The absence of asset declaration in Zambia’s proposed constitutional amendments raises critical concerns about transparency, accountability, and the fight against corruption. Critics have accused the United Party for National Development (UPND) administration of tailoring the amendments to serve President Hakainde Hichilema’s interests, a claim that, on closer inspection, seems to hold weight. Asset declaration, a straightforward yet vital issue, has been omitted from the proposed amendments, signaling a troubling omission.

The issue of asset declaration centers around President Hichilema himself. Citizens have repeatedly called on the president to disclose his assets and liabilities publicly. His refusal to comply stems from the fact that the law does not require him to do so. This loophole has undermined efforts to combat corruption, making asset declaration a noncontentious and essential issue. Yet, the UPND administration has deliberately excluded it from the list of amendments, seemingly to shield the president from scrutiny.

On March 26, 2025, Minister of Justice Princess Kasune presented the proposed constitutional amendments and a roadmap to Parliament. Shortly after, President Hichilema shared his thoughts on the matter, stating via Facebook, “We have today released the proposed constitutional amendments and the road map. This is your constitution, and we are listening. What are your first thoughts?” While the president’s statement aimed to project inclusivity, the absence of asset declaration in the amendments undermines its sincerity.

Leading up to this presentation, confusion surrounded the existence of a draft of the amendments. Some sources claimed there was a draft, while others denied it. The revelation of the draft has only fueled suspicions that the constitutional amendments are politically motivated. The UPND and its supporters appear to have crafted these amendments with the intent of consolidating political power rather than addressing pressing issues.

One proposal that has sparked alarm is the increase in the number of nominated Members of Parliament to an unspecified figure. This amendment would grant the president the authority to determine the size of Parliament, a move that, if passed, could significantly alter Zambia’s democratic landscape. Critics argue that this provision could be exploited by President Hichilema to secure a majority in Parliament, paving the way for unchecked power and constitutional manipulation.

The potential for abuse becomes even more apparent when considering President Hichilema’s history of aggressively pursuing legal challenges to opposition seats in the 2021 elections, despite his party’s victory. The proposed increase in nominated MPs suggests an ongoing ambition to strengthen his grip on Parliament. If Hichilema wins a second term, this amendment could make it easier for him to amend the constitution further, consolidating his power under the guise of legislative reform.

In a democratic society, leaders must prioritize the needs of their constituents over personal or political ambitions. While constitutional amendments can serve as instruments for progress, they must not be used to sideline critical issues or erode transparency. Asset declaration, a cornerstone of anti-corruption efforts, should take precedence over amendments that risk destabilizing Zambia’s democracy.

President Hichilema would do well to heed the growing calls to abandon politically motivated amendments and focus on issues that matter most to the Zambian people. Issues such as corruption. Ensuring accountability and publicly declaring assets annually are steps that could restore public trust and strengthen the nation’s democratic foundation.

Including asset declaration on the list of proposed constitutional amendments is an open opportunity for the United Party for National Development (UPND) administration to regain the lost public confidence and trust in the fight against corruption, which starts with a demonstration of total leadership transparency.

The omission of this issue from the constitutional amendments is not just a missed opportunity, but a disservice to the Zambian people. By addressing asset declaration and other pressing concerns, such as the Public Order Act and the rising cost of living, Zambia can pave the way for meaningful reforms that truly serve its citizens. The fight against corruption begins with leadership transparency, and the time to act is now. Zambians must demand asset declaration be included in the list of proposed constitutional amendments. The issue deserves to be at the top of the list.
By Venus N Msyani

By Alexander Vomo

Amos Chanda, the former Press and Public Relations Aide to President Edgar Lungu, has recently taken center stage in Zambian politics not for noble reasons, but for what appears to be a desperate attempt at self-preservation. His so-called “revelations” are not an act of courage or transparency but a calculated move to rewrite his own legacy while betraying the very principles he once claimed to uphold.

For years, Chanda was the mouthpiece of the Patriotic Front (PF), a staunch defender of Edgar Lungu’s presidency. He stood at the front lines, justifying policies, defending decisions, and silencing critics. Yet today, in a dramatic turn of events, he has become the very thing he once despised—a vocal critic of the administration he loyally served.

The irony is glaring: Chanda is now revealing “dark secrets” from his time in power, yet he was not merely an observer—he was an active participant. He has confessed to actions that, in any serious democracy, could be classified as treasonous—including usurping presidential powers for personal gain. These are not mere accusations from his opponents; they are his own admissions. If the UPND government truly believes in the rule of law, they should not be giving him a platform to cleanse himself in the court of public opinion. Instead, they should be handing him over to law enforcement for thorough investigation.

But the most troubling aspect of Chanda’s sudden “change of heart” is not just the confessions—it is his convenient timing. He is not exposing these alleged secrets out of a sense of duty to the people of Zambia. Rather, he is repackaging himself, attempting to align with the ruling government of President Hakainde Hichilema, hoping to find a place at the high table once again. If he could turn on Lungu so easily, what stops him from doing the same to Hichilema when it suits his ambitions?

In politics, loyalty defines a man. Chanda has shown that his loyalty is not to a cause, a leader, or the Zambian people—it is to himself. Today, he speaks against Lungu; tomorrow, he may speak against Hichilema. Such a man cannot be trusted. His words are not those of a whistleblower but of an opportunist, seeking relevance in a game where his influence has waned.

Zambians must ask themselves: Why now? Why is Chanda suddenly unearthing classified information that he swore to protect? If he truly had the nation’s best interests at heart, why did he not speak out when he had the power to make a difference? The answer is simple—his actions are not about justice, but about self-preservation.

If the rule of law is to mean anything in Zambia, then Chanda must not be treated as a political pawn. He must be held accountable for his confessions. True justice does not pick and choose when to act—it holds all guilty parties to the same standard, no matter their newfound alliances.

Chanda’s fate should serve as a lesson: Those who betray one master for personal gain will eventually betray the next. The question is—will Zambia allow itself to be deceived?

Should the Government Be Paying Attention to Amos Chanda?

Amos Chanda’s dramatic confessions have certainly stirred political debate, but the real question is—why should the Zambian people care? While Chanda seeks to cleanse himself in the public eye, ordinary Zambians are struggling to afford mealie meal, fuel, and basic necessities. The cost of living has skyrocketed, and the very campaign promises that brought UPND to power remain largely unfulfilled.

The bigger issue here is not Chanda’s betrayal of Edgar Lungu, but rather, the government’s failure to focus on what truly matters. If UPND has time to entertain a political opportunist like Chanda, then surely they have time to address the economic crisis facing the nation.

Instead of parading a self-confessed political mercenary before the media, the UPND government should be answering real questions:

• What happened to the promises of cheaper fuel and affordable mealie meal?

• Where are the jobs that were promised to young people?

• Why is the kwacha struggling despite all assurances of economic recovery?

• How does Amos Chanda’s political maneuvering help a struggling Zambian family put food on the table?

Amos Chanda is not Zambia’s problem—the economy is. If the UPND truly wants to win back public trust, they must stop entertaining political defectors and start delivering on their promises.

At the end of the day, no amount of political distraction can change the reality on the ground. Zambians are feeling the pain of economic hardship. Chanda may be making headlines today, but the cost of living crisis is what will determine the next election. If UPND does not refocus on the people’s needs, they risk losing more than just popularity, they risk losing power.

By Kapya Kaoma

President Hakainde Hichilema’s insistence on pushing through his constitutional amendments ahead of the 2026 election raises eyebrows—and not just for its humor. The Constitution is a sacred document for many Zambians, revered second only to the Bible. Hence, tampering with it will continue to ignite public outrage against his administration. Politically, as the countdown to the 2026 elections begins, the campaign will not only focus on Hichilema himself, but these amendments are already 2026 campaign issues. HH risks alienating various societal groups, including civil society organizations, churches, the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), independent media, and other stakeholders. In short, it is simply a losing strategy.

One wonders who is advising Hichilema on his second-term campaign strategy. Chief Government Spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa’s performance has been embarrassingly incompetent. How does he claim that the HH administration has received “positive feedback from the public” regarding the proposed constitutional changes? His statement invites unnecessary backlash from the opposition and other sectors. On what basis does he make such a bold but self-insulting assertion? Everybody knows that Zambians are opposed to these amendments. If Mweetwa’s understanding of “the public” is limited to himself and President Hichilema, then he is correct. But sentiments across the nation tell a different story. Is the UPND suffering from what I call “poweramnesia” or simply addicted to lies? God help us! How many times did Hichilema urge his MPs to resist constitutional reforms during the MMD and PF administrations by pointing to upcoming elections? This move is solely focused on securing the UPND’s political future through dubious means—only those tragically misinformed would believe otherwise. With the August 2026 elections in sight, changing the rules at this stage is inappropriate. While there may be a need for reform, it begs the question: why propose such changes so close to an election when his public approval has plummeted so badly? The public deserves sufficient time to deliberate and grasp the implications of any proposed constitutional changes. It seems the current efforts are more about protecting Hichilema’s personal ambitions than serving the best interests of Zambians. If these reforms were so central to HH, why didn’t he take action when the “Bally virus” plagued the nation before people saw through his lies? (I was the first to do so.) If he ignored it then, surely he can wait until after August 2026—after all, it will be “Bally will fix it” after 2026!

HH knows the idea is unpopular. So, his administration masks its more controversial agendas by coupling progressive issues, like proportional representation, with the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). However, as is the case with all Commissions, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) lacks true independence and operates to advance Hichilema’s political objectives. Granting the ECZ unilateral authority to reshape constituencies could disproportionately favor the UPND, undermining the democratic process and depriving other regions of equitable representation.

Linking constituency division to the CDF is also ill-informed. The CDF is Hichilema’s vision for national development, but historical precedent shows that such ideological programs close when leadership changes. Assuming that future presidents will adhere to Hichilema’s national development plan is simply naïve. Besides altering the Constitution to fit a singular presidential ideology poses dangers to Zambia’s democracy.

Moreover, amending the Constitution in a rush is unreasonable; the public deserves ample time to debate and understand the full ramifications of these changes. With the UPND as a vested party in this process, it lacks the moral authority to unilaterally drive these amendments. If these proposals aim to be apolitical, they should be presented to the Zambian electorate in a referendum, allowing the people to voice their opinions democratically.
Including the proposed amendments on the general election ballot in August 2026, for instance, would be the most cost-effective, transparent, and accountable approach. Yet, the UPND may resist this option because it doesn’t aid Hichilema’s second-term electoral strategy.

The hard truth remains: the Constitution belongs to the people, and the people deserve a say in its future. It is not up to Mweetwa or Hichilema to dictate our destiny.