Rules of the game
The timing for Zambia to enact its new constitution upsets civil society
Zambia is in the process of enacting its fifth constitution in 50 years, which it hopes will address the weaknesses of the last version, enacted in 1996.
Though the content of the draft constitution hasn’t raised eyebrows, the mode of its adoption is the bone of contention between government and civil society.
Zambia’s government wants to use a phased approach where noncontentious issues are taken to parliament for amendment and are adopted before the 2016 elections. These issues would include the election of the president by a 50% plus one vote majority, the question of a presidential running-mate and dual citizenship. Touchy issues, including Zambia’s bill of rights, will be adopted after a referendum held alongside the general election.
Government says lack of funds and time are the reasons it has opted for the twophased approach. It insists that conducting an expensive referendum in 2015 — just over a year before general elections next September — would imply sacrificing resources that would otherwise be directed to urgent social development programmes.
But a group of nongovernmental organisations under the banner of the Grand Coalition on a People-Driven Constitution and the official opposition, the United Party for National Development, say a phased approach is government’s way of manipulating the constitution for its own purpose.
“The Grand Coalition maintains that . . . the current new draft constitution meets the basic minimum standards of a constitution that the people of Zambia have been campaigning for, for over 20 years,” its vice-chair, Sara Longwe, said in a statement last month.
The coalition wants the constitution to be adopted in its entirety, following a referendum, before the election.
Under the existing constitution, the Zambian president is the leader of the political party that secures the most votes. As a result, since 2001 Zambia has only had presidents who have secured less than half of the vote.
The new constitution stipulates that in the absence of a 50% plus one vote winner, the country will need to hold a second, runoff election.
Further, the old constitution does not allow for a presidential running mate to take over in case of death. Zambia had to organise presidential by-elections to elect new presidents after the death of Levy Mwanawasa in office in 2008 and Michael Sata in 2014, at a huge cost.
The election of President Edgar Lungu after Sata’s death in 2015 came at a cost of US$60m.
“By-elections are unplanned for, which means they are done at the expense of other, progressive programmes. But we can save ourselves this trouble by having a running mate who automatically takes over from the president. We have seen this work in Ghana, Nigeria and even in neighbouring Malawi,” Longwe told the Financial Mail.
The new constitution will introduce other changes. It will allow Zambians to hold dual citizenship. People who acquire foreign citizenship automatically forfeit their Zambian citizenship under existing law.
Some issues have already been tabled before parliament and will likely go the way of the ruling party, which has sufficient support to attain a majority. But there are still concerns. “What if some issues like the 50% plus one are rejected by parliamentarians to suit the wishes of their bosses? That’s the main fear we have,” says Chilufya Tayali, executive director of Zambian Voice, a nongovernmental organisation.
The new constitution has been a long time coming. The ruling Patriotic Front party promised to enact a “people-driven” constitution within 90 days of assuming power in 2011. Its failure to do so has resulted in demonstrations over the past four years.
In March 2014, the issue hit boiling point when members of opposition parties staged a walk-out in protest against the lack of progress, bringing all parliamentary business to a standstill for several days.
This year the United Party for National Development has already held demonstrations to pressure government to adopt the new constitution sooner than 2016, and it has vowed to continue the protest until its call is heeded.
Government has responded by saying that Zambia is a democratic country in which the opposition and civil society groups are free to demonstrate provided they follow the procedures laid down.
If noncontentious issues are adopted as they are, there will be less need for demonstrations, since civil society and the opposition will have more confidence in government’s commitment.