By Henry Kyambalesa

It is encouraging that some of the suggestions made by Zambians regarding the contemplated new Republican constitution are incorporated into the just-released Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2010. We are clearly getting closer to the enactment of a Republican constitution that will stand the test of time!
I, however, wish to make a few comments and suggestions (relating to a sample of Articles in the Bill cited above), which are designed to make the Bill more acceptable to the majority of Zambians, and more credible in the eyes of the international community.
The Preamble:
The first three paragraphs of the Preamble should read as follows:
“We, the people of Zambia, by our representatives assembled in our Parliament,
ACKNOWLEDGE the supremacy of God Almighty;
UPHOLD the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion; …”
There is no country in the world today that can claim to be a Christian nation in its national constitution other than the State of Israel. But, unfortunately, the Holy Land DOES NOT even have an official religion! And only 2.1% of Israelis are designated as being Christian, while 76.3% are designated as being Jewish, 16% as being Moslems, and so forth.
What is really driving us to this level of religious fanaticism? Is it not enough to acknowledge the supremacy of God Almighty in the constitution?
Anyway, the Republican constitution should be a neutral document that should not appear to discriminate against atheists or pagans, or those who believe in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism. All these segments of Zambian society have a genuine stake in the Republican constitution and, therefore, deserve to be respected in spite of the fact that they are currently not as large as their Christian counterparts.
Christian Values and Principles:
Article 144 of the Bill, which is about Christian Values and Principles, should be removed because “directing the policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values” or beliefs which it espouses would be inconsistent with “upholding the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion” that is enshrined in the Preamble.
It is also not consistent with what is enshrined in Article 201(2)(a) of the Bill, which states that a political party shall not be founded on a religious basis, among other things. If it would be permissible for the national government to generate “policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values …,” why would it be wrong for a political party to fashion its existence and contemplated policies and laws that would have a religious bearing?
There is also a contradiction between Article 201(2)(a) cited above and Article 201(1)(g), which states that “A political party shall promote the objectives and principles of this Constitution and the rule of law,” which would essentially include the promotion of Christian values and principles!
By the way, there are no such things as “Christian values” or “Christian principles.” I know this because am actually a devout Christian! It is, therefore, not a good idea to load the Republican constitution with such unconventional terms.
Qualifications of Presidential Candidates:
The requirement in Article 34(1)(c) of the Bill that presidential candidates should have been resident in Zambia for 10 consecutive years preceding any given presidential election are clearly designed to exclude certain individuals from contesting the Republican presidency. It is obvious that this Clause could not have been included in the Bill if the MMD presidential candidate in the 2011 general elections—that is, Mr. Rupiah Banda—had been working or studying in a foreign country over the last 5 or so years.
What is really the rationale for such a Clause? Apart from mimicking other countries which have a similar requirement in their national constitutions, what is it supposed to achieve?
There are many reasons why Zambians temporarily reside in foreign countries, such as to pursue studies, to work for the Zambian government in foreign missions, to work at foreign-based branches of companies registered in Zambia, to pursue investment opportunities, to seek employment due to the widespread unemployment currently obtaining in the country, or to serve the country at the African Union, SADC and COMESA regional offices.
These are all good reasons why some Zambian citizens have, now and again, found themselves temporarily residing in foreign countries. Why, then, should their native country’s constitution deny them the opportunity to vie for the Republican presidency?
Besides, there is really nothing sinister about Zambians who may happen to reside in foreign countries for 10 years prior to any given presidential election. In fact, we should consider it a blessing to have citizens who have lived in foreign countries to contest the Republican presidency because of their wide exposure, as bystanders, to the strengths and weaknesses of different modes of governance applied in different national settings.
Technically, the requirement affects even citizens who are currently serving our beloved country in foreign countries, such as Dr. Nevers Mumba and Dr. Inonge Mbikusita-Lewanika, and politicians like Mr. Tilyenji Kaunda who, I believe, conducts a business in neighboring Zimbabwe. Or is there going to be subsidiary legislation designed to exempt such people from the requirement?
No Amendments, Please!
From the beginning of the on-going constitutional process, there has been a general clamor by Zambians for a completely new Republican constitution. Any deviation from this expectation is, therefore, autocratic and a reflection of the political malfeasance which has become ingrained in our beloved country over the years. And, by and large, Zambians expect the new Republican constitution to include the following:
(a) Provision for the appointment of ministers by the Republican President from among persons qualified to be elected as members of parliament, but who are not members of parliament;
(b) Provision for the election of the Republican President under a system where the winning candidate should receive not less than 50 percent plus one vote of the valid votes cast;
(c) Provision for the Republican Vice President to be elected as a running mate to any citizen seeking to be elected as Republican President;
(d) Provision for a consultative, transparent and accountable debt contraction law designed to give power to Parliament to oversee and approve all loans to be contracted by the government on behalf of Zambians; and
(e) Provision for religious neutrality by removing the declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation and any related Articles and Clauses.
If these concerns cannot be addressed now, we should hold the forthcoming tripartite elections under the 1996 constitution in its current form. There is really no wisdom in trying to push through a constitutional Bill which has so many contentious issues and inconsistencies—the kinds of issues and inconsistencies which are predictably going to elicit nationwide demonstrations and potentially culminate in losses of property and human life.