President Donald Trump is “furious” and has “fumed” over the many recent reports commenting on his age and seeming decline in energy, according to a report from Zeteo, reserving specific outrage for comparisons “to Sleepy Joe.”
Citing sources both within the White House and outside of the administration, Zeteo reported on Friday morning that Trump “as repeatedly fumed about how the mainstream press” continues to report on his age and its potential effects on his performance as president, with one source lamenting the frustration with “this b—— again.” Reports pertaining to his “health, age, and brain consistently infuriates” Trump in ways that other persistent issues “simply do not nowadays,” aside from the Epstein files.
Trump is said to “fixate on the offending news outlet or coverage for several day,” and things are worse when reports emerge from one of the many outlets or reporters he already dislikes. He is also said to be more offended by comparisons to Joe Biden, whom Trump mocked persistently as “Sleepy Joe” over instances of the former president looking low energy in public appearances or seeming to fall asleep altogether.
“He is sensitive to being compared, even if not explicitly, to Sleepy Joe,” an anonymous Trump adviser told Zeteo. “Especially if it’s coming from a reporter he already hates.”
Trump’s seeming decline in energy and mental acuity have become more and more common in recent months. As highlighted by the Daily Beast, in September, the president appeared to misremember when his first term began during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Many have also pointed out recent instances in which it looked as though Trump was dozing off or struggling to stay awake during meetings, including during a cabinet meeting on Tuesday.
One of the bigger reports came from the New York Times, with the headline, “Shorter Days, Signs of Fatigue: Trump Faces Realities of Aging in Office.” In it, reporters analyzed Trump’s schedule and noted that he appeared to be doing less each day and making far fewer public appearance, which the outlet chalked up to his increasing fatigue due to his advanced age.
Trump stirred up more controversy when he lashed at against the report, claiming that it was a hit piece by “the failing” outlet, and attacked one of the co-writers, a woman, as “ugly, both inside and out.”
HH ISN’T HATED, ZAMBIANS HATE BLACKOUTS AND POVERTY – MUNDUBILE
By Staff Reporter
04.12.25
In a fiery rebuke that has electrified Zambia’s political discourse, leading opposition presidential candidate and constitutional lawyer Brian Mundubile has dismantled President Hakainde Hichilema’s claim that he is despised because of his ethnic origins in Southern Province.
Speaking in a live EMV interview that has since gone viral, Mundubile declared that Zambians do not hate their President, they hate the crippling blackouts, soaring poverty, and broken promises that have defined his tenure.
“Zambians don’t hate President Hichilema,” Mundubile thundered. “They hate the blackouts and poverty you have induced since assuming office. Stop playing victim—it’s pathetic.”
His remarks came in response to Hichilema’s televised lamentation: “Why do you hate poor me, finshi mwampatila nemulanda inee?” A statement many citizens interpreted as hollow selfpity rather than leadership, infact a weakness
Mundubile drew a sharp contrast with former President Edgar Lungu, who in 2016 suffered a humiliating defeat in Dundumwezi, polling a mere 220 votes against Hichilema’s 33,000 in southern provice.
Yet, instead of crying “hate,” Lungu extended development to the very community that rejected him, rolling out the Rural Electrification Programme. “That is leadership,” Mundubile stressed. “If Mr. Hichilema was truly hated, he would never have garnered over a million votes above an incumbent President. Stop crying wolf. Deliver. End loadshedding. Reduce the cost of living.” The Mporokoso lawmaker’s words have resonated across Zambia, positioning him as a rising star in African politics.
His blend of constitutional expertise, grassroots empathy, and bold rhetoric evokes memories of leaders like John Magufuli of Tanzania, who earned admiration for his uncompromising stance against corruption and inefficiency, and Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, whose fearless advocacy for selfreliance and dignity inspired generations.
Like them, Mundubile is carving an image of a leader unafraid to confront power with truth, while pledging readiness to serve under any leader chosen by the people.
Mundubile’s message is clear: Zambia’s crisis is not about tribal origins but about governance and poverty. Citizens demand electricity, jobs, and affordable living—not excuses. His call to action reframes the national debate, challenging Hichilema to abandon victimhood and embrace responsibility.
As Zambia grapples with economic strain and energy shortages, Mundubile’s voice rises as both critique and promise.
Whether he ascends to the presidency or serves in another capacity, his insistence on accountability and delivery marks him as a figure to watch—an African leader in the making, echoing the continent’s finest traditions of resilience and reform.
Quick Facts about Brian Mundubile
Full Name: Brian Muntayalwa Mundubile
Date of Birth: 5 January 1971 (age 54)
Place of Birth: Mporokoso, Northern Province, Zambia
Marital Status: Married
Education:
Bachelor of Laws (LLB)
Master of Laws (LLM)
Diploma in Legislative Drafting (ZIALE)
Advocate of the High Court of Zambia
ACCA (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants)
Profession: Lawyer, Accountant, Politician
Political Party: Patriotic Front (PF)
Constituency: Member of Parliament for Mporokoso since 2016
Mundubile is seen as one of the key strategists within the PF, often vocal on constitutional and governance issues.
He has positioned himself as a potential presidential candidate, drawing comparisons to reformist African leaders for his emphasis on accountability and grassroots development.
Known for his sharp critiques of President Hakainde Hichilema, particularly on issues of poverty, electricity shortages, and governance.
✨ Why He Matters Brian Mundubile blends legal expertise, financial acumen, and political leadership, making him a prominent figure in Zambia’s opposition politics. His trajectory mirrors other African leaders who rose from professional backgrounds to national prominence, and he continues to be a central voice in Zambia’s democratic debates. Source: AM.
WHAT I MEANT, WE MAY NOT WIN THE BATTLE TO GET THE PF BACK, THAT’S MY CONTENTION-DAVIES MWILA
Lusaka-5th December 2025
Former Patriotic Front Secretary General Davies Mwila has clarified the media statement attributed to him that the “PF is Dead”.
In an interview with Hot FM radio, Mwila stated that he was emphasising the fact that the legality of the Patriotic Front was hijacked by surrogates of the State led by expelled Mafinga MP, Robert Chabinga.
He said it was clear that the intentions and attacks by the State against the Patriotic Front were designed to prevent the Party from participating in the 2026 general elections.
He said as a longtime member of the Party it was sad to see the currenr state of the institution and therefore urged the leadership of the PF to seriously look at the opportunity to find a special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to enable the Party’s presidential candidate and members to participate in the upcoming general election.
CHANDA DECLARES CHAWAMA BY-ELECTION A TEST FOR ZAMBIAN POLITICAL CHANGE
The leader of the United Prosperous and Peaceful Zambia, Charles Chanda, has announced that his party will take part in the upcoming Chawama parliamentary by-election.
He believes this election will be a crucial test for the country’s political future ahead of the 2026 general elections.
Chanda said that changes in government often come with challenges. He emphasized that if Zambians truly want a change in leadership, they need to start with the Chawama by-election. “This is an opportunity for Zambians to make their voices heard,” he stated. “If the government is not willing to listen to the people, then something is not right.”
Chanda referenced that many citizens feel their concerns are ignored, and he believes this election can reflect the desire for a new direction.
He encouraged all Zambians to participate in the voting process, saying, “Your vote is your power. Use it to push for the change we need.”
As political tensions rise, the United Prosperous and Peaceful Zambia hopes to use the by-election to show that their party can offer a real alternative to the current government.
Chanda concluded by urging Zambians to stand up for their rights, saying, “Let us show that we are ready for change, starting with Chawama.”
The by-election has become a focal point for discussions about the future of Zambia’s political landscape and all eyes will be on Chawama in the coming weeks.
If Bill 7 returns to Parliament in the same form it was introduced, then the entire consultation exercise was a sham. It was designed to fool the Zambian people into believing they had a voice when, in reality, Mr Hakainde Hichilema never intended to change a single word.
Mr Hichilema encouraged submissions knowing fully that nothing could be amended. This was not a consultation. It was political theatre meant to pacify the nation while they pushed Mr Hichilema’s predetermined agenda.
This behaviour exposes a dangerous level of deception from Mr Hichilema. A leader who invites the people to speak but refuses to listen is driven by greed for power, not the desire to defend and advance democracy.
The intentions of Mr Hichilema regarding Bill 7 are far from normal. This is not about reform. It is about centralising political power in his hands and weakening public participation in governance.
Zambians participated in good faith, hoping their voices would shape the future. Returning the Bill untouched is a direct insult to every citizen who took time to contribute. It proves that Mr Hichilema does not respect and value the people.
A leader who fears genuine dialogue resorts to deception. Mr Hichilema pretended to be listening only to legitimise a bill he had already decided to force through Parliament. This is political greed and dishonest at its highest.
Mr Hichilema’s behaviour is a betrayal of democracy and decency. A leader who lies to the nation about constitutional reforms can not be trusted with the future of the country. Such conduct reflects deep moral decay and ethical bankruptcy.
All decent and patriotic members of Parliament must reject Bill 7 because it has become clear that it does not represent the will of the people. It represents the desires and ambitions of Mr Hichilema and a party desperate to entrench itself in power.
Bill 7 is now a symbol of Mr Hichilema’s growing appetite for dominance. It shows a leader who is willing to ignore national consensus and undermine public trust in order to secure political advantage.
This is the moment for members of Parliament to defend Zambia. They must refuse to be tools in a political project anchored on lies, deception, and greed. Zambia’s Constitution must never be shaped by the selfish interests of one man or one party.
Fred M’membe President of the Socialist Party Zambia
As part of the ongoing national conversation on Bill 7, I took a moment to visualize what the proposed 20 reserved seats for women could look like if allocated proportionally based on the 2021 presidential election results.
The proportional distribution would look something like this:
🔸 UPND – 12 seats 🔸 PF – 8 seats 🔸 Others – below the threshold for a full seat
This isn’t about politics as usual. It’s about strengthening Zambia’s governance architecture and ensuring that women are fully represented at the table of national decision-making.
Bill 7 creates a more predictable, inclusive system that encourages parties to field strong female leaders and rewards national support with proportional representation. In corporate speak, this is what we call optimising the talent pipeline.
As a country, we are stronger when all voices are heard. And when women rise, the Republic rises with them.
I prepared the simple graphic below to help illustrate what “proportionality” means in practice. Sometimes, a picture just closes the meeting quicker than a thousand memos.
Rev. Dr. Elias Munshya Zambia’s Ambassador to Angola
GOVERNMENT MUST COMPLY WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ORDERS REGARDING BILL 7- LAZ
LAZ writes…
GOVERNMENT MUST COMPLY WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ORDERS REGARDING BILL 7
The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) is deeply alarmed by the decision of the Government, through the Minister of Justice, to request the Speaker of the National Assembly to reintroduce the Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 of 2025 for consideration; and equally concerned by the Speaker’s decision to accept this request and appoint a Select Committee to scrutinize the Bill, despite a clear Constitutional Court ruling that the process leading to the presentation of Bill No. 7 was unconstitutional, rendering the Bill a nullity until a proper, people-driven process is undertaken.
While disagreement with judicial decisions may occur, the rule of law demands full compliance with them. Disregarding the Constitutional Court’s directives poses grave risks to our constitutional democracy. When leaders tasked with upholding the Constitution ignore it, citizens are left with limited lawful avenues for redress, thereby eroding public trust and inviting instability. Government must lead by example, by respecting and abiding by court decisions.
The Constitutional Court in the case of Celestine Mukandila and Munir Zulu vs Attorney General declared that the decision by Government to initiate a constitution amendment process culminating into Bill 7 before undertaking wide consultations with the People goes against the spirit of Articles 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 61, 90, 91 and 92 of the Constitution (as amended by Act No. 2 of 2016).
The Court further ordered and directed Government to comply with the spirit of the Constitution by ensuring a people-driven process led by an independent body of experts in conducting wide consultations with the people. It was the Court’s considered position that the initiation of the Constitution amendment process must come from the people and there should be a tangible and visible process of broad-based consultations to support legitimate amendments to the Constitution.
Going against the declaration of the Court is a breach of the law, hence an illegality under Article 1 (1) of the Constitution of Zambia, which specifically provides that any act or omission which contravenes the Constitution is illegal.
LAZ, therefore, calls on the Government and the National Assembly to listen to the voice of the Church, traditional authorities, civil society among other stakeholders and immediately withdraw and abandon any further deliberations of Bill No. 7. All constitutional reforms must be based on genuine, broad-based stakeholder engagement and consensus on both the substance and process to assure the legitimacy of its outcome.
This press release, on a matter of national interest, in promotion of Constitutionalism and legal reforms, has been issued in furtherance of LAZ’s mandate under Section 4 of the Law Association of Zambia Act No. 31 of the Laws of Zambia.
CAUGHT IN ITS OWN WEB: HOW BILL 7 HAS PLUNGED THE GOVERNMENT INTO A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS OF ITS OWN MAKING
By Prof. Cephas Lumina
Governments often stumble into crises; fewer manage to manufacture them with the determination and spectacle ours has displayed in recent months. The unfolding constitutional crisis, driven by the Executive’s insistence on resuscitating the already-dead Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 7 of 2025 (“Bill 7”), is not only ill-advised but legally indefensible, politically reckless, and institutionally corrosive.
The nation is witnessing the extraordinary spectacle of an administration simultaneously undermining the Constitution, contradicting its own public justifications, and ensnaring itself in a web of its own misrepresentations. What began as a rushed and self-serving amendment process has developed into a crisis of legality, credibility, and governance—one entirely of the government’s own making
At the heart of the controversy lies a simple fact that the Executive (and the Speaker of the National Assembly) refuse to confront: Bill 7 is a nullity. It was nullified not by opinion or political pressure, but by the Constitutional Court in Munir Zulu and Another v Attorney-General. This is the unavoidable starting point for any honest assessment of the current impasse.
The legal effect of the Munir Zulu judgment: Bill 7 died on arrival
In my earlier commentary in this paper (“‘Tainted at Birth’: Why Bill No. 7 must be withdrawn or considered a nullity, not merely deferred,” 10 July 2025), I argued that Bill 7 did not survive the Constitutional Court’s ruling in Munir Zulu – a view shared by most legal experts.
The Attorney-General publicly asserted that the judgment merely required consultations. But that interpretation ignored the Court’s reasoning. The Court held that the process leading to Bill 7 was unconstitutional. A Bill founded upon an unconstitutional process cannot stand. The Court does not need to utter the words “null and void” for the legal effect to be plain.
Bill 7 was therefore not merely paused—it was fatally tainted. The hurried—and I dare add, rather suspicious—“deferral” announced by State House a day before the Court’s decision did not rescue it; deferral cannot revive a Bill whose foundation has been invalidated. Despite persistent calls from legal experts, church bodies, civil society organisations, and citizens to withdraw the Bill considering the judgment, the government pressed ahead and, in doing so, deepened the constitutional quagmire.
A Technical Committee built on a legal fiction
Rather than acknowledge that Bill 7 was a nullity, the Executive created a procedural detour: the appointment of the Technical Committee on Amendments to the Constitution. The Committee’s terms of reference were revealing. They mirrored the content of Bill 7 and required the Committee to draft constitutional amendments and provide justifications, as well as produce a comprehensive evaluative report. This was not an invitation to assess whether amendments were needed; it was an instruction to produce them.
The compressed timeframe—purported “nationwide consultations” across all provinces and districts between 27 October and 13 November 2025—made genuine public participation impossible. The process appeared designed not to hear the nation’s views, but to stage compliance with Munir Zulu.
Yet even this flawed exercise has ultimately been undermined by the government itself. Under established practice, the Technical Committee’s report and draft Bill should have been taken to Cabinet and, if approved, published in the Government Gazette thirty days before introduction in Parliament.
Instead, the government has chosen to sidestep the Committee’s work entirely, ignoring the very deliverables it demanded and funded. The question is obvious: Why appoint a committee, instruct it to draft amendments, rush consultations, and then bury its output the moment it is completed?
The answer is obvious: the Committee was never intended to produce a new Bill, or at least one that did not fit the Executive’s agenda. It was meant to create the illusion of compliance while preserving a path back to the already-tainted Bill 7. More plausibly, the Committee’s draft did not align with the Executive’s objectives.
A resurrection attempt that violates the Constitution
On 2 December 2025—just a day after the Technical Committee submitted its report and draft Bill to the President—First Deputy Speaker, Attractor Chisangano, announced that she had received a communication from the Minister of Justice requesting resumption of consideration of Bill 7. She added that the select committee on the Bill would “commence its meetings immediately.”
This was politically explosive and legally indefensible. What happened to the draft amendment Bill produced by the Technical Committee only one day before? Why pretend to comply with Munir Zulu, then abandon the one action that could have restored some semblance of constitutional legitimacy to the process?
More fundamentally, how can Parliament “resume consideration” of a Bill that no longer exists in law?
Bill 7 was not simply tainted; it was effectively extinguished by the Constitutional Court in Munir Zulu. The government is, therefore, attempting to do the legally impossible.
The Standing Orders leave the government no escape route
The Standing Orders that govern parliamentary procedure were designed to ensure predictability, legality, and order in the legislative process. Yet it is precisely these rules that now trap the government. Far from providing a pathway through the crisis, they close every conceivable door to the revival of Bill 7.
For one, the Standing Orders demand that any constitutional amendment Bill must be published in the Gazette at least thirty days before it is introduced for First Reading. This requirement is meant to guarantee transparency and allow the public to scrutinise proposed constitutional changes before Parliament is invited to debate them. If the government were acting lawfully, it would be preparing to publish the draft Bill produced by the Technical Committee. But doing so would amount to admitting that Bill 7 is defunct. Publication of a new Bill would automatically invalidate the pretence that Bill 7 is still alive, and it would compel a restart of the entire legislative process—precisely what the Executive is determined to avoid.
Then there is the rule prohibiting the introduction of two Bills on the same subject within a single parliamentary session. This provision alone makes the government’s strategy impossible. If Bill 7 is acknowledged as withdrawn or lapsed, no new constitutional amendment Bill can be introduced until the next parliamentary session (after August 2026). Yet the Executive knows that waiting would derail its political timelines, so it has opted instead to bulldoze forward in defiance of the text and spirit of the Standing Orders and the Constitution.
The government’s difficulties do not end there. Even if it sought to amend Bill 7 through the select committee process, the Standing Orders only allow amendments that fall within the scope of the original Bill’s objectives. They do not permit a parliamentary committee to transform an invalid Bill into a substantively new one. Doing so would violate parliamentary practice, which demands that a Bill so fundamentally altered must be discarded and replaced—again triggering the Gazette requirement and again making it impossible to proceed within the current session.
Finally, the most decisive rule is Standing Order 122. It provides that any Bill deferred for more than six months is considered withdrawn. Bill 7 was “deferred” on 26 June 2025, meaning it lapses automatically on 25 December. A lapsed Bill is finished; it cannot be revived or reconsidered in the same session under any circumstances.
Taken together, these provisions form an unbreakable chain. Every legal and procedural path the government might attempt is blocked by rules designed to safeguard constitutional amendment from exactly this kind of manipulation. Instead of accepting this reality, the Executive has chosen to push forward along a route that violates the Standing Orders at every turn and invites a deeper constitutional crisis with every step.
Digging the hole deeper: A crisis of legitimacy
What we are witnessing is not simply procedural mishandling; it is an Executive scrambling to preserve a political agenda that has lost its legal foundation and public legitimacy.
The sense of desperation is palpable. Even those close to the process admit as much. One individual who has publicly defended the Technical Committee privately remarked to me about a senior government official involved in driving the amendment:
“He’s mad. He’s fighting for survival. He’s been involved in too many deals and knows if he loses office he would be in trouble.”
This is an extraordinary admission. It strips away the veneer of patriotic rhetoric and exposes the real motivations behind the amendment. For some, this constitutional amendment is not about strengthening democracy, improving representation, or enhancing governance. It is about self-preservation.
When constitutional reform becomes a tool for political survival, the integrity of the entire process collapses.
Reconsideration by the Select Committee: A constitutional absurdity
That the select committee is receiving submissions on a legally dead bill is itself an embarrassment to constitutionalism. The committee is operating on the fiction that Bill 7 still exists. But a nullity cannot be revived by parliamentary enthusiasm.
The Executive’s conduct has now placed Parliament in an impossible position. If the committee proceeds, it risks dignifying an unconstitutional act. If it declines, it exposes the Executive’s impropriety.
Thus, the government has not only trapped itself—it has trapped Parliament and the broader constitutional order as well.
PULL-QUOTE
“A nullity cannot be revived — yet government insists on dragging Bill 7’s corpse through Parliament, even as its own mandated draft amendments and report of 1 December 2025 lie discarded.”
The unfolding crisis: A government at war with the Constitution
All these developments have combined to create a constitutional crisis that is no longer abstract or speculative; it is unfolding in real time. The government’s refusal to accept the implications of the Munir Zulu judgment has set off a chain reaction of legal, procedural, and political ruptures. The crisis is not a single event but a series of accumulating breaches that together threaten the integrity of the constitutional order.
At the legal level, the Executive is attempting to advance a Bill that has been effectively extinguished by the Constitutional Court and by the Standing Orders. By insisting on treating Bill 7 as if it were still valid, the government is placing itself in direct conflict with the very Constitution it claims to be amending. This defiance of judicial authority erodes the principle of constitutional supremacy and signals to all institutions that legality is optional when political stakes are high.
There is also a procedural crisis. Parliament, which is supposed to operate according to established rules, is being pulled into a process that violates those rules at every stage. The select committee’s ongoing engagement with Bill 7, despite its legal nonexistence, creates confusion about the status of Bills, the meaning of deferral, and the force of Standing Orders. The procedural framework that ensures order in legislative processes is buckling under political pressure.
Then there is the political dimension—a profound crisis of legitimacy. Public confidence in the government’s intentions has deteriorated sharply, especially given the widespread perception that the amendment is self-serving and rushed. The speed at which the Technical Committee was forced to work, the absence of genuine consultation, and the government’s failure to publish the Committee’s report all feed a growing belief that the process is neither transparent nor principled. Add to this the unresolved allegations of bribery of Members of Parliament, and the shadow over the amendment becomes darker still.
Finally, the crisis is one of governance. The Executive is not merely failing to uphold the Constitution—it is actively undermining it. By pursuing an impossible legislative path rather than accepting lawful limits, the government is damaging the same institutions that uphold its own legitimacy. This sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations and threatens the stability of the constitutional order itself.
What emerges from this picture is a government in open conflict with the guardrails of constitutionalism, unwilling to retreat even as its actions deepen the crisis on every front.
Conclusion: A crisis deepened by the government’s own design
The country now stands at the edge of a constitutional rupture engineered entirely by those entrusted to safeguard the constitutional order. This crisis arises not from legal ambiguity, but from the Executive’s refusal to accept the consequences of its own unlawful actions. Bill 7, nullified by the Munir Zulu judgment, cannot be revived through insistence or political will.
What makes this moment especially troubling is the government’s decision to discard the very mechanism it created to repair the process. After directing the Technical Committee to produce draft amendments and a comprehensive evaluative report the Executive has ignored these deliverables, treating them not as tools of constitutional repair but as obstacles to be circumvented, simply because their content does not further its narrow partisan interests.
Meanwhile, the Standing Orders leave no lawful path forward. A lapsed Bill cannot be revived. A Bill on the same subject cannot be reintroduced in the same session. A fundamentally altered Bill must be gazetted anew. By refusing to accept these constraints, the Executive risks drawing Parliament into illegality.
Layered atop these violations are credible allegations of bribery, casting a corrosive shadow over the entire endeavour. A constitutional amendment pursued under such suspicion cannot command public confidence.
Even if forced through, Bill 7 will retain the incurable taint of an unconstitutional constitutional amendment—born of an unlawful process, pursued in defiance of judicial authority, and advanced in contempt of procedural safeguards.
In the end, the government has woven and fallen into a constitutional trap entirely of its own making. The country deserves a constitutional process anchored in legality, transparency, and national interest—not one propelled by political desperation. Until the Executive acknowledges that Bill 7 is beyond resurrection, the country will remain suspended in an avoidable and increasingly dangerous constitutional crisis.
REUBEN LIFUKA WARNS RETURN OF BILL 7 TO PARLIAMENT IS BEING DRIVEN BY POLITICAL MOTIVE
Governance expert Reuben Lifuka says the return of Bill 7 to Parliament without incorporating submissions from the Technical Committee only shows that the bill is meant to achieve political gain.
On Wednesday, Chief Government Spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa revealed that the re-tabled Bill 7 before Parliament contains the same provisions as the earlier deferred bill and does not incorporate the submissions received from the Technical Committee.
Reacting to this revelation, Mr. Lifuka emphasizes that the bill has nothing to do with strengthening constitutional order but focuses on advantaging the party in power.
In an interview with Phoenix News, Mr. Lifuka has challenged the UPND administration to disclose when the amendments to the Constitution were gazetted and make public the report from the Technical Committee.
He warns that treating Zambians in a manner that seems they have no say over changes to the Constitution may have serious repercussions.
Zambia’s Bill 7 Standoff: When Power Collides With the Constitution
….As panic deepens, Attorney General Kabesha has rushed to the Constitutional Court, seeking to nullify the Bill 7 judgment on grounds of unconstitutionality….
_By Michael Zephaniah Phiri – Political Activist & Advocate of Good Governce_
Zambia now finds itself at a defining constitutional crossroads, where law, politics and power are locked in a tense confrontation. At the centre of this storm is Constitution (Amendment) Bill No. 7 of 2025 a piece of legislation that has moved from parliamentary ambition to judicial rejection, and now into an arena of political desperation and legal uncertainty.
What is unfolding is not merely a disagreement over procedure. It is a deeper struggle over whether judicial authority will be respected, whether public money will be accounted for, and whether constitutional limits will hold firm in the face of political pressure.
Earlier this year, the Constitutional Court delivered a decisive blow to Bill 7, declaring core elements of the amendment process unconstitutional. The ruling was not symbolic. It struck at the legal foundation of the Bill, making it invalid in its presented form. In any constitutional democracy, such a ruling should have marked the end of the matter either through full compliance, or through a sober, lawful review process
Instead, what followed was confusion, contradiction and political retreat disguised as consultation.
Government withdrew the Bill and announced the formation of a Technical Committee a group of experts tasked with collecting submissions and crafting proposals. Public funds were released. Consultations were conducted. Allowances were paid. Citizens were encouraged to participate. Expectations were raised that a new, legally sound framework would emerge.
But as 2026 draws nearer, the state has abruptly declared that the Technical Committee’s draft will not be considered by Cabinet or Parliament. The very process that was presented as a national corrective mechanism has now been politically discarded without explanation.
This abrupt abandonment raises a serious public question: Was the committee formed in good faith or was it merely a political delay tactic?
In the same breath that government has rejected the committee’s outcome, it has announced its intention to revive the original Bill 7 in its unchanged form the very Bill the Constitutional Court already condemned. This contradiction lies at the heart of the current crisis. A Bill cannot be both judicially invalid and politically reusable at the same time. One of these positions must be false.
Government’s defence is that parliamentary privilege allows legislators to debate any matter within the House. While that is procedurally true, it is constitutionally incomplete. Parliamentary debate does not override a court judgement. A Bill found unconstitutional does not become lawful simply because it is returned to the Order Paper. Outside Parliament, the court’s ruling still binds the state.
The danger now emerging is not simply legal inconsistency it is institutional confrontation.
The Attorney General has now moved to challenge the Constitutional Court itself, arguing that the judiciary interfered with Parliament’s law-making authority and acted under public pressure. Such arguments, if accepted, would fundamentally alter the balance of power in Zambia’s constitutional order. Courts exist precisely to place limits on legislative and executive authority. When the executive turns against judicial oversight, the fault line of constitutional democracy is exposed.
Behind the legal manoeuvres lies political urgency.
The calendar is unforgiving. Zambia is moving rapidly toward the 2026 general elections. The Constitution itself discourages amendments close to elections because of the risk of instability, manipulation and loss of public trust. With time running out, any attempt to restructure electoral rules, parliamentary composition or governance frameworks now is bound to trigger suspicion. It is no longer viewed as reform; it is interpreted as survival politics.
More troubling still is the cost to public confidence.
The church, civil society, governance advocates and the Law Association of Zambia have all raised consistent alarms. Their message is simple: constitutional amendment must not be rushed, recycled or politically forced. When such broad moral and professional voices converge, they reflect not opposition politics, but national concern.
There is also the unresolved question of public money. The Technical Committee consumed state resources. If its work is now deemed legally unusable and politically irrelevant, then accountability is required. Silence on this matter deepens public distrust and reinforces the perception that national resources were spent without due responsibility.
At its core, this is not just a fight over a Bill. It is a test of whether Zambia remains governed by law or gradually shifts toward governance by political convenience.
A government confident in its legal footing does not argue with court judgements. It complies with them. A leadership secure in public trust does not fear judicial oversight. It welcomes it. And a state that respects taxpayers does not abandon expensive national processes without explanation.
Bill 7 may have been declared unconstitutional by the courts, but the deeper constitutional question it has exposed remains unanswered: when law and political ambition collide in Zambia, which one ultimately prevails?
The answer to that question will shape not only the credibility of the next election, but the very character of the Republic itself.
THE Constitutional Court has refused to halt Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti’s decision to declare the Chawama parliamentary seat vacant.
Constitutional lawyer Tresford Chali had asked the court to grant him an injunction staying or halting the declaration of the seat held by Tasila Lungu, vacant.
BILL 7 IS DEAD AS FAR AS THE LAW IS CONCERN – BRIAN MUNDUBILE
By Brian Matambo | Lusaka, Zambia
Honorable Brian Mundubile made an appearance on Emmanuel Mwamba Verified tonight, 4 December 2025, and addressed the elephant in the room, Bill 7. His message was unambiguous. In law, he said, the Bill is already dead, but its ghost continues to stalk Parliament through a process he described as unconstitutional, politically reckless and dangerously dishonest.
Mundubile’s argument rested on the Constitutional Court ruling that invalidated the process leading to Bill 7. According to him, once the Court pronounced itself, the Bill ceased to exist. Yet the Speaker allowed it to be re-tabled, and a technical committee appointed by President Hakainde Hichilema went around the country carrying the same clauses under a different cover. For Mundubile, this was not consultation but an attempt to resuscitate the dead Bill 7.
He traced the origins of the crisis to the President’s public declarations on Women’s Day in Kasama and later in Mongu, where he claimed to have agreed with women and youths to amend the Constitution. No national dialogue, no roadmap and no legal framework accompanied the announcement. Instead, Zambians woke up to a document that Mundubile said was drafted at State House and presented to the public as a finished product.
This controversy has intensified since the Oasis Forum accepted an invitation to State House. The Forum had held a prayer rally against Bill 7, mobilised faith leaders, and prepared for a peaceful march. Many hoped the President’s invitation signalled a willingness to ease national tension. Instead, the meeting exposed the widening gulf between State House and the public mood. The President discouraged protest and urged patience, but within days it became clear that the process was moving forward exactly as before. Beauty Katebe, the Oasis Forum Chairperson, later confirmed that there was no agreement and that fundamental differences remained unresolved.
Callers on the programme reflected the same frustration. One insisted that Bill 7 was a matter of national survival and urged MPs to show courage equal to that of the country’s freedom fighters. Another warned that if the Bill reaches a vote on the floor of the House, it will pass, especially in a Parliament where the ruling party is close but not quite at the two thirds threshold. Several callers raised concerns that some opposition MPs may already have been compromised, prompting Mundubile to confirm that he convened an urgent meeting with PF lawmakers to warn against any betrayal. He said he is engaging members privately and has been assured by many that they will not support the Bill.
The programme also revisited the President’s recent complaint that critics oppose him because of where he comes from. Mundubile dismissed this as self pity, reminding viewers that President Edgar Lungu once received less than 300 votes in Dundumwezi yet never accused residents of hating him. He said a leader who was elected by millions cannot claim to be unloved by the same people four years later.
Throughout the interview, Mundubile tied the constitutional crisis to the country’s deteriorating economic conditions. He cited crippling load shedding, unpaid farmers, collapsing small businesses and miners resigning due to poor conditions. In his view, the government has chosen to pursue an unnecessary constitutional amendment at a time when families, students and enterprises are buckling under an economic burden they did not create.
He also acknowledged the internal challenges within the Patriotic Front and said senior members were working on reconciliation and preparing for a convention. At the same time, he assured supporters that the PF remains the only party with national structures strong enough to confront the ruling party in 2026. Decisions, he said, will be made soon.
In closing, Mundubile pledged to lead the fight against Bill 7 within Parliament and to ensure that every MP understands the long term danger of the proposed changes. He called on citizens, churches and civic groups to remain vigilant, insisting that the Constitution belongs to the people and not to any President.
His final message was sharp. Bill 7 is legally dead, morally bankrupt and politically corrosive. The legitimacy of Zambia’s democracy, he said, depends on whether Parliament respects the people or chooses to serve the ambitions of the Executive.
Zambia’s Foreign Exchange Reserves Hit a Historic US$5.2 Billion: A Turning Point for the Economy
By Dr Lubinda Haabazoka
Zambia’s foreign exchange reserves have surged to an unprecedented US$5.2 billion! This is the highest level ever recorded. This achievement is not merely a financial statistic, it is a defining national moment. Based on the latest census population of 20.1 million people, this reserve position reflects roughly US$250 for every Zambian citizen, signalling renewed macroeconomic stability and a decisive step forward in the country’s economic recovery. It seems that four years of debt restructuring and economic reforms are now paying off!!!
So What Are Foreign Exchange Reserves?
Foreign exchange reserves form the backbone of a country’s external financial security. They are recorded under the national balance of reserve account and comprise three key components, foreign currency holdings, Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) from the International Monetary Fund, and gold reserves.
These assets enable the Bank of Zambia to stabilise the exchange rate, support international trade, strengthen investor confidence, and protect the country from global shocks such as recessions, commodity price swings, and supply disruptions. In short, reserves are Zambia’s financial safety net. The larger they are, the more resilient the economy becomes.
A Sharp Rise Confirming Economic Rebound
Just three years ago, Zambia’s reserves were around US$2 billion. The rise to US$5.2 billion marks a remarkable turnaround and reflects the success of ongoing reforms aimed at restoring stability after years of fiscal pressure, currency volatility, and external debt challenges.
This improvement is driven by several factors: -increased export receipts from both copper and emerging minerals -stronger fiscal discipline under the debt restructuring programme -macroeconomic reforms that enhance predictability -renewed investor confidence supported by credit rating upgrades from S&P and Fitch – deliberate reserve accumulation strategies by the Bank of Zambia
Why Foreign Reserves Matter
A strong reserve position strengthens Zambia in several important ways.
1. Exchange Rate Stabilisation Robust reserves allow the central bank to smooth out volatility in the kwacha, helping moderate inflation and stabilise the price of fuel, food, and essential imports.
no
2. Improved Debt Management High reserves reassure lenders and investors that Zambia can meet its obligations, reducing borrowing costs and improving fiscal credibility. 3. Increased Investor Confidence A reserve buffer of US$5.2 billion signals resilience and makes Zambia a more attractive destination for investment across mining, energy, agriculture, finance, and manufacturing.
4. Guaranteed Import Cover Reserves ensure uninterrupted access to essential goods such as medicine, fuel, machinery, and agricultural supplies, even during global disruptions. This is Zambia’s strongest external position in more than a decade.
How Zambia Compares in Africa and SADC
Africa-wide Comparison Zambia’s new reserve level places it among Africa’s more stable economies. Zambia now ranks around 13th on the continent, a notable achievement relative to its economic size.
SADC Comparison
Within SADC, Zambia is now 4th, behind, South Africa, Angola and Tanzania. This gives Zambia a stronger reserve position than Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, and eSwatini.
A Per Capita View, US$250 for Every Citizen
When viewed per capita, Zambia’s US$5.2 billion reserve position equates to about US$250 per person, a powerful illustration of renewed financial strength and effective macroeconomic management.
So What Does This Mean for an Ordinary Zambian?
While foreign reserves are a macroeconomic measure, their benefit reaches ordinary households in tangible ways. 1. Greater Price Stability A stronger kwacha helps stabilise the cost of fuel, mealie-meal, medicines, and other imports.
2. Lower Inflation Over Time As currency volatility eases, inflation softens, protecting salaries and household budgets. 3. Better Public Finances Lower government borrowing costs free resources for infrastructure, education, health, and job-creating programmes. 4. More Jobs Through Investment A stable macroeconomic environment attracts investors who create new industries and employment opportunities.
5. Enhanced National Security Stronger reserves mean the country can respond to global uncertainty without falling into crisis. Put simply, stronger reserves mean a more stable economy and better prospects for every Zambian.
Gold, Zambia’s Fast-Growing Strategic Asset
Gold now accounts for nearly US$300 million within the reserves, up from just US$69 million three years ago. Gold is critical because it: – retains value even when currencies weaken, – diversifies reserve holdings beyond foreign currencies, – stabilises reserves during global turbulence.
This growth underscores Zambia’s commitment to building a more resilient and diversified reserve portfolio.
The Path Ahead
The surge in reserves is one of the clearest signals that Zambia’s economy is gaining momentum. Combined with improved credit ratings, rising investor confidence, and continued reform efforts, the country is finally moving from a period of vulnerability to one of opportunity.
To sustain this progress, the government must: – continue safeguarding and expanding reserves, – diversify exports beyond copper, – strengthen mineral value chains, – maintain fiscal discipline, – invest in job-creating industries.
The economic gains are real and accelerating. What is essential now is consistency and commitment to the reform path that has produced this turnaround.
Munir, Mukandila launch contempt proceedings against govt, Parliament over Bill
Lusaka Lawyer Celestine Mukandila and Munir Zulu have commenced contempt of court proceedings against Attorney General Mulilo Kabesha, Speaker Nelly Mutti and all MPs for presiding over and participating in Bill 7 proceedings, which the Constitutional Court ruled to be unconstitutional.
Others cited include Minister of Justice Princess Kasune, First Deputy Speaker,Honourable Attractor Malungo Chisangano, MP, the First Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly.
Speaker Nelly Mutti has been taken to court for contempt over Bill 7, potentially slowing Zambia’s constitutional amendment momentum ahead of the 2026 elections.
⚖️ Zambia’s Constitutional Crisis Deepens In a dramatic twist to Zambia’s fast-moving constitutional saga, Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti has been dragged to court by Makebi Zulu & Advocates for allegedly defying a binding Constitutional Court ruling that halted the controversial Bill No. 7 of 2025.
The bill, which proposes sweeping amendments to Zambia’s Constitution, has ignited fierce resistance from civil society, the church, and opposition parties. The Constitutional Court’s June 27 judgment found the bill’s process unconstitutional due to procedural failures and lack of public consultation.
Yet, recently, Speaker Mutti ruled that the bill could proceed, citing parliamentary autonomy and separation of powers. This defiance has now landed her in legal hot water, with accusations of contempt of court and undermining judicial authority.
What’s at Stake?
• Bill 7 is accused of centralizing power in the presidency, potentially allowing the sitting president to dominate Parliament and extend his stay in office.
• The Oasis Forum, church mother bodies, and civil society have united in opposition, warning that Zambia risks sliding into authoritarianism.
• The government’s 14-day “consultation cruise” has been widely mocked as a rushed and superficial exercise, failing to reflect the will of Zambia’s 20 million citizens.
️ Countdown to August 13, 2026 Elections With elections looming, Zambia stands at a constitutional crossroads. The ruling party appears determined to push Bill 7 through Parliament, while the opposition, still fragmented, risks handing victory to the incumbents by failing to unite behind a single candidate.
The legal action against Speaker Mutti could stall the bill’s momentum, giving civil society and opposition forces a window to regroup. But time is short, and the stakes are existential. ️ Final Word As the battle lines harden, one Kiswahili proverb rings true: “Maji ukiyavulia nguo, huna budi kuyaoga.” (Once you undress for the water, you must bathe.)
Zambia has stepped into the waters of constitutional reckoning. Now, it must face the consequences—with courage, unity, and vigilance.
EXPLAINER | What Zambia’s Record US$5.2 Billion Reserves and Credit Rating Upgrade Mean for Ordinary Citizens
Zambia has entered a new phase of macroeconomic recovery after the Finance Minister, Dr Situmbeko Musokotwane, confirmed on the floor of Parliament that gross international reserves have reached US$5.2 billion, the highest level in the country’s history. The announcement coincided with upgrades from Fitch Ratings and S&P Global which restored Zambia from default status.
In his statement, Dr Musokotwane told MPs Thursday that the shift “marks a turning point in rebuilding the world’s trust in Zambia’s financial discipline”.
Reserves serve as the country’s financial shield. They are the foreign currency holdings used by the Bank of Zambia to stabilise the Kwacha, settle external obligations and cushion the economy when shocks hit. Zambia’s previous low reserves during the 2020 default meant the country had little protection when global fuel prices rose and import pressure mounted.
This current position gives the authorities room to manage turbulence without triggering steep price spikes in fuel, medicines, farm inputs and key industrial goods.
The minister explained the practical benefit to households: “These improvements do not make everything cheap overnight. They break the dangerous cycle of uncontrolled price escalation.” For years, citizens have faced rapid inflation triggered by currency swings. High reserves reduce panic, restrain speculation and limit the sudden price surges that often hit markets during periods of uncertainty.
Stable reserves have helped slow the pace of food inflation by reducing import exposure for fertiliser and by supporting the smoother rollout of local production.
Credit rating upgrades matter because they influence the cost of borrowing, the flow of investment and the confidence of global suppliers. When Zambia entered default in 2020, the country’s reputation collapsed. Many investors cut exposure, pricing of imports tightened and long-term capital withdrew. The recent upgrades signal that lenders and markets now believe the country is rebuilding credibility.
This encourages inflows into mining, agriculture, manufacturing and energy which eventually produce jobs. “As Zambia’s reputation improves, more investors are willing to commit long-term capital,” Dr Musokotwane said.
Opposition parties have argued that the New Dawn administration has “done nothing” for citizens. That claim overlooks objective indicators from independent institutions. The debt restructuring concluded with official creditors and private bondholders, the stabilisation of the Kwacha relative to 2023’s extreme swings, the progressive decline in food inflation from last year’s peaks and the shift to local fertiliser production are measurable outcomes, not partisan claims.
Whether these trends translate into improved living standards will depend on employment creation and continued policy discipline.
Historical context is important. Zambia has not recorded reserves above US$5 billion since independence. Even during the copper boom years of 2006 to 2012, reserves remained well below current levels. The only comparable period was in 2013 and 2014 when reserves approached US$3.2 billion before falling sharply.
This present buffer is unprecedented and comes after years of economic strain, drought pressure and a global downturn that hit commodity exporters hard.
The government insists that increased reserves and better ratings are not ends in themselves but platforms for long-term stability. The minister used biblical imagery to stress shared responsibility: “Prosperity grows when people act, cooperate and refuse to surrender to fear.”
The policy message is clear. Fiscal consolidation has created room for predictable planning, and citizens must use the calmer environment to invest, trade, produce and grow income. Development, he said, “happens in wards, constituencies and districts,” not only in central ministries.
Zambia’s challenge now is to convert macroeconomic progress into broad-based prosperity. Stronger reserves protect the currency. Improved ratings attract capital. But businesses need credit, farmers need access to inputs and households need predictable prices.
The quality of growth over the next 24 months will determine whether the current milestone becomes a genuine turning point or another temporary recovery.
What is clear is that the economic fundamentals are improving, and the debate will now shift to how these gains reach the most vulnerable households.
Renowned Lusaka business woman popularly known as Zed Farmer, Maria Zileni Zaloumis, has been sued by a property company for failing to pay K400,000 accrued rentals.
And in the communication seen by Daily Revelation, Zaloumis has asked the property owners why they rushed to court when they had not finished with her and inspection of the house.
In this case, Hua Jiang Investments Limited has sued Zaloumis and Misheck Mwila as first and second
We are writing to express our deepest appreciation for the invaluable opportunity you and the Socialist Party Zambia provided us to pursue our studies. With great pride, we wish to inform you that we have successfully completed our academic program and are now awaiting graduation.
This achievement would not have been possible without the support and vision of the Party. We are sincerely grateful for the chance to develop our skills and knowledge in service of our collective goals.
We look forward to contributing to the Party’s mission and the betterment of our Great Nation Zambia 🇿🇲 with the education we have received over here in Venzuela.
With respect and gratitude, SP Venezuela Medical Students.
Finally, A Debate on Substance: Opposition Engages on Bill 7’s Merits
Open Zambia Editorial
Something important has shifted in Zambia’s constitutional debate. For weeks, discussions around Bill 7 have centered on process, procedure, and symbolic gestures. Opposition leaders condemned the proposed amendments in sweeping terms without identifying which specific provisions posed the threats they described. That appears to be changing, and Open Zambia welcomes it. As an organization committed to constructive dialogue and substantive debate on matters of national importance, we believe this shift toward engaging with the actual content of the bill represents genuine progress.
State House’s challenge to opposition leaders—to point out even one clause in Bill 7 that endangers democracy—has had its intended effect. Rather than retreating into vague denunciations, opposition figures are now engaging with the actual content of the bill. Detailed open letters with clause-by-clause objections have been published. Opposition MPs have announced they will outline their positions on specific provisions in the coming days. Active engagement on social media has documented visits to civil society organizations to discuss substantive concerns about the legislation.
This represents genuine progress. For the first time, we are having the debate Zambia needs: not about who delivered what letter where, but about the merits of specific constitutional changes. We commend every opposition figure willing to engage on this basis. Democracy thrives when leaders debate substance rather than spectacle.
The opposition’s critique focuses on what they call an “autocratic architecture”—claiming that provisions on by-elections, presidential dissolution powers, and nominated MPs combine to weaken Parliament’s ability to check executive power. They argue that reserved seats for women, youth, and persons with disabilities amount to “elite-managed inclusion” that serves as cover for consolidating presidential authority. They question the fiscal logic of abolishing by-elections to save money while adding 55 new MPs.
Interestingly, even critics acknowledge that Bill 7 contains beneficial provisions. OASIS Forum Chairperson Beauty Katebe has stated that there are a lot of good things in Bill 7, though she maintains the constitutional amendment process is flawed. This acknowledgment is important—it suggests the debate should focus on distinguishing between substance and process, between problematic clauses and sound reforms.
On the mixed-member proportional representation system that guarantees spaces for marginalized groups, it would be helpful to understand what alternative mechanism the opposition would propose to achieve similar inclusion. This would allow Zambians to compare approaches rather than simply choosing between Bill 7 and the status quo.
Regarding concerns about abolishing by-elections for party-held seats, it’s worth noting that many established democracies employ similar systems. Understanding how those democracies maintain checks on executive power could inform our assessment of whether Bill 7’s specific formulation contains adequate safeguards for Zambia’s context.
On the question of expanding Parliament from 156 to 211 constituency seats based on the Electoral Commission’s delimitation report, it would be valuable to hear whether the opposition’s concern is primarily about cost or about the principle of representation for growing populations. Separating these issues could lead to more productive solutions.
Perhaps most importantly, if Bill 7 contains genuinely problematic provisions alongside beneficial ones, it would help Zambians to know which parts the opposition believes should be preserved and which should be revised or removed. This kind of specificity would move the conversation from wholesale rejection toward constructive amendment.
State House posed direct questions: Do opponents reject delimitation provisions that strengthen fair representation? Do they oppose guaranteed parliamentary spaces for women, youth, and persons with disabilities? The opposition’s attempt to answer “we support inclusion but not this inclusion” rings hollow without a concrete alternative.
If opposition leaders provide the comprehensive, constructive critique they claim to have developed, this debate will advance significantly. But critique without alternatives, condemnation without solutions, and opposition without proposals ultimately serve neither democracy nor the Zambian people.
We praise those willing to engage clause-by-clause with Bill 7’s provisions. Now we challenge them to go further: show us your better vision. The Constitution belongs to all Zambians, and we deserve to see competing ideas debated with the seriousness this responsibility demands.
Kafwaya Secures Amendment as House Votes ‘Yes’ Following Procedural Lapse
Parliament News, 4 December 2025
The National Assembly has continued to scrutinize the 2025 national budget, culminating in the successful passage of an amendment moved by Hon. Mutotwe Kafwaya.
The House voted “Aye”, thereby approving his proposal to reallocate 6 billion kwacha toward dismantling Zambia’s growing domestic arrears.
Hon. Kafwaya presented a detailed case highlighting the urgent need to address the country’s 84.1 billion kwacha in unpaid domestic arrears funds owed to suppliers, contractors, and service providers still struggling under delayed government payments. The current allocation of 4.7 billion kwacha, he argued, was insufficient to make meaningful progress.
“This is about honouring what we owe,” Kafwaya said
“When we pay Zambians for work already done, their companies survive, jobs are protected, and money circulates more widely in the economy. Let us give dismantling of arrears a decent and realistic amount.”
However, in his response to the amendment, the Minister of Finance and National Development rejected the proposal, insisting that the funds Hon. Kafwaya sought to redirect were essential for centralized recruitment in education, health, and other critical sectors.
In a notable procedural development, Second Deputy Speaker Moses Moyo skipped the crucial stage in which the House is supposed to vote specifically on whether the amendment itself should be accepted or rejected.
Instead of asking, “As many as are of the opinion that the amendment be agreed to, say Aye…”, the presiding officer moved directly to putting the question on whether Head 21 should stand part of the budget.
By doing so, he omitted the vote on the amendment itself, effectively allowing Hon. Kafwaya’s amendment to pass unopposed.
This procedural slip meant that once the House voted “Aye” on adopting Head 21, the amendment was automatically incorporated.
Under parliamentary rules, when an MP proposes an amendment to a budget head, the following steps must be followed: 1. The mover of the amendment formally presents and explains the proposed change.
2. The Line Minister responsible for that budget head responds, either supporting the amendment or giving reasons for opposing it.
3. The presiding officer must then ask the House to vote specifically on the amendment to decide whether there proposed change should be accepted or rejected.
Only after this vote is concluded should the Chair proceed to put the question that the entire budget head whether amended or not stands part of the estimates.
Because the presiding officer proceeded straight to the final vote, Head 21 was adopted with the amendment already embedded, without any objection from the floor.
Parliament then moved on to consider the next budget head, making Hon. Kafwaya’s 6 billion kwacha reallocation officially part of the 2026 budget framework.
THE BAG THAT BROKE THE CARTEL! WOOLWORTHS GOES TRANSPARENT AFTER SHOCK BRIBERY SCANDAL!”
South Africans are buzzing after sensational revelations shook the nation’s criminal underworld and even forced a change in Woolworths’ iconic shopping bags.
Commentators say secrets were spilled earlier than anyone expected, after Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala allegedly helped collapse what insiders describe as a sprawling criminal network. The chaos has reportedly pushed Woolworths to introduce transparent bags, with critics joking that the famous black-and-white carrier can “no longer be used as proceeds of crime.”
This dramatic twist follows explosive evidence aired at the Madlanga Commission, where CCTV footage allegedly showed suspected “Big 5 Cartel” figure Katiso Molefe handing a Woolworths bag to a runner linked to suspended Deputy Police Commissioner Sibiya in what observers claim looked like a cash-for-bribes exchange.
For many, the sight of that now-infamous bag has become a symbol of how deep corruption may run and how quickly criminals improvise when the lights come on.
I am overwhelmed with gratitude and joy as I reflect on the recent events that transpired. After a period of intense scrutiny and criticism, I humbly apologized to the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops (ZCCB) for my statement, and I am grateful for their gracious acceptance of my apology.
The ZCCB’s response was a testament to the love of Christ, who welcomed sinners with open arms (Matthew 9:10-13). Their unconditional love, good reception, and lack of condemnation are a powerful reminder of what the Church is meant to be – a sanctuary of love, forgiveness, and restoration.
As the Bible says, “Love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8). I am grateful for the opportunity to put this principle into practice, and I pray that we can all learn from this experience.
To those who insulted me, I forgive you, just as our Lord Jesus Christ forgave those who wronged Him (Luke 23:34). I urge my brothers and sisters who may have wronged others to repent and seek forgiveness, knowing that “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins” (1 John 1:9).
This experience has taught me valuable lessons, and I am grateful for the growth and revelation that has come out of it. I thank God for men of God who stood with me, for family members who vowed to stand with me, and for true friends who showed up when it mattered most.
As I look to the future, I am reminded that “we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him” (Romans 8:28). I have no doubt that God wants to reveal something significant in this experience, and I am excited to see what the future holds.
May God be glorified in all things, and may we continue to walk in love, forgiveness, and unity.
Release all dead bodies, Release all Political Prisoners-British, Canada and EU Tells President of Tanzania is Samia Suluhu Hassan.
Irrefutable evidence of extrajudicial killings, disappearances, arbitrary arrests, and concealment of dead bodies exist
Joint Statement by the British High Commission, the Canadian High Commission, the Embassies of Norway, Switzerland, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and the European Union Delegation, on Recent Events in Tanzania.
We recall the statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union (2 November 2025) and the joint statement from the Foreign Ministers of Canada, Norway and the United Kingdom (31 October 2025) on the elections in Tanzania.
We deeply regret the tragic loss of lives and numerous injuries in the wake of the elections. We recall the government’s desire for peace and stability, and underline the importance of security forces acting with maximum restraint.
We reiterate our call on the government to uphold their international commitments to protecting fundamental freedoms and the constitutional rights to access information and freedom of expression for all Tanzanians
Credible reports from domestic and international organisations show evidence of extrajudicial killings, disappearances, arbitrary arrests, and concealment of dead bodies.
We call on the authorities to urgently release all the bodies of the dead to their families, to further release all political prisoners and allow detainees legal and medical support. We further call on the government to address the recommendations made in the AU and SADC preliminary elections reports which set out clear shortcomings in the electoral process.
We welcome the government’s recognition that understanding the root causes and circumstances of the violence including deaths is a vital step towards justice and reconciliation.
Any inquiry must be independent, transparent, and inclusive – bringing in civil society, faith-based groups, and all political actors
ZIMBABWE’S FIRST PhD IN 1499! THE MUNHUMUTAPA PRINCE WHO BECAME A CARDINAL!”
According to historical accounts, Southern Rhodesia now Zimbabwe may have produced its first PhD holder as far back as 1499. The figure at the centre of this astonishing story is Miguel Mutapa, the son of Emperor Munhumutapa.
Sent abroad by early Jesuit missionaries, the young royal travelled to Goa, India, where he trained as a Jesuit priest before continuing his religious studies in Portugal. There, he is said to have earned a doctorate in Theology centuries before formal universities even existed in Southern Africa.
His journey did not end in Europe. Mutapa reportedly rose through the ranks of the Catholic Church, eventually becoming a Cardinal stationed in Brazil. His remarkable life bridged continents, cultures, and empires at a time when such travel was almost unimaginable.
Today, his legacy is said to rest in a cathedral in Brasília, where he is believed to be buried an extraordinary story of a Munhumutapa prince who became a global religious figure.
If you want a more dramatic, more factual, or more conservative version, I can adjust the tone.
Growing up in the 1990s, I witnessed Zambia stand tall as a beacon of peace, not just in the region, but across the African continent. Under the leadership of our then president, Frederick Chiluba, Zambia played a central role in promoting dialogue, mediating conflicts, and hosting peace negotiations that shaped the course of nations.
Zambia was not just known as a peaceful country; it was the headquarters of peace in southern Africa. We watched with pride as our capital, Lusaka, hosted landmark agreements like the Lusaka Protocol, which brought together Angolan President Eduardo dos Santos and UNITA rebel leader Jonas Savimbi in a bid to end the protracted civil war in Angola.
We also witnessed Congo’s newly installed president, Dr. Laurent Désiré Kabila, sign peace accords with over 18 rebel groups, right here in Lusaka. These moments were not mere political events; they were affirmations of Zambia’s identity as a stabilizing force and an honest broker in times of crisis.
It is against that legacy that yesterday’s event in Washington stands out sharply. The presidents of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Republic of Rwanda flew to Washington, D.C. to sign a peace deal brokered by Donald Trump. At the ceremony, Trump hailed the signing as “a great day for Africa, a great day for the world.” He said the agreement marked a breakthrough: “Today, we’re succeeding where so many others have failed.” But he did not stop at rhetoric, he framed the deal as an economic opportunity.
Trump announced that the U.S. would sign bilateral agreements with Congo and Rwanda to give American companies access to the region’s rich rare-earth and critical mineral reserves. “We’ll be involved with sending some of our biggest and greatest U.S. companies over to the two countries,” he said. “Everybody’s going to make a lot of money.”
That contrast, between how African conflicts used to be resolved and how this one was, raises hard questions. Why do African leaders need foreign backers or foreign capitals to broker peace? Cities like Lusaka, Nairobi, Addis Ababa, Pretoria, capitals with long traditions of African diplomacy, could serve as neutral grounds for negotiations. Yet instead, we now see peace deals signed thousands of kilometres away, in boardrooms where politics and mineral wealth intersect.
I believe Africa needs to reclaim its voice in peacemaking. We once led our own mediations not because we wanted profit, but because we valued justice, regional stability, and human dignity. If we are to truly resolve our conflicts, perhaps it is time for our leaders to reclaim that role, to bring negotiations home, on African soil, and on African terms.
“Facebook Rapist” Thabo Bester Demands Top Government Secrets — Is He Threatening to Expose the Powerful?
Convicted murderer and notorious “Facebook Rapist” Thabo Bester is taking his legal battles to the next level — and it’s raising eyebrows across South Africa. Bester, currently in Tanzania after his dramatic escape from Mangaung prison in 2022, is challenging his extradition back to South Africa.
But this isn’t just about avoiding jail. He is demanding access to Minister Ronald Lamola’s cellphone records, documents from the Presidency, and files from Crime Intelligence. According to Bester, he claims these records are necessary to mount a proper legal defense — but critics say this could hint at hidden links between his prison escape, powerful politicians, and government insiders.
Bester’s criminal history is infamous: he lured women via Facebook under the pretense of modelling jobs, raped them, and was also convicted of murder. His escape in 2022, reportedly staged during a “cell fire” meant to kill him, shocked the nation and exposed serious flaws in South Africa’s correctional system. He was eventually recaptured in Tanzania in 2023 with his accomplice Nandipha Magudumana.
Now, Bester is painting himself as a victim of government overreach, claiming that his rights are being denied, his legal resources are blocked, and that he cannot access crucial evidence that could prove his case or expose what he hints are powerful political connections.
The questions on everyone’s lips: Is Bester simply trying to manipulate the system for his benefit, or does he hold explosive information that could shake the corridors of power?
South Africans are watching closely. Could this be the moment where a criminal exposes a network of corruption — or is it just another chapter in Bester’s shocking story?
ARMY UPHEAVAL! FURY ERUPTS AS MNANGAGWA HANDS TOP JOB TO ANOTHER ZIPRA GENERAL
A storm is brewing inside Zimbabwe’s military as former Zanla commanders and senior ZDF officers quietly fume over President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s shock decision to appoint ex-Zipra commander General Emmanuel Matatu as the new head of the army.
Matatu’s elevation confirmed at a high-profile ceremony at State House on Monday comes barely days after General Philip Valerio Sibanda, also Zipra-trained, retired on 21 November.
Military insiders told The NewsHawks that powerful Zanu PF figures wanted the top post rotated back to a former Zanla commander, arguing that the unified ZDF structure, in place since 1992, requires balance and equity.
But Mnangagwa allegedly pushed Matatu through for ethnic, regional, and political reasons, seeking to curb Constantino Chiwenga’s lingering influence and stack the army with his loyalists.
The appointment has ignited fresh tensions, factional warfare, and succession battles, with insiders warning that Mnangagwa is tightening his grip on the military to block Chiwenga’s presidential ambitions.-BoldTruth
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)
ZAMBIA NEEDS EXORCISM TO CURE UNPRECEDENTED LEVELS OF HATE – LUBINDA
PF faction Acting President Given Lubinda says Zambia needs exorcism to heal from unprecedented levels of hate which emanates from the highest office.
He adds that all those who sat to arrive at the decision to declare Tasila Lungu’s Chawama seat vacant before her father’s burial must consider themselves inhumane.
Meanwhile, Lubinda says government’s emotional outbursts over Bill 7 show that the proposed amendments are not for the nation but for a few individuals.
In an interview, Monday, Lubinda wondered how Tasila, daughter of late former president Edgar Lungu, was expected to appear in Parliament when her father had not been buried six months after his death.
“It’s so shameful that people can gather and collude to declare a seat vacant when the incumbent member of parliament hasn’t put to rest the remains of [her] father. How on earth do those people in Parliament expect a person to leave the body of their father in the morgue, in the mortuary? And go to Parliament and they sit in Parliament and debate? Every person, when their parents die, they take leave to go and put the parents to rest,” he said.
“And a funeral does not end until after the burial. If President Hakainde himself told us that he had stopped public engagement, he has stopped travelling because the body of his predecessor hasn’t been buried, how do they expect the blood daughter to abandon the father’s body and come to Parliament and say, ‘here! here?!’ That’s mockery, that’s inhumane, and all those who sat to arrive at the decision must consider themselves inhumane”.
Lubinda further said the country needed an exorcist to heal it from the unprecedented levels of hate.
“I’m saying Zambia needs healing from this unprecedented level of hate. National dialogue on hate? There is much more than national dialogue that is required. I think that we need exorcism. We have to write the Vatican. And the Vatican [needs] to send exorcists. We need exorcism to take out this hate because unfortunately this hate emanates from the highest office. This hate can be seen… For as long as that hate is not removed from the highest office, it permeates throughout all society systems. So we need an exorcist, not dialogue. Dialogue won’t do anything. I mean if there is a person who doesn’t know what dialogue is, the only thing he knows is lecturing [it’s Hakainde Hichilema],” Lubinda said.
“His hate for Edgar Lungu has outlived Edgar Lungu’s life. It’s unbelievable. His hate for Edgar Lungu has gone through to the wife and the children, and now it has cost Tasila Lungu her seat. It is hate that has caused that, it’s nothing else, it’s not the law. Anyone who has a little bit of love would have understood and appreciated the fact that there is no way that Tasila Lungu could be in Parliament and start smiling and laughing and shouting ‘here! here! Madam Speaker’ before her [father] is buried. Who expects that? It is just driven by hate, that’s all. But I want to assure Tasila that the God of their father will one day vindicate [her]. And she must be assured that she has won the hearts of many, many people for enduring all this pain for the love of her father, and we in the Patriotic Front will stand with her”.
Meanwhile, commenting on the cancellation of negotiations between government and the Oasis Forum, Lubinda said the Forum was in order to stick with their original demands.
“They [government] cannot accuse the Oasis Forum of going there without an open mind. The Oasis Forum are demanding that Bill 7 be dropped in accordance with the ruling of the Constitutional Court. There cannot be two ways [about] that. Their demand is, ‘stop Bill 7 because it is illegal.’ How do they expect the Oasis Forum to be open about it? This is a clear-cut matter. It is black or white, that’s all. It can’t be grey. So when they say that the Oasis Forum went with their original demand, yes! Because their demand is that they are not going to watch their Constitution being raped by Hakainde and UPND. The position that many Zambians have taken on Bill 7 is to respect the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia by respecting the judgments of the court,” Lubinda said.
“All of us, including the President, are bound by judgments of the court. And since the court said that Bill 7 was unconstitutional, it means, therefore, that it is non-existent. It does not exist. The Constitutional Court threw it in the trash bin! They threw it in the dustbin! They threw it in the garbage box! It should not be referred to by anyone. So the government is just being arrogant by saying that we have stopped dialogue with the Oasis Forum because their position is fixed. They cannot have a fluid position over a matter that is so straightforward”.
Lubinda accused government of being emotional on the matter, something he added was proof that the constitutional amendment process was not for the nation but for a few individuals.
“The Oasis Forum did not go there to say, ‘let us talk about the content of Bill 7.’ They went there to say Bill 7 is a nullity in its entirety. But remember that after the Oasis Forum said, ‘we want to protest’, the President quickly went into the press briefing where he was saying, ‘come, let us have constructive dialogue.’ What does constructive dialogue mean? It meant that he was willing to listen. But the truth of the matter, as it has come out now, is that he is not willing to listen. It is the government which is being arrogant. It is not the Oasis Forum. But government has to be reminded that those in government must not be emotional, because they are governing for and on behalf of the people. They cannot run [the country] with emotions,” said Lubinda.
“They have to govern, bearing in mind that what they are doing must be in the best interest of the Zambian citizens. Now that they are showing emotions, that they are being emotional, it shows that Bill 7 is not for the nation. Bill 7 is for a few individuals who see themselves as beneficiaries. When we had Bill 10, we were listening to all the people, we went ahead and listened to the people who agreed to make amendments.
At no time did we say, ‘no, we are not going to listen to any grouping.’ We listened to all the groupings and then went ahead until Hakainde Hichilema locked up his MPs like they were in a cattle kraal. So the show of emotion is the evidence of the fact that the content of Bill 7 is for individuals. Had it been for the state, the state would not have had an emotional outburst. The state has no feelings, the country has no feelings”.
LAURA MITI WARNS BILL 7 WOULD CONFLATE ELECTORAL SYSTEMS
Lusaka… Thursday December 4, 2025 – Governance activist Laura Miti has cautioned that Zambia risks undermining its electoral integrity if it adopts the system proposed under Bill 7, arguing that the amendment would effectively merge two fundamentally different electoral models.
Ms. Miti drew parallels with developments in South Africa, where former president Jacob Zuma’s daughter, Duduzile Zuma, recently resigned from Parliament following allegations that she had influenced young men to join Russia’s war effort against Ukraine.
She explained that Duduzile’s seat–held by the MK Party, led by her father–would now be filled by her sister, in line with South Africa’s proportional representation (PR) system.
According to Ms. Miti, the South African model allows political parties to replace Members of Parliament at will because voters cast ballots for parties, not individual candidates.
She noted that parties in that system own the parliamentary seats, can recall MPs without explanation, and even have the authority to withdraw the President if they deem it necessary.
She contrasted this with Zambia’s direct vote system, under which the electorate votes for individual MPs and the Republican President.
She stressed that once elected, officeholders possess personal mandates that political parties cannot easily overturn.
Furthermore, she pointed out that it is constitutionally impossible for a party to remove a sitting President in Zambia.
Ms. Miti said this is why Zambia has relied on by-elections whenever an MP dies or vacates their seat: “The contract is between voters and the MP,” she argued, adding that parliamentary mandates belong to individuals, not political parties.
She warned that Bill 7 seeks to borrow from the PR model by allowing political parties to unilaterally fill vacant seats within a parliamentary term–without returning to the electorate.
This, she said, would treat seats won by individual candidates as though they had been awarded through proportional representation.
Describing the proposal as “problematic,” Ms. Miti cautioned that, without the recall powers inherent in the PR system, party leaders could exploit the provision to remove MPs they disliked and replace them with preferred loyalists.
She suggested that such a system could incentivise political manoeuvring that might place MPs’ security at risk, remarking that Zambians would have to hope parties sought only to eliminate MPs from their seats, “not from their share of oxygen.”
Ms. Miti has urged a careful re-examination of Bill 7, warning that the proposed changes could distort Zambia’s democratic framework and weaken the bond between voters and their elected representatives.
Today State House has issued a press release demanding that the opposition should “point out even one clause in Bill 7 that is a danger to democracy.” The tone was dismissive and carried an arrogant suggestion that anyone questioning this Bill is simply seeking spectacle.
There are several clauses in Bill 7 that pose a real and direct threat to our democracy, our Constitution and the sovereignty of voters. Below are just a few.
1. Clauses 9 and 18: Abolition of By-Elections
These clauses remove the right of citizens to choose a new MP when a seat becomes vacant. Instead of a by-election, the political party will simply appoint someone from its headquarters. This takes power away from the people and hands it to party bosses. It also creates a system where MPs can be expelled or intimidated because their party can replace them without facing voters.
2. Clause 11: Presidential Power to Dissolve Parliament
Bill 7 gives the President the power to dissolve Parliament if he believes MPs have “failed to legislate.” This vague provision creates fear and weakens Parliament’s independence. How can MPs hold the Executive accountable when the President can threaten to dissolve them?
3. Clause 7(e): Presidential Nomination of MPs Allowing the President to nominate up to 10 MPs strengthens executive control over Parliament.
In a system where by-elections are abolished and party lists dominate, these nominated MPs become a loyal block for the Executive.
4. Clauses 22 to 24: Local Government Changes
These clauses remove mayoral term limits and allow MPs to sit on councils. This undermines decentralization and creates political dynasties at local level without accountability.
5. “As Prescribed” Clauses
Bill 7 repeatedly leaves important electoral rules to ECZ regulations instead of writing them in the Constitution. This allows rules to be changed without a two thirds majority. It gives excessive discretion to the Electoral Commission and weakens constitutional safeguards.
So if the UPND Government was truly interested in inclusion, Bill 7 would have contained mandatory gender and youth quotas, campaign finance reform and protections for women against political violence. None of these appear in the Bill.
So when State House through Clayson Hamasaka asks for “one clause” that is dangerous to democracy, here are several. These are not political games. These are constitutional dangers that every Zambian must be aware of.
Zambia belongs to all of us. We have a duty to defend our democracy, our Constitution and the voice of the people.
We will not be intimidated by empty State House press statements. We will speak the truth.
Simon Mulenga Mwila – Aspiring Mayor of Lusaka. (DBA-Candidate, MBA, LLM, LLB, Legal Practioner, Commissioner for Oaths, Notary Public)
US Reviews Ties with Tanzania Amidst Human Rights Concerns
The United States has initiated a comprehensive review of its bilateral relationship with Tanzania, citing concerns over the government’s handling of human rights, particularly the repression of religious freedom and free speech, as well as obstacles to US investment.
The review was prompted by the Tanzanian government’s response to protests and violence surrounding the October 29 elections, which have raised grave concerns about the country’s direction and reliability as a partner.
The US State Department expressed concerns over the security agencies’ violent response to protests, including killings, and the government’s actions putting American citizens, tourists, and interests at risk.
President Samia Suluhu Hassan’s government has faced criticism for its handling of the elections and the subsequent crackdown on opposition and protesters. The US review marks a significant diplomatic step, with the future of the bilateral relationship hanging in the balance, dependent on Tanzania’s actions to address these concerns.
A woman is accused of drowning her six-year-old niece during a wedding celebration because the child “looked prettier than her.”
The woman, named Poonam, reportedly drowned her young relative in a tub of water after her family gathered for a ceremony in Panipat, northern India, on Monday, Dec. 1.
The girl, named Vidhi, had attended the wedding with her father, mother, 10-month-old brother and her grandmother.
Vidhi’s father is said to have received a phone call during the celebrations, informing him that the girl had gone missing. This prompted a family search party.
After an hour, Vidhi’s grandmother, Omwati, found her de@d in a nearby storeroom, with her head submerged underwater.
She was rushed to the nearby NC Medical College, where she was later pronounced de@d.
Police arrested Poonam following the de@th and she then confessed to k!lling Vidhi, her paternal niece.
According to local media, Poonam told police that “she didn’t want anyone to look more beautiful” than her at the wedding.
Superintendent of Police Bhupender Singh said that according to investigators, the woman committed the crime when all the guests were out of the house.
Poonam allegedly saw the child climbing the stairs before following her to the terrace and making conversation with her.
“After having her placed in a plastic tub filled with water outside the storeroom, she drowned the child in the tub, then bolted the door from the outside, and came down,” Superintendent Singh said.
“During interrogation, the accused woman told the police that she was irritated by beautiful girls.”
Poonan also reportedly confessed to previously murd3ring another three children, including another niece and her own son, whom she also drowned.
In 2023, the woman allegedly murd3red her sister-in-law’s daughter, 9, before then k!lling her own son to “avoid suspicion.”
In August this year, she allegedly k!lled a young girl in a nearby town because she was “prettier” than her.
Police revealed that the family previously considered these de@ths accidental and that Poonam “committed these crimes one after the other.”
From Lagos, Gauteng and Somalia, POTUS Trump rages on
Amb. Anthony Mukwita wrote-
4th Dec 25
Quick Take: The Trump–Omar feud is less a policy debate than a political theatre of insults, race, and identity.
Trump calls Somalia “the worst country in the world,” Omar says he’s “obsessed with me, I don’t know why.” Meanwhile, Trump brokers peace between Congo and Rwanda but rattles sabers at South Africa and Nigeria.
Analysts laugh, the world watches, and Africa wonders what Kissinger would say. Developing: Trump vs. Omar — A Global Comedy of Errors
It began, as most Trump feuds do, with a microphone and a grievance. President Donald Trump, fresh from brokering a peace deal between Congo and Rwanda, turned his attention back home to Minnesota. “Somalia is the worst country in the world,” he declared, adding that Somali immigrants had “destroyed Minnesota, a great city”.
Cue Representative Ilhan Omar, the Somali born congresswoman from Minnesota, who shot back: “Trump is obsessed with me. I don’t know why. Maybe he thinks I’m living rent free in his head.”
She accused him of Islamophobia, noting that his attacks on Somali immigrants were less about policy than prejudice.
This is not their first round. Trump once famously referred to African nations as “shithole countries”, a remark that analysts say revealed more about his politics than his geography.
Omar, meanwhile, has become his favorite foil, a progressive Muslim woman who embodies everything Trump’s base loves to hate.
But here’s the irony: while Trump is busy beating the drums of rhetorical war against South Africa and Nigeria, he is simultaneously parading as peacemaker in Central Africa.
The Washington Accords, signed under his watch, brought Presidents Kagame and Tshisekedi together to end fighting in eastern Congo. So, is Trump the global dealmaker or the neighborhood brawler?
Analysts laugh. “It’s race, it’s politics, it’s theatre,” one quipped. Venezuela watches from afar, perhaps relieved that—for once—the spotlight isn’t on Caracas.
The French, ever fond of diplomacy, might shrug and say: “La diplomatie, c’est l’art de dire ‘bon chien’ jusqu’à ce qu’on trouve un bâton.” (Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘good dog’ until you find a stick.)
How does this end? Likely not with a handshake. Trump thrives on conflict; Omar thrives on resistance.
Their feud is less about Somalia or Minnesota than about America’s unresolved struggle with race, immigration, and identity. POTUS says she is married to her ow brother go figure!
Lessons for Africa? Henry Kissinger once warned that “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.” Africa should take note: today you’re a partner in peace, tomorrow you’re a “shithole.”
The continent must build resilience, define its own interests, and laugh at the theatre—because in the end, this is less about Africa than about America’s endless appetite for drama.
Sources: ABC News, NPR, The Hill, PolitiFact, Stanford History, US News, PBS, France24, Guardian Nigeria.
DStv subscribers are facing a major shake-up. MultiChoice has confirmed that a dozen channels will vanish from its service on 31 December 2025. This sudden change directly impacts popular channels like CNN International and the Discovery Channel. The decision comes from the pay-TV giant’s new owner, the French media conglomerate Canal+ Group, which finalised its takeover in September 2025.
Customers received the news through a push notification on the DStv app on the evening of Tuesday, 2 December 2025. The message was clear and listed the channels set for removal.
“Please be advised that Discovery Channel, TLC Africa, Discovery Family, Real Time, TNT Africa, Food Network, Travel Channel, Investigation Discovery (Discovery ID), Cartoon Network, Cartoonito and CNN International will not be available from 31 Dec.”
It is noted that the notification omitted HGTV, but this channel is confirmed to be part of the group being removed. The announcement followed an earlier statement from MultiChoice that it had reached an impasse in negotiations with Warner Bros Discovery, the owner of all twelve channels. The existing carriage contract between the two companies expires on 31 December.
Why Are The Channels Being Removed? The primary reason centres on cost-cutting by the new owner, Canal+. The French parent company has been clear about its intent to reduce expenses at MultiChoice. The Warner Bros Discovery channel bundle is seen as a key target.
Industry observers suggest Canal+ believes it is paying for channels that are not widely watched. In the mature French market, Canal+ itself carries fewer Warner channels than DStv currently does. The new owners have reportedly conducted a fresh analysis of the deal’s value.
Hilton Tarrant writes, “The new owners would’ve done their sums and calculated very clearly and neatly or exactly how much they were prepared to pay to Warner, and for what, under a new agreement.”
This is a strategic move by Canal+ to reshape its relationship with MultiChoice. The company is effectively calling Warner Bros Discovery’s bluff in high-stakes negotiations. The removal highlights a practice known as channel bundling, where broadcasters must take a package of channels to secure the most popular ones.
What Does This Mean For Subscribers? For viewers, the immediate effect is a reduced channel lineup from the New Year. The full list of channels being removed is as follows:
Discovery Channel (121)
TLC (135)
Discovery Family
TNT Africa (137)
Real Time (155)
Investigation Discovery (171)
Food Network (175)
HGTV (177)
Travel Channel (179)
Cartoon Network (301)
Cartoonito (302)
CNN International (401)
Premium subscribers who pay over R1,000 per month will see their service reduced. There is still a chance the channels could be saved. A last-minute deal before the 31 December deadline remains a possibility.
The broader context is the uncertain future of Warner Bros Discovery itself, which put itself up for sale in 2025. A Bloomberg report indicates companies like Paramount, Comcast, and Netflix are interested in parts of the business, which could further affect channel availability globally.
Latvia is facing a severe gender imbalance that has left many women struggling to find partners, prompting a surge in demand for so called “husband for an hour” services that provide men to handle household chores and repairs. The trend stems from a longstanding demographic gap in which Latvian women are generally better educated, healthier and living significantly longer than men.
Dania, a 29 year old festival worker, said the shortage of men is felt in daily life. “There’s nothing wrong with that… but just for the good balance you would want to have some more men to flirt or chat with. It’s just more interesting,” she said. Her friend Zane added that many women are leaving Latvia to find partners abroad.
With eligible men increasingly scarce, businesses offering short term handyman services have flourished. Companies such as Komanda24 advertise “men with golden hands” who can be called out seven days a week to fix plumbing issues, mount televisions, assemble furniture or handle electrical repairs. Remontdarbi’s service allows women to book a “husband for an hour” online or by phone, promising arrival in about an hour, operating much like a ride hailing service for household maintenance.
The unusual solution reflects deeper social challenges. Male mortality in Latvia is among the highest in Europe, with men four times more likely than women to take their own lives. Sociologist Baiba Bela said the gender imbalance becomes sharply visible between the ages of 30 and 40. “In this age group the mortality for men is three times higher than the same age group for women,” she said, citing factors such as alcoholism, risky driving and workplace accidents.
Among those under 30, men outnumber women, but the pattern reverses quickly; by ages 30 to 39 there are nearly 3000 more women than men. The overall life expectancy gap is the widest in the European Union, with Latvian women living 11 years longer on average.
Software engineer Agris Rieksts said “macho” culture contributes to damaging behaviour. “It is kind of perceived that it is manly, that the more alcohol you can handle, the more of a man you are,” he said. Psychoanalyst Ansis Stabingis noted that economic upheaval and the transition from Soviet rule pushed many men into depression and unhealthy coping habits.
Writer Dace Ruksane said highly educated and successful women are often left single because they struggle to find partners who match their ambitions. “The smartest girls are alone. The really beautiful girls are alone – if they are smart,” she said. “They want to find partners who are equal to them. But a man, having all this choice, doesn’t need to be very perfect. He just sits in front of the TV and knows he can get a woman. And if she doesn’t suit him, he will get another.”
Eurostat figures show Latvia has 15.5 per cent more women than men, more than three times the EU average. With the country’s median age at 44.1, a crude death rate of 14.9 per 1000 and men accounting for over 80 per cent of suicides, many women are increasingly turning to practical alternatives to fill the domestic gap left by the demographic divide.
Manchester City and Ivory Coast icon, Yaya Toure has sensationally reopened his bitter feud with his former coach, Pep Guardiola, labelling the legendary manager a ‘snake’.
Toure and Guardiola have had a strained relationship ever since the ex-Barcelona manager offloaded the star midfielder to Manchester City in 2010, shortly after elevating Sergio Busquets from the club’s B team.
Guardiola saw Busquets as a better fit in the holding midfield role in his fabled 4-3-3 system. Toure completed 90 minutes on just nine occasions in his final season at the Nou Camp, before enjoying a glittering eight-year spell at the Etihad.
The pair met again in 2016 when Guardiola was recruited by City’s hierarchy and he once more relegated Toure to a bit-part role, leading to the player’s agent, Dimitri Seluk, speaking out publicly against the coach.
Seluk later apologised for those comments, which did little to encourage Guardiola to give Toure a second chance, and he left the club in May 2018.
Appearing on the ZACK YouTube channel, Toure described his former coach as a ‘snake’.
‘I don’t see a man, I see a snake,’ he said.
‘The Barcelona coach calls me back then and says, “You have to come back, it’s important.” My wife says to me, “Are you going to listen to that nonsense? He treated you like dirt, and now he wants you to stay, and you’re going to stay? Let’s go to Manchester, my brother”.
‘The guy didn’t play me all year, and at the end of the year, I shine at the World Cup (2010), and he brings me to Barcelona. My wife would tell me about him. “Sheytan, he’s not a man, he’s wicked.” She sees him as a negative person.’
Toure enjoyed a glittering career with Barcelona and Manchester City, winning three Premier Leagues, two LaLigas, a Champions League, and five domestic cup trophies.
The midfielder was also named African Footballer of the Year for four successive seasons from 2011 to 2014, winning the Africa Cup on Nations in 2015.
ZUMA’S MOSCOW MISSION ENDS IN COLD SHOULDER, “BLUE-TICKED BY PUTIN”
By: The Sardonic Observer | International Affairs Section, Slightly Serious News
3rd December 2025 – MOSCOW
Former South African President Jacob Zuma’s latest Russian adventure ended not with triumph, but with a virtual shrug from President Vladimir Putin himself.
The 82-year-old ex-president, long famed for his “special relationship” with the Kremlin, flew to Moscow in September to rescue 17 young South African men allegedly lured to fight on Ukraine’s frontlines. Sources say Zuma assumed decades of cordiality with the Russian leader would guarantee him a personal audience.
Instead, he was blue-ticked. Denied meetings with both Putin and the Russian defence minister, Zuma was redirected to a junior official, who politely asked that his plea be submitted in writing—on MK Party letterhead, naturally. Observers likened the scene to being told, “Your call is important to us,” by a receptionist who clearly did not care.
The fallout at home was immediate:
Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla resigned from Parliament, claiming she needed to focus on the crisis she allegedly helped create. She insists she is “merely another victim of deception.”
Aggrieved grandmothers begged Zuma to bring back their sons, many of whom reportedly “cannot even handle a rifle.”
Russia demonstrated the harsh realities of international friendship by shutting the door in Zuma’s face.
Recruiters allegedly demanded millions from families before releasing the young men, turning what was meant to be a heroic rescue into a transactional nightmare.
The incident underscores South Africa’s limited influence on the global stage. When a former G20 president is treated like a low-level courier, ordinary citizens can hardly expect justice.
https://youtu.be/o6honOuDPt4?si=e1Z6ERqXfaDClDaq
Meanwhile, the saga continues. The Hawks have arrested five more would-be recruits at OR Tambo International Airport, including a media personality. It seems the recruitment pipeline moves faster than any diplomatic intervention Zuma—or the government—can muster.
What was intended as a heroic rescue mission has become yet another entry in the annals of Zuma-related disappointment!
Zimbabwe Police Rolls Out Body-Worn Cameras Nationwide in Major Tech Shift
The Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) has begun deploying body-worn cameras to officers across the country.
This move marks another significant step in modernising law-enforcement operations and enhancing transparency.
Cameras Distributed to All Provinces According to B-Metro, National police spokesperson Commissioner Paul Nyathi confirmed the nationwide rollout, saying provincial commanders would oversee how the cameras are allocated and used within their jurisdictions.
“Yes, the process has started. We have distributed the cameras to all the provinces, and it’s the prerogative of the Officer Commanding the province on how those cameras will be distributed,” said Comm Nyathi.
He added that the ZRP has already begun training officers on how to operate the devices, though the process will continue in phases.
“I must emphasise that training is ongoing. There is no specific group of officers designated to use these cameras, so the process of training is still ongoing,” he said.
Boosting Accountability and Evidence Collection Body-worn cameras are compact recording devices designed to capture police interactions with motorists, suspects, victims and the general public.
The footage can be used to document behaviour, statements and evidence, while also promoting accountability and deterring misconduct from both officers and civilians.
Move Follows Rollout of Smart Traffic Systems The new technology comes months after the launch of the Smart Traffic Enforcement System in Harare and Bulawayo, which has already captured numerous traffic violations through automated monitoring.
Just last week, the police and the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe (TSCZ) introduced breathalysers and speed-trap cameras on major highways — a development expected to clamp down on drunk driving and excessive speeding
“Who really believes that Russia will lose in Ukraine? It’s a fable, a total illusion. It is not even desirable that it loses and that instability sets in in a country that has nuclear weapons” — Belgian PM Bart De Wever delivers a brutal reality check
He also stated Belgium will not seize frozen Russian assets for Ukraine, warning it would provoke Moscow’s retaliation and could undermine the Western financial syste
“What if Belarus and China also confiscated Western assets? Have we thought about all this? No, we didn’t”
Despite EU pressure, only Germany has agreed to pool the risks incurred by Belgium
Overall, he made it clear that confiscation will never happen the way Kiev and the EU envision
“Even during the Second World War, Germany’s money was not confiscated. During a war, sovereign assets are immobilized”
