WHY ZAMBIA’S NGOs WANT TO MARCH BEFORE INK IS DRY
….civil society want to revive spirit of 2001 to draw a line in the sand
By DAVID KANDUZA
THE Constitutional waters in Zambia, usually calm between election cycles, have suddenly begun to churn.
On November 25, 2026, a coalition of the country’s heaviest civic hitters—including Transparency International Zambia and the Council of Churches in Zambia—intend to lead citizens into the streets in a peaceful procession.
The banners will read of defense, preservation, and democratic loyalty.
Yet, to the casual observer, the march looks like a battle against a ghost: no bill to alter the Constitution sits before Parliament and no Government official has openly claimed a desire to rule forever.
So why march now?
The trigger was pulled on October 27, when a counter-group of citizens formally petitioned the National Assembly, calling the current two-term limit ‘counterproductive’ and an obstacle to long-term development.
For seasoned civic activists, those words are a familiar, dangerous melody.
They remember 2001, when the second Republican president Frederick Chiluba’s allies tried to orchestrate a ‘popular demand’ for a third term.
They see the warnings flashing across Africa this very year—from Kinshasa to Harare—where constitutional limits are being dismantled.
The NGOs are acting on a simple rule of political physics: it is infinitely easier to stop a snowball at the top of the hill than a political avalanche on the floor of Parliament.
Yet, as the country prepares to see how the November 25 demonstration escalates, a deeper question hangs over the democratic landscape.
If the people truly hold the ultimate power, why fear a limitless term?
If a president underperforms, the ballot box remains the ultimate eviction notice.
Zambia proved this by voting out incumbent presidents in 2011 and 2021.
The real vulnerability in Zambia’s democracy today may not be a flaw in the text of the Constitution, but a vacuum on the political stage.
The opposition is currently so fragmented that it recently failed to even field a candidate in the Mandevu Constituency—a traditional opposition stronghold.
Without a formidable, organised political alternative, a dominant ruling party can comfortably control the narrative, regardless of what the rules state.
When the footsteps of the protestors echo through Lusaka later this month, if at all they succeed, the message will be clear: rules matter and thresholds must be guarded.
But as the dust settles, Zambia’s civic leaders may need to confront an equally pressing reality—that a Constitution is only as strong as the political competition alive within its democracy.
While civil society organisations play a vital role as early-warning systems against institutional overreach, their defensive strategy tackles only half of the democratic equation.
Guarding the text of the Constitution from premature manipulation ensures that the legal rules of the game remain fair.
However, those rules only matter if there are strong, organised and viable players on the field to contest them.
Ultimately, Zambia’s democratic resilience will not be decided solely by keeping the gates of the presidency locked at two terms.
It will depend on building a robust, competitive political ecosystem where the opposition can effectively check power in Parliament, giving citizens a genuine and meaningful choice every time they step up to the ballot box.