Concourt rules bill 7 initiation lacked broad consultation, violated constitutional sprit

The Constitutional Court has determined that the government’s decision to initiate the Constitution (Amendment) Bill No. 7 of 2025 without extensive national consultations was inconsistent with the spirit and principles outlined in the Republican Constitution.

In a majority judgment delivered today by Constitutional Court President Professor Margaret Munalula, along with judges Martin Musaluke, Mathews Chisunka, and Judy Mulongoti, the court found that the State did not fulfill the constitutional requirements for public participation prior to proposing amendments.

“In the absence of any evidence that the initial process undertaken by the respondent meets the expectations of wide consultations with the people, we firmly believe that the initiating process lacks legitimacy,” stated Judge Munalula.

This ruling followed a petition filed by incarcerated former Lumezi Member of Parliament Munir Zulu and Tonse Alliance Youth Chairperson Celestine Mukandila, who argued that the amendment process was unconstitutional due to insufficient engagement with citizens.

The petitioners argued that proposed changes, particularly those related to wards and constituency delimitations, should undergo meaningful and inclusive dialogue before being advanced by the State.

Attorney General Mulilo Kabesha, however, defended the government’s approach, claiming that the proposed roadmap by the Minister of Justice had incorporated stakeholder input and met legal requirements. He asserted that there was no hidden agenda and emphasized that the ruling party, the UPND, had no legal role in the amendment process.

Despite the Attorney General’s defense, the Court ruled that even proposed changes deemed “non-contentious” must be subject to public scrutiny.

“We are not convinced. Even so-called non-contentious issues can fundamentally alter the Constitution. The only way to adequately protect the Constitution is to ensure that every amendment process undergoes a broad consultative process with the People from the outset,” stated Judge Munalula.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Mungeni Mulife argued that the petition should be dismissed, noting that the absence of extensive consultation alone was not sufficient to invalidate the process without a breach of Article 79 of the Constitution.

Nonetheless, the majority judgment prevails and establishes a significant precedent for future constitutional amendment processes in Zambia.

This development follows President Hakainde Hichilema’s directive to the Minister of Justice to postpone the Bill 7 process to facilitate broader consultations with the Zambian people, a move that has been widely welcomed by civil society and legal stakeholders.