutions rather than a broad judicial order changing the law.
The court rejected a proposal that would have allowed all minors, regardless of age, to independently consent to such services.
“A child aged sixteen might be better able mentally and emotionally to receive SRH services than a child aged ten years, yet they all fall into the definition of an adolescent,” the judge said.
The judgment referred to practices in other countries where minors may make certain decisions based on maturity rather than age alone.
However, the court said introducing such a system in Zimbabwe would be a matter for Parliament and lawmakers, not the judiciary.
The application was dismissed, with each side ordered to pay its own legal costs.
The ruling means the current consent requirement remains in force unless changed through legislative reform.
