M’membe Accuses HH of Blocking Genuine Constitutional Dialogue

M’membe Accuses HH of Blocking Genuine Constitutional Dialogue

Socialist Party presidential candidate Dr Fred M’membe says President Hakainde Hichilema has weakened constitutional order and shown little regard for alternative views by suspending talks with the Oasis Forum. He stated that the collapse of the discussions confirms concerns that the President is attempting to consolidate political control rather than genuinely consult stakeholders on the constitutional amendment process. Dr M’membe was reacting to the government’s decision to end dialogue with the Oasis Forum following disagreements over Bill 7.

According to Dr M’membe, the President’s actions reflect a pattern in which the administration invites participants to discussions but refuses to adjust its position. He said the government seeks to create an impression of consultation while continuing with a predetermined agenda. Dr M’membe referenced developments surrounding Bill 7, describing the proposed amendments as divisive and authoritarian. He said the Oasis Forum could not be expected to trust a process that was already viewed as flawed.

He noted that participants entered the dialogue with principled positions on constitutional procedure. Dr M’membe explained that a democratic government should be prepared to listen, negotiate, and adjust, especially when dealing with amendments to the supreme law. He said this did not occur in the recent engagements. Dr M’membe stated that genuine dialogue requires openness rather than rigid positions. In his view, the government’s posture demonstrated an unwillingness to consider objections raised by civil society, churches, and legal bodies.

The Socialist Party leader said the President has repeatedly shown a reluctance to tolerate criticism. He argued that the suspension of the meeting should not surprise citizens because the administration has consistently resisted scrutiny on national issues. Dr M’membe said the events surrounding the Oasis Forum meeting illustrate the government’s broader approach to governance. He cited previous disputes involving the Lungu family and various public concerns, saying these suggest a pattern of handling disagreements through unilateral action rather than consultation.

Dr M’membe said the attempt by the government to frame the Oasis Forum as unprepared to engage constructively was misleading. He explained that raising constitutional concerns does not amount to obstruction. Instead, he said it reflects a commitment to protecting the integrity of the constitutional order. He insisted that stakeholders who question the current process are acting in the national interest.

He argued that Bill 7 would concentrate authority in one office and alter fundamental aspects of Zambia’s governance structure. Dr M’membe said such changes cannot be pushed without broad national agreement. He warned that moving forward with the amendments without consensus poses risks to the country’s democratic future.

Dr M’membe said the suspension of dialogue appears intended to weaken public resistance and buy time for further moves in the amendment process. He described this approach as tactical rather than procedural. Dr M’membe warned citizens to remain alert to developments surrounding the constitutional debate. He said constitutional reform must not be conducted through strategies that reduce public participation.

He urged Zambians to speak out and defend the Constitution, saying it is the responsibility of citizens, civil society, churches, trade unions, professional bodies, and youth groups to protect the country’s democratic framework. Dr M’membe said this period demands active involvement to ensure that the country does not adopt a constitutional amendment process that undermines democratic values.

He concluded that the Constitution cannot be reshaped according to the preferences of a single office. Dr M’membe said constitutional amendments require transparency, consultation, and national unity. He encouraged citizens to recognise the importance of safeguarding the document that defines the structure of governance and limits the exercise of state authority.