WHO HAS THE POWER TO CHANGE ZAMBIA’S CONSTITUTION? UNDERSTANDING BILL NO. 7 AND THE ROLES OF THE PRESIDENT AND PARLIAMENT
By; Tobbius Chilembo Hamunkoyo, LLB 13/07/2025
In Zambia, the power to change the Constitution or start new laws is shared between the President and the National Assembly, as guided by the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016.
The Constitution is the highest law in the country, and any amendment or new law must follow strict legal steps to ensure transparency, public involvement, and legality. The National Assembly is the main law-making body, while the President plays a key role in proposing laws and setting policy direction.
According to Article 79 of the Constitution, Parliament may change the Constitution at any time during its five-year term.
There is no legal limit on when such amendments can be made, provided the correct procedures are followed. These include publishing the full text of the amendment Bill in the Government Gazette at least 30 days before its first reading (Article 79(2)(a)), and securing a two-thirds majority vote from all Members of Parliament on both the second and third readings (Article 79(2)(b)). This protects the Constitution from being changed without broad political agreement
However, if the proposed amendment affects Part III (the Bill of Rights) or Article 79 itself, it must first go to a national referendum, as required by Article 79(3). At least 50% of eligible voters must vote in favour of the amendment before Parliament can proceed.
The law also provides that any such referendum must be conducted under rules set out in an Act of Parliament (Article 79(4)), such as the Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016 read together with it’s Amendment Act no.32 of 2021. This ensures that important rights and freedoms cannot be removed or changed without the people’s direct approval.
In addition to constitutional amendments, the President has the power to initiate Bills, as stated in Article 92(2)(i) of the 2016 amended Constitution.
These Bills, often called Government Bills, reflect the Executive’s plans and policies. They are usually prepared by government ministries and submitted to the National Assembly for debate.
However, once a Bill is introduced, it is Parliament that decides whether to approve, amend, or reject it. In Zambia, the President cannot make laws alone, Parliament must agree. This maintains the principle of separation of powers and democratic oversight.
Importantly, opposition political parties, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders have no legal authority to block or stop the progression of a Bill, including Bill No. 7, as long as it complies with the Constitution.
The Constitution does not give legal standing to these groups to prevent a Bill from being tabled, read, or debated in Parliament.
Their role is limited to advocacy, consultation, and participation through public engagement mechanisms.
The legal power to process or reject a Bill lies solely with the National Assembly, following the rules set out in Articles 62, 79, and 92 of the Constitution. Therefore, objections to Bill No. 7 must be addressed through lawful participation in the legislative process, not by trying to block its progress outside constitutional procedures.
Both the President and Parliament play important roles in Zambia’s law-making process. The Constitution allows amendments to be made at any time during a government’s term, as long as there is a genuine need and the proper legal steps are followed, there is no specific timetable or restriction on when constitutional changes can occur.
Such changes must be handled with care, transparency, and public involvement. This ensures that the Constitution remains a living document that responds to new realities while protecting the rights and will of the people.
Well articulated.
And would like to emphasise that “Their role is limited to advocacy, consultation, and participation through public engagement mechanisms.”
And that public engagement can be through those that will vote for the bill. Petition members of Parliament with factual points in why the bill should not be voted for.
We read on a daily basis “generalisations that my professor would refer to as waffling. Uku sabaila. Speaking without substance and pretend you what you are saying has substantive content.”
What exactly is wrong with the bill? Until we have concise we articulated arguements against what exactly is wrong with the bill. We are, sorry to say and withdue respect; MAKING NOISE!.
And lets be adults about our choices and the destiny of this nation.