OPEN LETTER TO THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON THE AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION VIA BILL
No to Bill 7
Dear Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
I write to you with deep concern and a heavy heart following your recent swearing-in as members of the Technical Committee tasked with gathering public submissions on the highly contentious Bill 7. As you assume this important national responsibility, it is crucial to recognize the gravity of the task before you — and the widespread public opposition to this Bill.
Bill 7 has already been categorically rejected by major stakeholders across Zambia: the Zambian people, the Constitutional Court, the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops (ZCCB), and numerous civil society organizations. It is therefore disturbing that, despite this overwhelming rejection, the UPND government and President Hakainde Hichilema are determined to push this Bill through less than ten months before the general election.
You must be aware that Bill 7 is not a minor amendment — it proposes changes to numerous critical articles of the Constitution that protect our democracy. Among the most alarming provisions are:
• The removal of the presidential term limit, effectively allowing the sitting president to rule indefinitely.
• The elimination of corruption charges against the President, insulating the office from accountability.
• The granting of power to judges to determine cases without public hearings, undermining transparency and the rule of law.
• The addition of over 100 Members of Parliament and 55 new constituencies, without the publication of a credible delimitation report.
• The dissolution of Parliament and government just one day before the general election, which unfairly allows the ruling party to continue using state machinery, resources, and privileges until the eve of the polls. This is unacceptable and contrary to democratic fairness.
According to ECZ data, Southern Province alone has recorded an 80,000-voter increase, raising questions about deliberate political engineering. It is evident that a third of these new constituencies would likely favor the ruling party, consolidating its parliamentary dominance.
The claim that these amendments promote proportional representation is misleading. The current Constitution — under Article 52 — already provides for representation by population and gender. Ironically, Bill 7 would reduce representation for women, youth, and persons with disabilities to a combined total of only 35 seats, effectively silencing marginalized voices.
Furthermore, a leaked UPND strategic document reportedly outlines how Bill 7 is key to the party’s plan to maintain power beyond 10 years, potentially until 2090. This Bill is therefore not a democratic reform — it is a blueprint for authoritarianism, designed to establish a one-party state where the ruling party controls two-thirds of Parliament, eliminating effective opposition and checks on power.
In addition, credible reports and leaked materials have raised even deeper concerns. It is alleged that there exists a secret document in which the President, through the UPND party structure, has promised payments of K600,000 per month to all current UPND Members of Parliament for campaign purposes, with explicit instructions that Bill 7 must pass and that any MPs opposing it will be dealt with firmly. If true, this constitutes a serious attempt to bribe Members of Parliament to vote in favor of the Bill once it reaches the National Assembly.
Equally disturbing is a circulating audio recording, in which the President allegedly stated at a conference that he has been informed that all UPND MPs, councillors, and ward chairpersons are likely to lose in the upcoming election — and that only he himself would win. This statement, if authentic, is an admission of the party’s declining popularity and a clear indication that the ruling party views Bill 7 as its only path to survival in 2026.
Given these revelations, the question becomes urgent and unavoidable: why are you accepting to undertake this assignment when it is clear that its true purpose is to tilt the electoral playing field and manipulate the outcome of the 2026 elections?
Distinguished members, your task is not neutral — it is political. By lending your names and reputations to this process, you risk being seen as accomplices in an attempt to undermine democracy and entrench a single party’s power.
Your duty is to the Constitution and the people of Zambia, not to any political entity. I therefore urge you to recuse yourselves from this process in defense of the rule of law and the democratic values our nation stands for. History will judge harshly those who remain silent or complicit in this hour of constitutional crisis.
Should Bill 7 pass, all who participated in enabling its enactment will be held accountable for their role in eroding Zambia’s democracy. The Zambian people will not forget.
The Constitution belongs to the people — not to politicians. To alter it now, on the eve of an election, is changing the rules of the game to escape defeat. It is cheating, plain and simple.
I therefore appeal to your conscience, integrity, and patriotism: withdraw from this assignment and stand with the people of Zambia. The future of our democracy depends on it.
Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Pumulo Situmbeko
Founder- New Era Democratic Party (NED)
Concerned Citizen and Defender of Democracy
#DefendDemocracy
#Zambia
#takapite
I don’t think this letter has truthful message. Misleading it is.
Writing a letter on unverified information and speculation.
The letter does not even address itself to the content of bill 7, it’s just blind condemnation.
Good luck with yowa galloping condemnation based on guesswork.
This letter is misleading indeed. It contains a lot of unverified information. Am just asking myself questions like, why writing such a letter with half truth information?
Why write such article that is misleading? Democracy must be based on the truth. You can’t write insinuations and half truths and hope those you are writing to bend to your level. Point to what terms of reference that removes term limits for the president?