MULAMBO ADDS TO THE CONFUSION OVER BILL 7 CONSTITUENCY DELIMITATION
By Political Correspondent
Lusaka, 13 December 2025
The debate surrounding constituency delimitation under the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 7 of 2025 has taken a troubling turn, with senior government officials and the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) issuing contradictory explanations that deepen public confusion and raise serious constitutional questions.
Lunte Member of Parliament, Hon. Mutotwe Kafwaya, has described the unfolding situation as evidence that “there is something fundamentally wrong” with how the proposed delimitation of 55 new constituencies is being handled.
At the centre of the controversy is the alleged 2019 ECZ Delimitation Report, which Bill 7 claims to “actualize.” However, statements from key actors suggest uncertainty not only about the contents of the report, but also about its custody, revision process, and constitutional validity.
The ECZ Chairperson has publicly stated that the Commission resubmitted the 2019 delimitation report to the Executive after revising it. This admission has immediately raised red flags, as no explanation has been given on how such a revision could lawfully occur without following the prescribed constitutional and statutory procedures, including stakeholder consultations and parliamentary scrutiny.
In sharp contrast, the Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry informed a public panel that the report is with the ECZ, not the Executive. He challenged critics to engage the ECZ directly, insisting that Cabinet does not supervise the Commission. This statement directly contradicts the ECZ Chairperson’s assertion that a revised report was resubmitted to the Executive.
Adding further confusion, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, responding to Senior Counsel Sakwiba Sikota, offered an entirely different interpretation of the process. According to him, government must first decide the number of constituencies it wants 55 in this case and only thereafter instruct the ECZ to “go and find” constituencies to delimit.
This explanation appears to invert the constitutional logic of delimitation, which assigns the technical and independent role of constituency assessment to the ECZ, not to political actors. It also sits uneasily with object (a) of Bill 7, which explicitly states that the amendment seeks to actualize an ECZ report, not a Cabinet-determined figure.
“Uhh!” remarked Hon. Kafwaya, summing up the bewilderment many observers now share.
The emerging picture is one of institutional dissonance: the ECZ says it revised and resubmitted a report; one minister says the Executive does not have it; another suggests the ECZ merely implements a number predetermined by politicians. These are not minor discrepancies they strike at the heart of constitutional governance, separation of powers, and the independence of electoral institutions.
Hon. Kafwaya has urged Minister Mulambo to carefully read object (a) of Bill 7 and publicly clarify how his pronouncements align with the Bill’s stated purpose. More broadly, he questions which of the conflicting narratives truly reflects the position of the President.
With public trust at stake and constitutional amendments under consideration, calls are growing for President Hakainde Hichilema to personally intervene and provide clarity on the matter. In the absence of a coherent and unified explanation, the constituency delimitation process risks being viewed not as a constitutional exercise, but as a politically driven project shrouded in uncertainty.
As Parliament and the nation continue to grapple with Bill 7, one question remains unanswered! where did the remaining 44 constituencies come from and who, exactly, authorized them?