Zambia Opposition Warns Reform Panel of Personal Liability for “Illegal” Funds
LUSAKA – Acting president of the opposition Patriotic Front, Given Lubinda, has issued a stark warning to members of President Hakainde Hichilema’s constitutional reform team, stating they will be held personally accountable for public funds spent on a process he labels unlawful.
Lubinda alleges the recently appointed 25-member technical committee, tasked with gathering public input on constitutional changes, was established outside the law. He warned that its members would ultimately be forced to refund their allowances and could face prosecution.
Speaking in Lusaka on Sunday, Lubinda accused the government of sidestepping established legal procedure by forming the committee without invoking the Inquiries Act, the traditional legal framework used for constitutional review bodies.
“You cannot run a nation on shortcuts,” Lubinda stated. “Every individual on that committee must understand that an illegality does not cease to be one simply because it is sanctioned by the state. The day will come when they will be required to account for every penny drawn from the treasury.”
He stated that bypassing parliamentary or statutory backing undermines the rule of law and could render the entire reform process invalid.
“This committee includes former judges, lawyers, clergy, and civil society leaders who know better,” Lubinda said. “Their duty was to advise the President to correct this error, not to legitimize it with their participation. It is profoundly disappointing.”
The technical committee, appointed last month, was mandated to consult the public on potential amendments. However, critics point to Articles 92(2)(f) and (j) of the Constitution, which they say grant the President general administrative powers, not the authority to create a body with such a significant lawmaking mandate.
Lubinda contended that using executive powers for this purpose “directly violates the very Constitution it seeks to amend.” He further warned that the Ministry of Finance would be complicit if it continued to fund what he termed an “illegal structure.”
“The Ministry of Finance is failing the nation by releasing public funds for a process with no legal footing,” he said. “Those authorizing these payments will also be held responsible and face prosecution for abuse of office.”
As acting chairperson of the opposition Tonse Alliance, Lubinda declared the Patriotic Front would boycott what he called a “fraudulent constitutional process.”
He cited the country’s legal fraternity, including former Law Association of Zambia president Linda Kasonde, who has previously stated that establishing the committee under Article 92 is unconstitutional.
The opposition leader emphasized that every previous constitutional review,under Presidents Mwanawasa, Banda, Sata, and Lungu—was conducted under the Inquiries Act, which ensures public accountability, clear terms of reference, and defined reporting obligations.
“This administration is not above the law,” Lubinda asserted.
His position was supported by All People’s Congress Party leader Nason Msoni, who called for accountability to start from the President’s office.
“The committee members themselves should have been the first to advise the President to withdraw and correct the process,” Msoni said. “By choosing to participate, they are complicit.”
Lubinda vowed his party would pursue every available avenue, including legal action, to halt the process unless the government rectifies what he calls a fundamental flaw.
“Zambia cannot afford another botched constitutional reform,” he said. “We have seen the consequences of rushed and mishandled processes. The President must withdraw this committee and restart under the proper legal framework.”
The government has yet to respond to these allegations.
Meanwhile, a group of lawyers has written to the Attorney General’s office seeking clarification on the legal basis for the committee’s mandate and questioning why the Inquiries Act was not used.
The committee has held its first internal meeting but has not yet made its terms of reference public, fueling the opposition’s criticism that the process lacks transparency. Lubinda remains adamant that if it continues, all involved will be held to account for the misuse of public funds.
Let them assign themselves a helicopter instead, then they will be completely innocent
What makes these two think they are relevant
Can they not read the signs
Lubianda and his fellow criminal suspects should first tell us if they paid back the salaries and allowances they stole from government when they illegally stayed in government for 3 months.
The article highlights a core principle we must defend: governance requires transparency, legality, and checks and balances. When any arm of government acts outside the law, it undermines the constitution and honesty in public funds. Parliament, the President, and the executive must all be held to the same standard. If the constitutional reform process bypasses proper legal footing, it threatens democracy and public trust. We should demand a restart under the legal framework, with clear terms of reference, accountability, and public scrutiny.