State House Widens the Table as Bill 7 Storm Enters New Phase

 MATTERS ARISING | State House Widens the Table as Bill 7 Storm Enters New Phase

The constitutional standoff entered a new chapter on Saturday after State House confirmed that President Hakainde Hichilema will meet additional civil society organisations on Monday, a move that disrupts the growing perception that the Oasis Forum alone embodies the national mood on Bill 7.

The announcement, delivered by Chief Communications Specialist Clayson Hamasaka, was deliberate in tone and strategic in timing. It came barely forty-eight hours after the President’s seven-hour meeting with the Oasis Forum and one day after their prayer rally that featured a heavy line up of former cabinet ministers, opposition presidential hopefuls and senior PF figures.

That rally, black-clad and symbolic, has increasingly been framed as a reunion of the old political elite rather than a broad civic reflection.

Hamasaka’s statement sought to reset the narrative. He said the President emphasised that the constitutional review “is not about advancing the interests of government, but about empowering citizens,” and that the reforms aim to widen participation for women, youth and persons with disabilities.

The message signals that government wants to reclaim the centre ground by broadening the list of voices deemed legitimate to speak on national reforms.

This shift matters. The anti-Bill 7 coalition has built its strength on the claim that “the people” reject the process. But those who submitted views to the Technical Committee through public sittings, online platforms and chiefdom consultations rarely feature in the public theatre. Instead, opposition pages and PF-aligned tabloids have filled the space with daily accusations that MPs are compromised and “bought.”

The Oasis Forum’s demand at State House that Bill 7 be “completely withdrawn” was presented as the national position, but its prayer gathering was dominated by familiar political faces who once occupied state power.

This is why Monday’s meeting is politically significant. It signals that the government will not accept the Oasis Forum as the sole custodian of public sentiment. By inviting organisations that support aspects of the reform process, State House is challenging the idea that dissent alone equals majority.

The President’s line that the Constitution “belongs to the people” is a reminder that the only institution mandated to reflect national will is Parliament, not ecclesiastical coalitions or partisan prayer blocs.

Anti-Bill 7 voices remain intense. Their media allies describe the reforms as a “power grab” and insist MPs cannot be trusted to vote independently. Pro-Bill 7 voices argue the reverse, saying legislators from all ten provinces are elected to settle national questions precisely because emotions shift, interests collide and pressure groups claim to speak for millions.

The reference to Edgar Lungu’s January 2016 amendments, which passed through Parliament despite UPND opposition, is a useful historical anchor.

Constitutional change has always been settled in the House, even in election years.

Hamasaka’s statement has landed in the middle of this clash. It carries a subtle challenge: if the Oasis Forum speaks for “the people,” who do the thousands who made submissions to the Technical Committee speak for? And if protesters claim MPs are compromised, does that render the entire representative system illegitimate?

These are not theoretical questions. They go to the heart of who has the authority to define Zambia’s future.

With dialogue continuing into next week and both sides retreating to review their strategies, the country enters a new phase where legitimacy, not volume, will determine the next direction.

The coming days will test whether consensus is possible in a climate where every group claims to speak for Zambia and where the central question remains unresolved: who truly stands in for “the people” in a constitutional democracy?

© The People’s Brief | Ollus R. Ndomu