Why are constitutional amendments in Zambia to undermine the people’s confidence before the 2026 elections?

** The Zambian constitutional imbroglio: a call for real inclusion **

The debate on the amendments proposed to the Zambian Constitution, defended by President Hakande Hichilema as an advance for the representation of women and young people, highlights worrying contradictions. By omitting a real participatory dialogue, Hichilema seems to favor his political interests on national consensus. Comparisons with other countries, such as Chile, reveal a precipitation that could remove the necessary reforms. Instead of focusing on pressing economic issues, the current administration could miss a golden opportunity to create an inclusive environment conducive to dialogue. To restore confidence, it is imperative that the executive listens to the voices of all the Zambians. An authentic democracy is not built on opportunistic developments, but on concrete actions that meet the real expectations of the people.
** The Zambian constitutional imbroglio: between promises and realities **

The current debate around the amendments proposed to the Zambian Constitution raises crucial questions concerning the transparency, the inclusiveness and the true political will of the administration of President Hakiande Hichilema. At first glance, the amendment proposal, strongly promoted by Hichilema as a necessity for the representation of women and young people within Parliament, seems to meet a democratic need. However, by looking at it, elementary contradictions arise, revealing a gap between the stated intentions and the political reality of the country.

### one one -way survey

The first Zambian president, by his declarations, seems to have omitted a crucial step: popular consultation. The amendments to the Constitution, far from being a technical or bureaucratic operation, must be a reflection of the national consensus, and not the result of an opaque process devoid of legitimacy. By affirming that the Zambians “have now agreed to amend the Constitution”, Hichilema neglects the importance of a real participatory dialogue. How can he claim the agreement of the people if the latter has not even been informed of the very existence of the proposals modifying the legislative framework on which their rights and their representations rest?

### Comparisons with other systems

To give a comparative framework for this situation, it is interesting to look at examples from other countries that recently reformed their constitution. Take the case of Chile, where a constitutional revision process began in the wake of the 2019 demonstrations. Unlike Zambia, this approach involved a wide range of civil society groups in the development of a draft constitution, thus reflecting the diversity of opinions, cultures and aspirations of citizens. The result was an inclusive draft constitution which was submitted to referendum. In Zambia, the contrast to the Chilean model is manifest and seems to bear witness to poorly prevailing.

### The weight of 50+1: a painful political agenda

In the Zambian context, it is essential to wonder if the reforms envisaged are not more animated by a desire to perpetuate the power of the current administration than by a real need to anchor democracy. Is the famous 50+1 clause, which requires that a candidate gets an absolute majority to access the presidency, is really an obstacle to democratic governance, or does it rather serve as a control tool for the ruling party? The words of President Hichilema resonate as an attempt to eliminate the obstacles that could harm his re -election in 2026.

### A failed opportunity for youth

The promise to create an environment conducive to employment and economic prosperity has not been held. Instead of focusing on political measures that could really contribute to improving living conditions, Hichilema seems to favor a constitutional revision to redefine the balance of political power in its favor. The economic reality of young Zambians, with alarming unemployment rates, can no longer be ignored. A sincere commitment in this regard would remain a better approach to rally young people, who wish more prosperity rather than promises of representativeness.

### The Botswanese model: an effective counterpoint

By taking an example from Botswana, under the supervision of its president Duma Boko, it is interesting to note how the integration of young people in the decision -making bodies contributed to forging dynamic governance. This contrast highlights the lack of audacity of the Hichilema administration. Far from being innovation, Hichilema is enclosed in exclusion practices that the country could have happened. Inclusiveness should be the impulse of any reform; This must go beyond the simple quantitative aspect of the representation.

### Conclusion: towards a better dialogue

In the end, the call to a constitutional amendment, without a real participatory process, could prove to be a serious political error. Renewed transparency and sincere commitment to the population are essential to restore confidence. The road to democracy should not be paved with improvisations but based on a real will to balance between power and the people. For the Lambda Zambian, the promise of a better future rests not on opportunistic modifications of a legislative text, but on concrete actions which respond to the pressing realities of society. The time has come for the current administration to listen carefully, learn and respond to the voice of all the Zambians.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *