Zambia is gearing up for one of the most ambitious constitutional overhauls in its history, one that could reshape politics and governance in the Southern African nation.
From increasing the number of nominated Members of Parliament (MPs) to enforcing stricter election rules and making room for marginalised groups in governance, the proposed amendments have sparked intense debate.
Justice Minister Princess Kasune unveiled the Constitutional Amendment Bill on 26 March, setting the stage for discussions that could redefine the way Zambia is governed.
Some say the changes will bring fairness and accountability, while others worry about the hidden consequences.
So, what’s really at stake?
Parliament’s Nominated Seats: A Clever Fix or a Political Loophole?
Right now, Zambia’s president can nominate up to eight MPs. The proposed amendment removes that cap, leaving Parliament to decide how many should be nominated.
On paper, this could allow for broader representation, ensuring that voices from different sectors—such as civil society and professional bodies—are heard. But without a fixed number, could it also open the door to political favouritism? The details remain unclear.
90-Day Rule: Stripping Ministers of Power Before Elections
One of the biggest shake-ups in the proposal is the requirement for cabinet ministers to step down three months before elections. The reasoning is simple: prevent those in power from using government resources to gain an unfair advantage.
But this move raises practical concerns. Who runs key ministries in the interim? Could such a transition create instability? While the idea sounds fair, its implementation will be anything but straightforward.
Reworking Constituencies for a Fairer Share of Resources
Zambia’s electoral map could soon look very different. The bill proposes redrawing constituency boundaries to reflect population size and geographic realities. This change is meant to ensure that the Constituency Development Fund (CDF)—money allocated for local projects—is distributed more fairly.
Currently, some large constituencies with high populations receive the same funding as much smaller ones. If this goes through, expect a political battle over which areas gain and which lose.
Reserved Seats: A Step Towards Inclusive Politics
For years, women, youth, and persons with disabilities have struggled to secure political seats. This bill offers a direct solution: reserved seats for these underrepresented groups. But the big question remains—how many? Without a specific quota, this well-intentioned change could end up being just another empty promise.
No More Election Delays Due to Candidate Withdrawals
Under the current system, if a candidate resigns before an election, fresh nominations must be held. This often leads to unnecessary delays. The proposed amendment scraps that rule, ensuring elections proceed as planned, even if a candidate pulls out.
It’s a practical fix, but it could also leave voters in a tricky position. What happens if a major contender suddenly quits, leaving only weak candidates in the race?
Bringing MPs into Local Councils—A Smart Move or a Conflict of Interest?
The bill also suggests that MPs should become part of local councils. The idea is to create a direct link between lawmakers and community development. In theory, this could speed up decision-making and funding allocation. But some fear it could blur the lines between legislative and executive roles, leading to power struggles at the local level.
Election Petitions: Justice, But on a Deadline
To avoid prolonged legal battles, the proposal limits the time courts have to resolve election disputes. Parliamentary petitions must be settled within 90 days, while presidential petitions must be wrapped up in just 14 days.
While this would bring much-needed speed to the process, legal experts worry that rushed decisions could lead to flawed rulings. Can a fair verdict truly be delivered in just two weeks?
Mayors for Life? A Controversial Proposal
One of the most surprising changes in the bill is the removal of the two-term limit for mayors. Supporters argue that experienced leaders should be allowed to serve as long as voters want them. However, critics see this as a dangerous move that could allow political strongholds to form in city leadership. If passed, Zambia could see the same individuals holding mayoral positions for decades.
What’s in a Definition? Changing the Legal Meaning of ‘Child’
In what might seem like a minor change, the bill proposes redefining a child as anyone “under 18” rather than “18 or below.” On the surface, this doesn’t look like a big deal. But legally, it could affect things like juvenile justice, marriage laws, and even social protection programmes. Sometimes, small wording changes have big consequences.
Key Government Positions: Lowering the Bar?
Another proposed change would reduce the required experience for the Secretary to the Cabinet from 10 years to five. This could open the door for younger, more dynamic officials. But critics argue that experience in such a high-stakes role shouldn’t be compromised.
Meanwhile, a major shift is also being proposed for the Attorney General and Solicitor General. Under current law, these officials automatically leave office when a new president takes over. The amendment would allow them to stay until their replacements are appointed, ensuring continuity in legal affairs.
What Happens Next?
With these sweeping proposals on the table, Zambia’s Parliament has a tough decision to make. If passed, these reforms could change the way the country is governed for generations. However, not everyone is convinced that they are in the best interests of the people.
