Bill 7 Under Fire

....  Church, Civil Society Unite to Defend Zambia’s Constitution

By Francis Maingaila

Lusaka, Zambua24 (23-06-2025) — The Oasis Forum, a consortium comprising the Council of Churches in Zambia (CCZ), Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ), Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), Non-Governmental Gender Organisations Coordinating Council (NGOCC), and the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops (ZCCB), has officially launched a national campaign against Bill Number 7 of 2025, which seeks to amend the Republican Constitution.

Speaking at the launch of the campaign dubbed “The Crusade Against Bill 7”, Oasis Forum Chairperson Andrew Mwenda expressed profound concern over the government's determination to proceed with constitutional reforms without adequate citizen participation, inclusivity, or national consensus—both in process and content.

“The Constitution is a people’s document,” Mwenda emphasized. “It should not be used to promote narrow partisan interests. The preamble of the Constitution is clear: ‘We, the people of Zambia, do hereby solemnly adopt and give ourselves this Constitution…’ This means that any meaningful amendment must be a product of broad-based consultation and consensus.”

Mwenda described the process surrounding Bill 7 as opaque and lacking transparency, accountability, and public trust. He warned that any constitutional amendments made without legitimacy and public ownership would be invalid in both spirit and principle.

He also challenged the Minister of Justice’s assertion that failure to pass the Bill would result in Zambia “losing many good things.”

“In fact, the opposite is true. Very little good will come out of this rushed, opaque, and exclusionary process,” Mwenda countered.

While acknowledging the government’s stated aim to increase the representation of women, youth, and persons with disabilities in governance structures, Mwenda questioned the sincerity and practicality of the proposed measures—particularly at a time when the state is grappling with economic constraints that have made it difficult to recruit volunteer doctors or procure sufficient maize from local farmers.

“The proposed constitutional changes risk diverting already scarce resources from critical sectors like healthcare and agriculture,” he warned.

Mwenda also raised concerns about the financial implications of the proposed reforms:

“What about the financial implications? How can a country that has not even completed restructuring properly begin to increase its obligations? If you are struggling to take care of five children, how can you justify having ten or more just because you want to? Maybe this is a simplistic example, but it illustrates the point: you need to manage what you have before thinking of expansion.”

He highlighted Zambia’s growing debt and the setbacks caused by drought, stressing the risks of adding layers of governance without addressing existing inefficiencies.

“The proposal to bring back Members of Parliament to also serve on councils—meaning the same people who make policy would also execute it—raises concerns. Look at the problems with the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). We still face many challenges, which indicates systemic issues. Yet, we are proposing to revive a similar structure.”

Mwenda called for an immediate halt to the current reform process and the withdrawal of Bill 7, urging the government to engage meaningfully with citizens, civil society organisations, traditional authorities, the legal fraternity, and faith-based institutions.

“If the government chooses to rely on its numbers in Parliament to push through these amendments without the people’s consent, it will be undermining the very foundation of constitutionalism,” he said.

The Oasis Forum pledged to lead a robust, nationwide resistance to the Bill, spotlighting the dangers of a non-inclusive, election-timed constitutional reform. The movement will also mobilize citizens to wear black—a symbolic gesture of mourning for the Constitution—and to call on the UPND-led government to abandon the process in its current form.

“This  is not just a fight for lawyers or the church—it is a fight for every Zambian,” Mwenda concluded.

Bishop Emmanuel Chikoya, the Secretary General of the Council of Churches in Zambia (CCZ), along with Beauty Katebe, the Board Chairperson of the Non-Governmental Gender Organisations Coordinating Council (NGOCC), and Oasis Forum Chairperson Andrew Mwenda, raised fundamental questions about the legitimacy, timing, and true intent of the constitutional amendment process, which they argued is being misrepresented as addressing only "non-contentious" issues.

Bishop Chikoya dismissed government-aligned claims that critics of the Bill lack legal standing or are acting under the influence of foreign sponsors.

“People say we have no legal basis to oppose this bill — that if we did, we would take it to court. Others go further, accusing us of speaking on behalf of our so-called paymasters,” said Bishop Chikoya.

“But our stance is based on principle, not pressure. Our concern is about the legitimacy of the process and the rights of citizens—not politics or personal gain.”

He further emphasized that all political parties currently have sufficient women and diverse representatives, and thus have the opportunity to adopt these changes voluntarily.

“So, what really stops them? There is nothing stopping them,” he said. “Using this amendment as a carrot or incentive being sold to Zambians is not correct. It shows a lack of sincerity.”

He also warned about the potential manipulation of numbers within the amendment process:

“Some think it’s just about increasing representation, but if changes are made selectively, different voting patterns could be exploited to grant certain stakeholders an automatic majority to easily amend the Constitution. That is a serious concern we must consider carefully.”

Beauty Katebe, the NGOCC Board Chairperson, underscored the fundamental notion that the Constitution belongs to the people, and any changes must be validated through public involvement.

“Any resolution passed in a boardroom cannot be overturned outside that boardroom,” she said.

“In the same way, if the Constitution begins by declaring, ‘We the people of Zambia give ourselves this document,’ then any change to it must be brought back to the people for approval. No one—not even government—should alter the people’s Constitution without their full participation.”

Katebe stressed that constitutional amendments require a structured, comprehensive process rather than ad hoc consultations.

“We are saying there must be a proper process because these processes protect the Constitution. This is not something where a minister just goes around collecting views from people. No, that is not how constitutional amendments work. There must be a committee or a body established to handle this properly, going out and engaging with the matter comprehensively.”

Mwenda cautioned against fragmentary reforms driven by political motives and electoral timelines. He criticized the pattern of governments—past and present—promising inclusive constitutional reforms, only to pursue selective changes under the guise of addressing "non-contentious" issues.

“True reform must encompass broader themes such as human rights, inclusive political participation, and the empowerment of marginalized groups,” Mwenda argued.

He pointed to the unimplemented Political Parties Bill, which already addresses many of the inclusion concerns being raised, as an example of squandered political will.

“We keep spending money creating documents and processes, then abandoning them. Why not activate what we already have?” he asked.

“If we truly care about reform, let it happen far from election periods and through a people-centred, participatory process. We thought we had learned from the past. It’s time to prove it.”

The voices of Bishop Chikoya, Katebe, and Mwenda represent a growing chorus of civic, legal, and faith-based institutions calling for constitutional reform in Zambia to be grounded in transparency, genuine public consultation, and democratic integrity.

As the government continues to push for amendments under Bill 7, the nation stands at a crossroads: will it heed the call for inclusive, principled reform—or risk eroding the very Constitution it claims to uphold?