Constitutional Overhaul or Power Play? Hichilema’s Reforms Draw Fury

Constitutional Overhaul or Power Play? Hichilema’s Reforms Draw Fury

Lusaka — It takes a special kind of political amnesia to oppose a constitutional amendment while in opposition, only to embrace its mirror image once in power. Yet here we are. President Hakainde Hichilema’s administration, which once railed against the excesses of the Patriotic Front’s infamous Bill 10, has now tabled its own sweeping constitutional changes bearing an uncanny resemblance to the very provisions it once decried.

The government insists these reforms—mixed-member proportional representation, an inflated Parliament (from 156 to 256 seats), and altered appointments for constitutional officeholders are about inclusivity and progress. But forgive us if we don’t join the standing ovation. When a leader who built his reputation on democratic principles suddenly pushes through major constitutional changes just a year before elections, skepticism isn’t just warranted it’s necessary.

Makebi Zulu, a constitutional lawyer and PF official, put it bluntly: “This isn’t reform; it’s a rigging mechanism disguised as democracy.” One can’t help but marvel at the irony. The man who once positioned himself as the guardian of Zambia’s democratic ideals now stands accused of weaponizing them.

And let’s talk about timing. Why the rush? Civil society, opposition parties, and even the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops have all questioned the urgency. Is this really about national development or about locking in political advantages before 2026?

Anthony Chibuye of the FDD cut to the heart of the matter: “While Zambians queue for mealie-meal and hospitals run out of drugs, this government’s priority is to create 100 more MPs?” Indeed, where is the evidence that a bloated legislature translates to better governance? Or is this simply a patronage scheme disguised as reform?

Former MP Sensio Banda went further, accusing the government of sidelining civil society and traditional leaders a curious move for an administration that promised transparency. “This isn’t consultation; it’s imposition,” he said. And he’s right. If these reforms were truly about the people, why the top-down approach?

Then there’s the claim that these changes are necessary for delimitation despite new constituencies like Senga Hill and Mafinga being created under existing laws. So, what’s the real motive? Could it be, as some suggest, a quiet effort to redraw political boundaries in the UPND’s favor?

The opposition must unite against what can only be described as an immoral power grab. At a time when Zambia is drowning in debt and hunger, expanding Parliament is not just tone deaf it’s reckless.

President Hichilema, meanwhile, has been conspicuously silent on the details, leaving his ministers to spin this as “modernization.” But Zambians are not fools. They remember his past rhetoric. They see the contradictions. And they will judge whether this is genuine reform or just another case of “rules for thee, but not for me.”

Zambia’s democracy stands at a crossroads. The coming months will reveal whether this administration is truly committed to progress or merely to preserving its own power. The choice, as always, will be history’s to make. But for now, the writing on the wall is clear: this isn’t reform. It’s a test and Zambians are watching.