MY OPINION ON THE CLAUSE ALLOWING POLITICAL PARTIES TO CHOOSE A REPLACEMENT MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
The clause that grants political parties the authority to choose a replacement Member of Parliament without returning to the electorate requires urgent reconsideration and revision. While the desire to reduce the costs associated with by-elections is understandable, it must not come at the expense of fundamental democratic principles. The integrity of representative democracy depends on the continued recognition of the electorate as the ultimate source of political authority.
I also wish to bring this matter to the attention of His Excellency President Hakainde Hichilema. Your Excellency, the reality on the ground is that there is often no sense of urgency or accountability among some civic leaders. Many quickly forget that it is the ordinary citizen the farmer, the market trader, the teacher, the youth who entrusted them with public office. It is equally concerning that some leaders who appear humble and respectful in your presence adopt a completely different posture in their constituencies. They become unapproachable “big bosses,” treating any citizen who questions their performance as an adversary rather than a stakeholder.
A clause that allows political parties to appoint a replacement MP without consulting the electorate can only function effectively in a mature democracy one where civic leaders understand that public office is a duty, not a privilege, and where they do not have to be pushed to fulfil their obligations. It works in societies where leaders are willing to listen to every citizen, including the villager who may have never been to school but nonetheless has a legitimate voice in governance.
As an aspiring Member of Parliament for Katombola Constituency, I fully acknowledge that I must also be held accountable. If I am entrusted with public office and go astray, I expect voters to question me, challenge me, and correct my course. That is the essence of democracy. It is for this reason that removing the electorate’s power to choose its representative is deeply problematic. Any system that sidelines the people in favour of party-appointed individuals risks undermining public trust and weakening the very foundations of our democratic governance.
My concerns are grounded in practical experiences and observable realities in many constituencies across the country:
1. Misconduct and Disengagement of Elected Leaders
In our current political environment, some civic leaders drastically change their attitudes once voted into office. Instead of serving the electorate, they become unapproachable, dismissive, and in some cases, outright arrogant. It is not uncommon for an elected leader to tell constituents, “You did not even vote for me,” or to conduct themselves as though they are beyond accountability. These incidents occur regularly and have contributed to the widening gap between representatives and those they are elected to serve.
A similar concern arises with certain District Commissioners who, when challenged by citizens, respond that they are appointed by the President and therefore not accountable to the electorate. Such attitudes reflect a broader problem: the erosion of public confidence in political leadership and the weakening of democratic accountability.
Given these realities, any clause that removes the electorate’s power to choose its representative poses a serious risk. It would effectively allow political parties to impose individuals possibly through internal favouritism, patronage, or bribery without any recourse for the voters. While this arrangement may be acceptable in jurisdictions where elected officials demonstrate consistent professionalism and respect for their constituents, it is highly problematic in a context where public officials often act contrary to the expectations of their office.
Therefore, I respectfully appeal to the relevant authorities to refine this clause to ensure that it continues to reflect the authority and will of the electorate.
2. MPs Appointed to Executive Positions Neglecting Their Constituencies
Another related concern is the tendency of some Members of Parliament who, once appointed to ministerial or other executive positions, become detached from their constituencies. Constituents are left without meaningful representation, and many feel unable to question or challenge their MP because they believe such individuals have become politically untouchable.
This problem reinforces the need for mechanisms that preserve the voice of the electorate. If an MP vacates office whether through death, resignation, appointment, or incapacity the people must not be deprived of their democratic right to choose a new representative. Imagine a scenario where an MP dies in the first week of their term and the party then appoints an individual who is arrogant, unresponsive, or indifferent to community needs. The electorate would be forced to endure five years of ineffective representation with no legal avenue for redress.
For these reasons, I firmly believe that we can and must find a better legal framework one that balances fiscal responsibility with the democratic rights of the people. Ensuring that the electorate maintains its authority in selecting its representatives is essential for strengthening public trust, promoting accountability, and upholding the values of constitutional democracy.
To the general public I wish to state that an official submission has been made to the ministry of Justice expressing these concerns and our suggestions to the legal issue at hand. We will continue giving our feedback to the government as we continue digesting things in Bill 7.
Respectfully submitted,
Sikaile C. Sikaile
Independent Aspiring Member of Parliament, Katombola Constituency (2026)
Kikikiki.
You have now started seeing the defects in the Dead, illegitimate and unconstitutional Bill 7! Laura Miti has opened your eyes!
You want to stand as an Independent Member of Parliament for Katombora Constituency? Look at the clause on Independents! Mwangala Zaloumis ‘s ECZ won’t accept your nomination papers according to Bill 7 if you belong to the UPND, and then less than two months prior to Nomination,you leave the party.
The UPND will make sure that adoptions are done in less than 2 months so that those who are unsuccessful don’t stand as Independents.. That’s the illegitimate and unconstitutional Bill 7 for you. Who can make such a submission? Ofcourse it came from the Bedroom of the Party scared of Independents.
Cont’.
Sikaile has made me laugh. He wants the “powers that be ” to look into the clause on replacement of MPs. He has come to the realization that bye Elections are necessary!
Powers that be???
The constitution is supposed to come from the people, we the people, and not from ” powers that be”.
So Mr Sikaile, you now admit these clauses didn’t come from the people. They were prepared in some one’s Bedroom.
Go through the illegitimate and unconstitutional Bill 7. You will find things which will cause your head to start spinning.
Sikale Sikale, this inefficiency is what holds back development in the Country. Now you should just hope that your late submission was already submitted on time by someone else. By the way, do you have evidence that under the current system where people vote for MPs as individuals, the elected MPs are held accountable by the voters?? We call Zambia a multi-party democracy and yet you want to claim that MPs are voted for on an individual basis. I thought MPs selected by parties campaign on the basis of their party manifestos?? If we want to strengthen the power of voters to hold to account elected MPs whether from the winning party or from independent candidates, we need other provisions for a certain threshold of voters to recall such erring MPs. Indeed what is needed is a strong mechanism for voters to recall erring elected leaders. Voting for leaders is just one needed step but it is not enough if this is not backed by mechanisms for voters to hold elected leaders accountable.
Great thought Ngoma Yamaano.