What’s at Stake as Bill 7 Comes Before Parliament

By Gibson Zulu

Zambia’s contentious constitutional reform initiative, Bill Seven, is expected to be tabled in Parliament this morning, setting the stage for debate and a possible vote.

When it resurfaced in Parliament on presidential instruction, it reignited a national debate over constitutional reform, this time focused as much on how the proposed amendments were developed as on what they contain. Some churches, civil society groups, legal experts and ordinary citizens have questioned whether the consultation process met the threshold of transparency and inclusivity promised by government.

Officials maintain that the Bill seeks only technical adjustments, including increasing the number of constituencies, expanding proportional representation, harmonising terms of office for elected officials, and clarifying electoral procedures. They argue that these changes are necessary to improve representation and administrative efficiency.

However, concerns have emerged around the conduct of public submissions, particularly allegations of monetary inducements, inconsistencies in how consultations were organised across districts, and growing scepticism toward the work of the technical committee.

These concerns are unfolding against a politically sensitive backdrop, with the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND) falling short of the two-thirds parliamentary majority required to amend the Constitution.

In this context, questions have arisen over whether the reform process initiated by the UPND-led government was entirely citizen-driven, or whether elements of it may have been managed in ways that created the appearance of broad public support. Events in Chipata, Eastern Province, have become central to this scrutiny.

“I witnessed people being given K100 for the submissions they made during the constitutional amendment process in Chipata. I received the money too,” a source who attended the hearings told MakanDay. The account was independently corroborated through multiple, independent interviews with participants who described similar experiences.

Taken together, these accounts have fuelled criticism that the process may have been rushed, unevenly communicated, and vulnerable to influence, raising fresh questions about whether the consultations fully captured the views of ordinary Zambians.

Civil society leaders say the technical committee did not operate with sufficient openness or meaningful public engagement. One observer who attended the public sittings in Chipata was blunt in her assessment.

“The technical committee was window dressing. In our view, the process was designed to ensure Bill 7 passes,” said Laura Miti, Executive Director of Alliance for Community Action.

Chapter One Foundation Executive Director Josia Kalala echoed the concern, warning that procedural flaws undermine legitimacy.

“When the constitution amendment process is defective, the substance that emerges cannot command public confidence,” he said.

Under Article 79 of the Zambian Constitution, any attempt to amend the Constitution requires, a two-thirds majority vote of the total number of members of parliament.

The national assembly has 167 members, 156 elected MPs, eight presidential nominees and three ex-officio members (Vice President and two Speakers — not allowed to vote). This leaves 164 voting MPs.

How the numbers stand:

• UPND: 89 elected MPs
• Nominated MPs: 8
• Independents: 11
• PF: 54
• NCP: 1
• PNUP: 1

To pass the Bill, the government needs approximately 111 votes.

“The ruling party has 89 MPs. The Bill cannot pass without support from outside the party,” said Chapter One’s Kalala.

Even if all UPND MPs and all nominated MPs vote for the Bill, the government reaches only 97 votes, still 13 to 14 votes short of the required threshold.

This political reality has raised suspicions about whether inducements or patronage are being used to secure additional votes or to create the appearance of popular support.

There are also concerns about the danger of rushing constitutional changes.

“Constitutional reforms must be grounded in a credible, transparent and participatory process,” Kalala told MakanDay.

He urged MPs to reflect carefully on the lack of clarity surrounding the Bill, inconsistencies in the submission process, and the risk that the proposed reforms could weaken, rather than strengthen, constitutional governance.

Despite mounting criticism and the arithmetic challenge in Parliament, the Minister of Information and Media, who is also the chief government spokesperson, has maintained that Bill Seven is well-intentioned and is supported by majority MPs.

For citizens, the question remains, will constitutional reform strengthen Zambia’s democracy, or will it deepen mistrust in the institutions meant to protect it?