BRIEFING | Govt Halts Talks as Oasis Forum Sets Out Demands
The constitutional reform debate entered a new phase late Sunday after Government abruptly suspended dialogue with the Oasis Forum, citing a lack of “constructive engagement”. Hours later, the Forum released a detailed 14-page letter restating its objections to Bill 7 and outlining the conditions under which it would resume talks.
Government Position: Process Has Broken Down
Chief Government Spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa announced that follow-up talks scheduled for Saturday had been discontinued. He said Attorney General Mulilo Kabesha led the delegation but found that the Oasis Forum arrived “with the same fixed position” presented during Friday’s State House meeting.
“The Forum was not prepared to engage constructively. Effective dialogue requires mutual commitment and good faith,” Mweetwa said.
Government argues that Oasis failed to identify specific problematic clauses, offered no alternative proposals, and rejected the Technical Committee’s ongoing consultations across all ten provinces.
Officials insist the constitutional review is legally compliant, people-driven through the Committee’s outreach, and aimed at strengthening equity, inclusion and service delivery.
Oasis Forum Position: Process Illegitimate, Bill Must Be Withdrawn
In a strongly worded letter dated November 29th, Oasis Forum told President Hichilema that both the process and content of Bill 7 are “of grave concern”.
The Forum cites the Constitutional Court’s judgment in Mukandila & Munir Zulu v. Attorney General, arguing that:
“Bill 7, which was initiated without the mandatory antecedent wide public consultations, is a nullity.”
The Forum maintains that:
– The Technical Committee lacks an independent legal framework
– The Terms of Reference are restrictive and mirror a bill already nullified
– Citizens are being guided into an “election-centred agenda”
– Government must withdraw Bill 7 before any credible dialogue occurs
– The process should reopen the Bill of Rights, not simply adjust constituencies
“There must be a fresh initiation of the constitutional amendment process which must come from the people,” said Chairperson Beauty Katebe.
Friday’s Events Cast a Shadow
The breakdown follows Friday’s highly publicised sequence in which the Forum first held a black-clad prayer rally attended by several opposition leaders and former ministers, then proceeded to meet the President at State House.
The optics fuelled competing interpretations:
– Government supporters argue the Forum entered with positions, not issues, compromising negotiation space.
– Opposition actors celebrated the Forum’s hard stance, calling it “courageous” and “protective of democracy”.
Neutral observers note the Forum’s prayer rally resembled an elite opposition reunion, raising questions about whether it represents broad citizen sentiment or a particular political demographic.
Political Undertones Deepen
Anti-Bill 7 voices have escalated their rhetoric, insisting Parliament is compromised. Pro-Bill 7 voices argue the legislation should be tested on the floor, just as Bill 10 was defeated in 2020, not pre-judged by civil society positions.
Government now insists it will continue engaging other CSOs on Monday, signalling a shift away from the belief that Oasis Forum is the sole national mirror of consensus.
Technical Committee Still Central
Government reaffirmed that the Committee has undertaken nationwide consultations, and its submissions will shape the next legislative roadmap. The Forum, however, rejects this, arguing that the Committee is neither independent nor sufficiently broad-mandated.
What Happens Next?
With the Forum demanding withdrawal of Bill 7 and Government insisting the process is already compliant, the reform effort enters uncertain territory.
What remains clear is that Zambia’s constitutional reform is no longer merely a legal debate. It is now a political contest over legitimacy, sequencing, and institutional authority.
© The People’s Brief | Goran Handya