Press Statement from the Office of the Secretary General of the Tonse-PF Alliance, Hon. Raphael Mangani Nakachinda
Date: June 04, 2025
The Tonse-PF Alliance unequivocally rejects the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2025, as gazetted by the current administration. This proposed amendment is a blatant affront to our democratic principles and an insult to the intelligence of the Zambian people.
1. Flawed Process and Lack of Genuine Consultation
The government’s approach to constitutional reform has been characterized by a top-down methodology, lacking genuine public consultation. Civil society organizations have expressed deep concern over the absence of a clear and transparent roadmap for the amendment process. The announcement of constitutional amendments without a detailed plan undermines the participatory nature essential for such a significant undertaking.
2. Superficial Inclusivity Measures
The allocation of only three seats for persons with disabilities in the expanded National Assembly is not only inadequate but also tokenistic. This minimal inclusion fails to address the broader issues of representation and inclusivity. Civil society organizations have emphasized that such limited representation does not align with the principles of equality and non-discrimination. Furthermore, the proposed reserved seats for women and youth, while seemingly progressive, lack a clear implementation framework, raising concerns about their effectiveness.
3. Piecemeal Amendments and Political Expediency
The proposed amendments resemble the previously rejected Bill 10, raising concerns about the government’s intentions. The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has criticized the government’s approach, describing it as a reintroduction of controversial provisions through the backdoor. LAZ emphasizes that any constitutional amendments should be comprehensive, widely consulted, and not politically driven.
4. Alternative Approach by the Tonse-PF Alliance
As an alternative government, the Tonse-PF Alliance advocates for a comprehensive and inclusive constitutional reform process. This process should:
Engage in Broad-Based Consultations:
• Involve all stakeholders, including civil society, political parties, traditional leaders, and the general public, to ensure that the reforms reflect the collective will of the people.
Ensure Genuine Representation:
• Implement measures that go beyond tokenism to ensure meaningful participation of marginalized groups, including women, youths, and persons with disabilities.
Adopt a Holistic Approach:
• Address interconnected issues within the governance ecosystem, such as judicial independence, checks and balances, and decentralization, rather than isolated amendments.
Maintain Transparency and Accountability:
• Provide a clear roadmap and timeline for the reform process, ensuring that citizens are informed and can actively participate at every stage.
In conclusion, the Tonse-PF Alliance stands firm in its commitment to protecting the sanctity of our Constitution. We urge the government to halt the current amendment process and initiate a genuine, inclusive, and comprehensive constitutional reform that truly reflects the aspirations of the Zambian people.
Hon. Raphael Mangani Nakachinda
Secretary General
Tonse-PF Alliance
In short the Tonse alliance are not happy with only one issue which is the number of seats allocated to persons with disability. The rest of the write up was saying nothing but empty words to make the speech long enough and with no substance. I would have expected a rejection of each of the 14 amendment items with reasons why. Unfortunately they are silent and only spoke of seats for the disabled as inadequate. The reasons of lack of stakeholders consultations cannot be sufficient ground to reject the amendment in its entirety. Someone is not being truthful here. This is what the late Nelson Mandela would call beating around the bush but saying nothing
With his defunct pair of binoculars he can’t see and understand the ratios used. The importance of census is to help the government get number of people categorically to determine ratios for relative distribution of national resources and other determinations of allocation. In this regard the number allocated for the seats of disabled, is justified by the ratio formula for distribution. So nakachinda, don’t just argue for the sake of arguing. Thanks to HH for free education and making mathematics a compulsory subject.