The opposition United Party for National Development (UPND) has directed all UPND Members of Parliament to reject the piecemeal amendment of the constitution.
UPND Spokesperson Edwin Lifwekelo has disclosed the development to QFM News via telephone that the UPND MPs are fully aware that the country needs a new constitution and not the amendment through parliament.
Mr. Lifwekelo says this is because the PF promised to deliver a new constitution during campaigns and not to amend the current constitution.
He says the PF manifesto is very clear about the adoption of the new constitution through a referendum and not the piecemeal amendment of the Supreme Law of the land.
Mr. Lifwekelo says the UPND President has told the UPND MPs to ensure that they do not support such moves by the PF government to amend the constitution instead of delivering a new one.
He says the PF government ought to know that their decisions on the constitution making process will haunt them in 2016.
Last week, Justice Deputy Minister Keith Mukata disclosed that the 50% plus one vote and the presidential running mate are some of the clauses government will take to parliament for amendment when the house resumes sitting next month.
Mr Mukata added that government will also table the clause on having a fixed general election date among other clauses which do not need to be subjected to a referendum.
Mr. Mukata told QFM News in an interview that government will be disclosing more clauses which will be taken to parliament for amendment as time goes by.
He advised stakeholders to consult widely on other clauses they want government to take to Parliament for amendment.
Mr. Mukata said that the amendment of the constitution was a continuous process which required the inputs of relevant stakeholders.
He said that his ministry was consulting widely with relevant stakeholders including the opposition political parties, adding that what government is doing is merely to provide leadership.
Mr. Mukata however cautioned that taking the clauses to parliament does not mean they are guaranteed of being enacted, stating that parliament has the powers to reject or approve them.