Aid Must Not Be Used as Leverage, Zambia Warns

Government has defended Zambia’s sovereign right to determine its economic and mining policies following remarks attributed to Ambassador Gonzales, arguing that development assistance should not be conflated with trade interests or used as leverage to influence national decision-making.

According to reports carried in the Times of Zambia and supported by commentary emerging in other publications, officials expressed concern that linking aid to commercial or geopolitical interests risks undermining the principle of partnership on which development cooperation is founded. They stressed that Zambia welcomes cooperation with all international partners, provided such engagement is conducted on the basis of mutual respect and non-interference.

Government sources emphasised that aid is intended to support social development, poverty reduction, and institutional capacity building, not to serve as a tool for exerting pressure over policy choices. They said attempts to frame development assistance as conditional upon alignment with specific trade or mining interests distort the purpose of aid and weaken trust between partners.

Zambia’s mining sector, which attracts investment from a range of international players, operates under national laws designed to balance economic growth, environmental protection, and community welfare. Authorities said decisions relating to the sector are guided by domestic policy objectives and legal frameworks, not external pressure.

Officials also reiterated that Zambia maintains diversified international partnerships and values constructive engagement with all countries. They said the government’s approach is anchored in transparency, fairness, and the pursuit of national development goals that benefit citizens broadly.

The response comes amid heightened global debate over resource governance and the role of external actors in developing economies. Government representatives stressed that Zambia remains committed to responsible mining practices and to engaging partners who respect national sovereignty.

They further noted that Zambia’s recent economic reforms and debt restructuring efforts reflect a commitment to restoring macroeconomic stability and creating an environment conducive to sustainable investment. These reforms, they said, should not be undermined by conditional approaches that blur the line between aid and trade.

Analysts note that maintaining a clear distinction between development cooperation and commercial negotiation is critical to preserving trust in international partnerships. They argue that aid effectiveness depends on respecting recipient countries’ policy autonomy.

Government said it will continue engaging diplomatically to clarify its position and ensure that international cooperation supports, rather than constrains, Zambia’s development agenda.

HH Calls on Church to Remain Moral Anchor for the Nation

President Hakainde Hichilema has called on the Church to remain a strong moral pillar for the nation, emphasising its continued importance in promoting unity, peace, and ethical leadership as Zambia navigates complex social and economic challenges.

Speaking during an engagement with church leaders, the President acknowledged the historical and ongoing role of faith-based institutions in shaping national values and fostering social cohesion. He said the Church occupies a unique position of trust and influence, making it an indispensable partner in national development and governance.

The President said Zambia’s progress depends not only on economic policies and institutional reforms but also on moral guidance that reinforces accountability, compassion, and respect for the rule of law. He urged church leaders to continue providing constructive guidance to both citizens and those in public office.

He further noted that the Church has often played a stabilising role during periods of political transition and social tension. By offering platforms for dialogue and reconciliation, faith leaders have helped defuse conflict and promote peaceful coexistence, reinforcing Zambia’s democratic traditions.

The President reaffirmed government’s respect for the independence of the Church, stating that its prophetic voice remains essential in holding leaders accountable while also encouraging national unity. He said constructive engagement between government and faith-based organisations strengthens governance outcomes when conducted in mutual respect.

The appeal comes at a time when the country is undergoing institutional reforms and economic recovery efforts. Government has been engaging various stakeholders, including civil society and traditional leaders, to ensure that reforms are inclusive and responsive to citizens’ concerns.

Church leaders present at the engagement acknowledged the President’s remarks and reiterated their commitment to national unity and social justice. They emphasised the importance of maintaining moral integrity and promoting peaceful dialogue, particularly during periods of political contestation.

Observers note that sustained collaboration between government and faith-based institutions has historically contributed to Zambia’s relative stability. The Church’s role in civic education, conflict resolution, and social welfare continues to complement government efforts, particularly in underserved communities.

The President encouraged faith leaders to continue supporting initiatives that uplift vulnerable groups and promote ethical leadership among the youth. He said investment in values-based leadership is essential for long-term national development.

Government has maintained that partnerships with non-state actors are key to addressing complex social challenges. Faith-based institutions remain among the most extensive grassroots networks in the country, providing critical social services and moral guidance.

The engagement concluded with a call for continued dialogue and cooperation, underscoring the shared responsibility of government and the Church in fostering a stable, inclusive, and values-driven society.

Lawyer Condemns Extension of Munir Zulu’s Detention
The continued detention of Lumezi Member of Parliament Munir Zulu has drawn sharp criticism from his legal representative, who has described the decision to hold him for an additional 60 days despite remission having been granted as unlawful and punitive.

Lawyer Joseph Chirwa said the MP had satisfied the legal requirements for remission and should have been released in accordance with established correctional procedures. He argued that the extension of custody undermines the rule of law and raises serious constitutional questions about respect for judicial authority and personal liberty.

He said remission is governed by statute and administrative regulations and is not a discretionary favour once eligibility has been met. In his view, failure to implement a lawful remission decision without transparent justification amounts to arbitrary detention and exposes the State to legal challenge.

The prolonged incarceration has intensified public scrutiny, particularly because the detainee is a serving Member of Parliament who has been vocal on governance matters. The case has therefore attracted wider attention beyond its legal merits, feeding into broader debates about institutional independence and equal application of the law.

The lawyer warned that allowing administrative authorities to override remission decisions sets a dangerous precedent. He said such actions risk eroding public confidence in the justice system and weaken the constitutional principle that court decisions must be respected and implemented.

Concerns were also raised about the perception that the continued detention may be punitive rather than corrective. Under Zambia’s legal framework, incarceration is meant to serve clearly defined purposes, and deviation from those principles, he argued, undermines both legality and legitimacy.

He further stressed that personal liberty is a constitutional right and that any restriction must be grounded strictly in law and due process. Where these safeguards are not observed, he said, the justice system itself becomes vulnerable to accusations of selective enforcement.

The matter has unfolded against the backdrop of heightened political tension following the enactment of Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7. Several legal and political disputes have emerged during this period, prompting closer examination of how institutions exercise their powers, particularly in politically sensitive cases.

Legal observers note that the case has broader implications for the separation of powers, especially where executive or administrative actions appear to conflict with judicial outcomes. The handling of remission decisions, they argue, is a litmus test for institutional discipline and respect for constitutional boundaries.

The legal team has indicated that available remedies may be pursued if the situation is not resolved within the confines of the law. While no formal court action has yet been announced, the possibility remains open should the continued detention persist without lawful explanation.

The case has also reignited debate over the treatment of politically exposed persons within the criminal justice system. Critics warn that inconsistency in applying legal safeguards risks normalising arbitrary detention, while supporters of strict enforcement maintain that all procedures must be followed carefully.

The lawyer maintained that the strength of Zambia’s legal system lies in its willingness to uphold rights and procedures consistently, even in controversial cases. He warned that failure to do so could deepen scepticism about institutional independence and weaken public trust in the administration of justice.

ECZ Dismisses Rigging Claims, Says Electoral System Is Secure
The Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) has rejected claims that elections in the country can be rigged, saying the existing electoral framework contains multiple safeguards that make manipulation of results impossible.

Responding to growing public debate and political claims questioning the credibility of electoral outcomes, the Commission said Zambia’s elections are conducted through a transparent, multi-layered process involving political parties, observers, and independent verification mechanisms at every stage.

ECZ explained that the voting process begins with voter registration, which is subjected to public inspection and verification. Political parties and stakeholders are allowed to scrutinise the voters’ roll, lodge objections, and participate in verification exercises aimed at eliminating duplication or irregular entries.

On polling day, the Commission said voting takes place in the presence of party agents, election monitors, and observers accredited from both local and international organisations. Each polling station operates independently, with ballot papers accounted for before, during, and after voting, reducing opportunities for interference.

The Commission further noted that results are counted at the polling station immediately after voting closes, in full view of party agents and observers. Once counting is complete, results are recorded on official forms that are signed by polling officials and party representatives before being transmitted to the constituency tally centres.

According to ECZ, party agents receive copies of the results at the polling station, enabling political parties to independently compile and verify totals as results are announced. This parallel verification system, the Commission said, makes it difficult for results to be altered without detection.

The Commission said claims of rigging often overlook the cumulative effect of these safeguards, which include secure transportation of election materials, monitored storage, and reconciliation of ballots against voter turnout figures.

ECZ also addressed concerns around electronic systems, clarifying that while technology is used to enhance efficiency and transparency, it does not replace physical ballots or manual counting at polling stations. The Commission said this hybrid approach limits the risk of technological manipulation while improving administrative accuracy.

The assurances come amid heightened political tension following the enactment of Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7, which has intensified debate around electoral reforms, representation, and governance. Some opposition figures and activists have questioned whether future elections will reflect the will of the electorate, prompting the Commission to restate its mandate and operational independence.

ECZ emphasised that it operates as an independent constitutional body and does not take instructions from political parties or the Executive. It said its credibility depends on strict adherence to the law and transparent procedures that withstand scrutiny from all stakeholders.

The Commission acknowledged that public confidence in elections is critical to democratic stability and said it remains open to engagement with political parties, civil society, and the Church to address concerns and clarify misconceptions about electoral processes.

While defending the integrity of the system, ECZ encouraged political players to use established legal channels to challenge any perceived irregularities rather than undermining public trust through unsubstantiated claims. It said the courts remain the appropriate forum for resolving electoral disputes.

The Commission also pointed to Zambia’s history of peaceful transfers of power as evidence that the electoral system functions as intended. It said outcomes over the years have reflected voter choices across different political contexts, further reinforcing confidence in the process.

ECZ concluded by urging citizens to participate actively in electoral processes and to rely on verified information. It said maintaining confidence in elections is a shared responsibility that requires honesty, vigilance, and respect for democratic institutions.

International law expert Professor Cephas Lumina has accused Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti of undermining the credibility of Parliament during the passage of Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7, saying her conduct eroded public confidence in the legislature and compromised the principles of neutrality expected of the presiding office.

Prof Lumina said the manner in which parliamentary proceedings were conducted during debate and voting on Bill 7 raised serious concerns about adherence to established rules and conventions governing constitutional amendments. He argued that the Speaker’s handling of procedural objections, time allocation, and control of debate created an impression that Parliament was not operating as an impartial forum during a process with far-reaching constitutional consequences.

According to Prof Lumina, the Speaker occupies a critical position in Zambia’s democratic architecture and is expected to rise above partisan considerations, particularly when presiding over constitutional matters. He said constitutional amendments demand heightened procedural integrity because they affect the balance of power, electoral arrangements, and governance structures for generations.

He said any perception that the presiding officer tilted the process in favour of one side risks delegitimising the outcome, regardless of whether the numerical thresholds required for passage were met. In his view, Parliament’s authority is derived not only from constitutional mandate but also from public trust in the fairness and transparency of its proceedings.

Bill 7 was passed by the National Assembly after an intense and polarising debate that divided lawmakers, political parties, civil society organisations, and sections of the Church. The Bill introduces changes to Zambia’s constitutional framework, including provisions for increasing the number of constituencies and altering electoral and governance arrangements. It has since been assented to by the President and is now law.

Supporters of the amendments argue that the reforms are necessary to address representation gaps caused by population growth and to modernise governance systems. However, critics maintain that the process was rushed, insufficiently consultative, and managed in a manner that constrained meaningful debate.

Prof Lumina said the Speaker’s responsibility during such proceedings is to ensure that all sides are afforded a fair opportunity to be heard and that parliamentary rules are applied consistently. He argued that rulings perceived to favour one political outcome undermine Parliament’s institutional credibility and weaken democratic norms.

He further warned that procedural shortcuts or heavy-handed control of debate in constitutional matters can set dangerous precedents for future legislatures. In his view, the long-term cost of eroding parliamentary integrity far outweighs any short-term political gains secured through procedural advantage.

The legal scholar said concerns about the conduct of the Bill 7 process extend beyond partisan politics and speak to broader issues of democratic governance and institutional independence. He noted that Parliament is a cornerstone of Zambia’s constitutional order and must be seen to function independently of the Executive and partisan pressures.

Criticism of the Speaker’s role has been echoed by opposition political parties and civil society groups, who have questioned whether the legislative process met the standards required for constitutional reform. Some have argued that the atmosphere in the House during the Bill’s passage discouraged dissenting voices and narrowed the scope for substantive engagement.

Prof Lumina said restoring confidence in Parliament requires reaffirming the principles of neutrality, procedural fairness, and respect for dissenting views. He warned that failure to address concerns arising from the Bill 7 process risks deepening public scepticism about democratic institutions.

He said while constitutional reform is sometimes necessary, the legitimacy of such reforms depends as much on the process as on the substance. In his assessment, Parliament’s handling of Bill 7 will remain a reference point in debates about democratic accountability and the role of the Speaker in safeguarding institutional integrity.

Human rights activist Laura Miti has accused government of introducing key changes to Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 without subjecting them to public scrutiny, warning that the manner in which the amendments were handled has lasting implications for democratic governance.

In a statement seen in today’s The Mast, Miti said alterations to provisions on proportional representation were not presented to citizens for interrogation, despite their far-reaching impact on the composition of Parliament and the balance of power between the Executive and the legislature.

She noted that the changes did not originate from either the Christopher Mushabati-led Technical Committee or the Parliamentary Committee that reviewed the Bill, raising questions about how and when the amendments were introduced into the final legislative framework.

According to Miti, the absence of transparency surrounding the changes undermined the credibility of the constitutional amendment process. Constitutional reform, she argued, demands openness and broad public participation, particularly where alterations affect the structure and authority of elected institutions.

She expressed concern that the revised provisions place expanded power in the hands of future Presidents, regardless of whether such authority is exercised responsibly. In her view, constitutions should be designed to restrain power rather than simplify its concentration.

Miti warned that easing the path to a two-thirds parliamentary majority carries serious consequences, given the authority such a threshold confers on the Executive. She maintained that such power should arise only from the explicit will of voters, not from structural advantages embedded within the Constitution.

Of particular concern, she said, was the linkage of proportional representation seats to presidential election outcomes. That arrangement, she argued, effectively grants ruling parties a substantial head start toward achieving a two-thirds majority before parliamentary voting even begins.

She pointed out that under the amended framework, dozens of parliamentary seats are effectively pre-allocated based on presidential results, reducing the electorate’s ability to shape a balanced and independent Parliament.

Miti also took issue with the public framing of the changes as measures intended to promote inclusion for women, youths and persons with disabilities. While inclusion remains important, she argued that the practical effect of the amendments is to strengthen Executive dominance rather than enhance representative diversity.

She drew parallels with past constitutional processes, cautioning that lightly handled amendments have previously laid the groundwork for institutional instability. Constitutional design, she stressed, should prioritise the protection of citizens, democratic institutions and future generations.

Miti maintained that the manner in which the Bill 7 changes were introduced has altered the democratic equation and narrowed the space for meaningful parliamentary oversight. She said citizens deserved full disclosure and participation in decisions of such magnitude.

Credit  Source: The Mast, Sunday, December 21, 2025