The Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2025 pros and cons
By Dr. Lawrence Mwelwa
The Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduces a number of commendable reforms that deserve recognition. The proposal to adopt a mixed-member proportional representation system is a progressive step that promises to enhance inclusivity in Parliament. By allocating proportional seats specifically for women, youth, and persons with disabilities, the amendment addresses historical inequalities and aims to broaden participation in national governance. Furthermore, aligning the terms of Parliament and councils to five years and standardizing procedures around electoral petitions reflect a genuine effort to streamline Zambia’s democratic processes and improve electoral efficiency.
However, despite these positive strides, the amendment’s redefinition of the term “term” in Article 266 poses a serious and dangerous constitutional loophole. By stating that a term begins when Parliament first sits and ends only when Parliament is dissolved—without enforcing the five-year limit already stated in Article 81—the amendment opens the door for abuse of executive power.
It gives the sitting President disproportionate influence over the political calendar. As long as Parliament is not dissolved, the government may argue that the term continues—regardless of how many years have passed. This undermines the fixed electoral cycle and could legally justify overstaying in power.
Worse still, the amendment strengthens presidential authority to dissolve Parliament on subjective grounds, such as when the legislature is deemed incapable of performing its duties.
Though the Constitutional Court is meant to provide oversight, the language used lacks clarity and enforceable standards, leaving room for potential manipulation. In an environment where the separation of powers is delicate, such vagueness can easily be exploited.
Equally concerning is the amendment’s silence on how partial terms are treated. If someone assumes office due to a vacancy—whether as President, Member of Parliament, or Mayor—will that time count as a full term? This very ambiguity led to legal controversy in the case of former President Edgar Lungu, whose eligibility for re-election became the subject of national debate. Rather than resolving that confusion, the current bill reproduces it, thereby risking future political instability and legal gridlock.
Additionally, by allowing political parties to replace elected officials without a by-election within 180 days of a general election, the bill limits voter agency. This move, while possibly aimed at administrative efficiency, weakens democratic participation and promotes the consolidation of power within party structures rather than with the electorate.
In sum, while the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduces reforms that are progressive and inclusive on the surface, its redefinition of the term “term” and the powers it grants to the executive pose significant threats to constitutional democracy.
For Zambia’s future to remain firmly rooted in democratic governance, the language around tenure, succession, and electoral timing must be precise, transparent, and safeguarded against manipulation. Democracy thrives on clarity—not convenience.
Dr Mwelwa this is a good start up for the much needed health debate concerning the draft constitution amendments.It is exciting to see submissions starting.With me I firstly looked at age issue.Who is an adult? The draft constitution amendments has suggested 18 years and above.The question is at what age are the young people going to be acquiring the national registration cards? At what age shall they begin to vote? If a 16 years child is allowed to vote, won’t it be wrong to allow a minor to do that when it is now getting known that they are not of sound mind to make a perfect decision at that age? If we stand at 18 years as an adult age won’t we deprive a person younger than 18 years some certain engangements like school loan agreements and other incentives.I appreciate the one thing of protecting them from sexual abuse more especially a girl child.Are we going to regard them as having the ability to think correctly only when they go to vote? Or we shall stop them until they are 18 years for them to vote? Will those under 18 years not to be allowed to have sim cards for their phones registered in their names even when they posses their national registration cards? We shall enjoy a lot of debates on various matters concerning the draft constitution amendments I presume.It is for the good of our country let us do what needs to be done well for the benefit of the majority of the people.
What I do not want to see in the Constitution is BY-ELECTIONS. They are a TOTAL waste of money and time, and they just polarize our Citizens with stupid electioneering Talk. Completely useless. As a country we should have a “cooling off period” from one 5 Year – General Election to the next 5 Year-General Election, and in-between during the 5 year-Tenure of an elected Government, elected officials should be given time and space to either “work or mess up”, and also we the general citizenry should “roll up our sleeves and work”, until the next General Election, not ALWAYS politicking. If you care to observe on social media since 12 August 2021, on daily basis Zambians are just discussing and blogging Politics, and immediately an MP either resigns, loses his/her Seat or dies, Zambia becomes abuzz with talk and expectations of a By-Election, with its offshoots of Tribal Talk and Hate Speech amongst fellow Citizens. When do we work? If an elected Official dies, let the Party under which the Deceased was voted in choose whoever they want to replace the deceased, whether the new one chosen looks like a “Pirate”, does not matter to me, the citizens voted for that Party, let them carry out its mandate. If it is an Independent who “kicks the Bucket”, let the Candidate who came second in the General Election be given the vacant Seat. Whether they will be “killing or bewitching” each other to get the seats vacant, it none of my business, it is a “free country”. Please let us just get rid of By-Elections. All this Talk about “weakening democratic participation” is sheer Nonsense.
Who brain washed us that it is only the so called ‘ democracy ‘ that brings best results? Many countries in Africa and world had the so called ‘ democracy ‘ imposed on them with horrible consequences. No development to show for, no proper education – zambia still depend on outside engineers, health services including medicines yet it produces graduates who only know to recite things from books but NOT make. On the other hand, hatred and divisions in our societies are a result of this political system. Corruption is daily bread in addition to other vices life stealing state resources using positions of power. Does it mean even ‘ political students and analysts can’t figure this out yet are so proud that they are educated. If education doesn’t improve, bring good or positive results to/in society, it is a curse that should be illiminated. Let’s visualise African neglected management styles among our societies imbued with respect, integrity, honour and value for humans above objects. The systems aimed to care for each other – I am because you are. I will NOT allow you or your children to go hungry while I have something to offer – ubuntu philosophy. It is rejected as uncivilised yet accepted as ‘ do unto others as you would like them do unto you’ just because it comes from where ‘ democracy ‘ originates. Our minds must be damaged and yet even the justice system dealing with ‘ genocide’ the African approach proved to be more superior in bringing reconciliation while very cost effective as compared to western punitive system. Lastly though NOT least, the sahel states approaches have eliminated debt, brought massive developments in infrastructure, manufacturing, education, security, agriculture and food , health and medical services including new health facilities. WHY NOT FOLLOW WHAT WORKS? Are we brain dead?
Dr mwelwaa, your intended communication to the government, as an opposition for good checks and balances is not professionally complete. You have only stated your observation mainly what you view as not clear and that might be another set of lacunas in the constitution, but you have not given your input or suggestions to improve and make the document better.