The undersigned Civil Society Organisations would like to share our perspective on the roadmap and Constitutional Reforms that have been proposed by the Government.
We join the Zambians and stakeholders that have expressed deep concern and opposition to the proposed constitutional reforms currently under consideration by the government.
The proposed constitutional reforms, as they stand, are not just inadequate; they risk undermining the very principles of democracy, justice, and inclusivity that our constitution must uphold.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we oppose these reforms, not out of obstructionism, but because the process and substance fall disastrously short of what a legitimate, people-centred constitutional reform process demands.
In this Press briefing, we shall firstly reiterate our calls for comprehensive constitutional reforms, then we shall highlight the flaws in the approach and the proposal taken by the Government.
The Importance of Comprehensive and Holistic Reforms
Zambia’s many crises are rooted in systemic governance failures that demand comprehensive, interconnected reforms. The nation’s heavy reliance on copper exports, coupled with opaque resource governance and elite capture, has perpetuated cycles of wealth concentration and deprivation, leaving over half the population in poverty despite an abundance of both God’s blessings and mineral wealth. These economic disparities have been compounded by exclusionary governance structures that institutionalize inequality such as centralized power models which prioritize urban political strongholds, marginalizing rural regions. Gendered inequities in political representation and resource access persist despite constitutional guarantees. At the same time, the erosion of democratic accountability—evidenced by shrinking civic space, increasing political polarisation, and systemic corruption—has continued to divert public resources from critical sectors and has hindered equitable development.
These challenges are not isolated but interconnected symptoms of a governance ecosystem that prioritizes elite interests over participatory, rights-based development. Addressing Zambia’s crises thus requires holistic reforms that dismantle systemic power imbalance. Only by reimagining governance as a tool for equity, inclusion, and accountability can Zambia break its cycles of exclusion and forge a social contract that aligns state power with the needs and rights of all citizens.
Our challenges are tied to governance structures that fail to prioritize inclusive policy-making or equitable resource allocation. Comprehensive governance reforms are essential to overhaul these structures, ensuring that institutions are reoriented to address poverty and inequality as interconnected outcomes of political and administrative dysfunction, rather than as standalone issues amenable to superficial fixes.
The state of human rights in Zambia further underscores the need for a holistic governance overhaul. A Bill of Rights protects individuals from state overreach by recognising and protecting fundamental freedoms—such as expression, assembly, and equality—while empowering the people to demand accountability and access to justice. A robust Bill of Rights is critical to rebalancing power dynamics. It will provide a legal framework to challenge abuses, such as the suppression of dissent or the unequal distribution of resources, which have historically undermined trust in public institutions. Without these enforceable guarantees, development remains superficial, as citizens lack the tools to participate meaningfully in shaping policies that affect their lives. A comprehensive Bill of Rights is a necessity, ensuring that the state is held to account and that rights are not contingent on the goodwill of those in power.
A holistic Bill of Rights would go beyond civil and political freedoms to include socio-economic rights, such as the right to water, housing, and a clean environment, reflecting the aspirations of a population where over half live in poverty.
Where human rights are eroded, and the law is unable to meaningfully address violations, civic participation—which is critical for development—is stifled. Citizens are then unable to hold leaders accountable or contribute to national progress. Comprehensive reforms would allow us to integrate human rights protections into the governance framework, decentralize decision-making to empower local communities, and align resource allocation with developmental priorities, addressing these issues as part of a unified system rather than as disparate problems.
Our problems are further compounded by a governance structure where power is concentrated in the executive, undermining checks and balances and entrenching patronage networks that favour elites over the public good. Partial reforms, such as amending some provisions in the constitution fail to dismantle these entrenched power dynamics. Comprehensive governance reforms, by contrast, would reconfigure the entire system—strengthening independent institutions, enhancing participatory democracy, and embedding accountability mechanisms—to create a foundation capable of tackling poverty, inequality, underdevelopment, and human rights violations in an integrated and sustainable manner.
Ladies and Gentlemen, a nation’s constitution is not just a legal document; it is the supreme law of the land—the foundation upon which our shared values, rights, and responsibilities are built. It is a living contract between the state and its citizens, designed to ensure that power is both accountable and distributed equitably. Any attempt to modify this cornerstone of our democracy must be conducted in a manner that appreciates its sanctity, importance, and history.
OUR PERSPECTIVES ON THE PROPOSED ROADMAP AND PROCESS
Ladies and Gentlemen, the constitutional roadmap proposed by Minister of Justice falls short of the standards that a robust and inclusive constitutional reform process requires. The process even falls short of the standards previous attempts that have been criticised attained such as basing a draft off public consultations.
Rather than firstly facilitating a national conversation around the roadmap, the Government has presented it as something to be accepted by citizens. In the roadmap, citizens’ roles have been relegated to discussing and agreeing on the Bill after it is drafted—when, in fact, the Bill should be the result of citizens’ discussions and agreements. A good roadmap presents a comprehensive framework for the process of reviewing the constitution and must address the pre-drafting, drafting, and post-drafting stages. In this case, citizens have been robbed of their agency in determining what the process and the content of the reforms should be.
Legitimate constitutional reform must be built on the foundation of stakeholder consensus. Effective reforms require active engagement from all sectors of society—civil society, political parties, traditional leaders, and the general public—to ensure that the resulting changes truly reflect the collective will of the people. The current roadmap has been developed through a top-down approach that excludes essential voices. This exclusion not only undermines the democratic legitimacy of the process but also risks creating reforms that are unresponsive to the diverse needs of our communities. Constitution making, when done right, is an empowering process. Through an empowering process, every citizen comes to know that their voice matters—that this is their country too. Denying citizens the opportunity to participate and shape their future effectively disempowers them.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the current proposals risk entrenching the same power structures they claim to reform. Instead of dismantling and redistributing power to empower all citizens, these reforms offer only cosmetic changes that preserve existing privileges. The government’s proposals are being sold as a quick fix to the edges of our constitution while ignoring its structural cracks and weaknesses. The government is proposing that we repair our ailing country by repainting its walls while ignoring its collapsing foundation. That is what these reforms represent: superficial fixes that fail to address systemic failures in governance, accountability, and justice.
Constitutions are living documents whose parts are interconnected. You cannot reform electoral systems without addressing how power is to be exercised and ensuring the necessary devolution of power; you cannot tackle corruption without reimagining judicial independence or undertaking a comprehensive review of the institutions tasked with preventing, investigating, or prosecuting it; you cannot speak of economic equity without dismantling the monopolies of power that perpetuate inequality in all its forms. By isolating reforms, the government is creating a constitutional patchwork—one that may temporarily conceal problems while inevitably deepening them. History teaches us that fragmented reforms breed fragmented societies.
Governance is not a collection of isolated silos. It is an ecosystem where every element—from executive authority to legislative oversight, judicial independence to citizen participation—plays a critical role. When one institution is weakened or manipulated, the entire system suffers. Ladies and Gentlemen, a restructured legislature without empowering it to effectively oversee the Executive or an empowered judiciary cannot check executive overreach; a devolved system without fiscal autonomy becomes merely a puppet of central authority; anti-corruption laws without an independent prosecutorial body are nothing more than words on paper. Similarly, delimitation and redistricting by an Electoral Commission that is not independent or perceived to be independent undermines the essence of the exercise and can be a tool for abuse. The proposed reforms ignore these vital interconnections. They fail to address how power circulates, whom it serves, and who remains excluded. True constitutional reform must rebalance this ecosystem—ensuring checks and balances, decentralizing power, and embedding transparency at every level. Our nation deserves a comprehensive approach that reimagines how governance works in an interconnected society, rather than one that simply makes isolated adjustments that risk entrenching the status quo.
Our Views on the Proposed Areas of Reform
Ladies and Gentlemen, while we have concerns with the proposed areas of reform as presented by the Minister, we believe having a conversation without ensuring that we have agreed on a process that will protect the content gives legitimacy to the flawed approach and process that the Government is taking. The thirteen areas the government has termed as non-contentious, are not the result of a transparent consultation. Who decided that the proposals are not contentious? When did they decide? What was the criteria for determining whether something in the Constitution is Contentious or not?
Some of the proposals and the justifications given for the need for reform demand further interrogation by all stakeholders. Proposals such as removing the Constitutional Cap on the number of nominated MPs have the potential to undermine the Country’s democracy. Proposals such as the increasing the number of Members of Parliament demand conversations about how to improve representation and accountability and transparency in the work of our elected representatives. While we support the calls to have more equitable gender representation and fair representation of youth and persons with disabilities, this must be done in a manner that does not undermine democracy and good governance. There is little wisdom in overhauling the electoral system to one in which the combinations of systems to achieve gender parity and ensure more equitable representation has not yet been agreed, or where the proportions are not yet agreed. Introducing a new electoral system, amidst the administrative, and logistical challenges of registering voters, and managing an election is daunting in itself. Introducing a more complex electoral system in a country where there are so many spoiled ballots without factoring the necessity of civic education undermines democracy and participation.
Finally on the Process as has been proposed, the Minister of Justice highlighted that some stakeholders had participated in the Electoral Reform Technical Committee under the Electoral Commission of Zambia. Participation was in good faith on the understanding and belief that the conversations will be part of a broader review of the Constitution. For the civil society organisations that participated and are a part of this statement, participation was not an endorsement of piecemeal approach the government is proposing. It is disingenuous for the Government and the Electoral Commission to pass that consultative process as an endorsement of this process. It further raises concerns about when the Government and the Electoral Commission agreed that that process fed into broader constitutional reforms and would be considered an endorsement of the approach that has been proposed.
Conclusion
Ladies and Gentlemen, constitutional reform should unite the country and give every citizen the power and opportunity to shape their future. The government must empower citizens through transparent and participatory dialogue on constitutional reforms. In order for Zambia to achieve meaningful and sustainable constitutional change, the government must abandon this controlling, top-down methodology and instead foster an environment of open, inclusive deliberation that builds consensus and truly serves the interests of all Zambians.
Our criticism is not an attack on progress but a plea for a process that honours the dignity and rights of all citizens. We believe that a people-centred constitutional reform process will not only strengthen our institutions but also promote social cohesion and national unity.
To the People of Zambia, this is your constitution. It is the embodiment of our collective hopes, struggles, and dreams. We must demand a process that is transparent, inclusive, and transformative. A constitution shaped by informed citizens and built on consensus will safeguard our freedoms and ensure that power is truly in the hands of the people. The constitution is the bedrock of our shared values—it is the social contract that binds us together as a nation. It must not be subject to rushed, fragmented reforms that risk undermining the very principles of democracy, justice, and inclusivity.
History judges harshly those who have placed partisan or personal interests over those of the Zambian people. History will judge us all by the decisions we make today.
Whenever constitutional reforms are proposed, they are not merely a set of technical adjustments—they are potentially defining moments for our democracy. Only a holistic, people-driven process can deliver the meaningful reforms our nation desperately needs. We again call on the government to stop the current process—a strategic halt to a potentially divisive process—and to commit to genuine public engagement, comprehensive planning, and true stakeholder consensus.
This statement is Read by:
Ms Faides Temba Temba
Country Director
ActionAid Zambia
For and on behalf of:
Chapter One Foundation
ActionAid
Civil Society for Poverty Reduction
Alliance for Community Action
Alliance for Accountability Advocates Zambia
Advocates for Democratic Governance Foundation
Women in Law in Southern Africa
Zambia Council for Social Development
Media Institute for Southern Africa
People’s Action for Accountability and Good Governance
Women in Law and Development in Africa
PANOS Institute Southern Africa
Zambia Alliance of Women
Transparency International Zambia
Foundation for Democratic Process
Centre for Environmental Justice
Zambia Civic Education Association
Centre for Trade Policy and Development
Southern Africa Cross Border Traders Organisation