POLITICS-ZAMBIA: Tensions Simmer Over New Constitution

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Jeff Kapembwa

LUSAKA, Sep 14 2004 (IPS) - Zambians could be forgiven for pleading “constitution fatigue”. The constitution that was drawn up for their country at independence in 1964, has been replaced three times in the past 40 years. Now, yet another constitution is up for debate – something that has pitted government against civil society.

Will constitutional squabbles lead to a repeat of the 2002 election protests? (Photo: Salim Henry) Credit: PictureNET Africa

Various civic groups, spearheaded by a coalition called the Oasis Forum, have called for the new constitution to come into force before general elections in 2006, so as to ensure a fair poll.

The groups appear to be pinning their hopes for a just election on a number of recommendations put before the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC), which began work in May 2003.

These include a provision that presidential candidates would need to garner 51 percent of the vote to win an election. Mwanawasa took office in 2002 with 28 percent of ballots cast, while his closest rival – Anderson Mazoka – won 26 per cent of the vote.

There is also a recommendation that that the president would need to achieve victory in more than five of Zambia’s nine provinces (to ensure widespread support for the head of state), and that a new leader should not be sworn in until all claims of vote rigging had been resolved by the courts.

Three of the losing candidates in the 2002 poll petitioned the court about alleged irregularities in that election. They argued that Mwanawasa had, amongst other things, used state resources in his campaign – contrary to electoral rules.

In addition, opposition Liberal Progress Party leader Rodger Chongwe has called for the constitution to stipulate an ongoing process of voter registration. This would enhance public participation in elections.

The constitution that Zambia acquired upon gaining independence from Britain was replaced in 1973 under President Kenneth Kaunda – who used the new draft to transform the country into a one-party state. In 1991, the document was changed to mark the resumption of multi-party politics in Zambia – while yet another constitutional review came in 1996, setting term limits on the presidency.

At that time, the key recommendation that future presidents be elected with 51 percent of the vote was rejected, as was the call for all Zambians to be allowed to contest polls – irrespective of their parentage. The present constitution stipulates that both parents of a candidate must have been born in Zambia.

As a result of these experiences, civic groups have called for the new constitution to be endorsed by a constituent assembly that would allow various interest groups to air their views on the draft. They also believe the constitution should be put to a national referendum.

Government appears reluctant to follow this route, saying the organisation of a constituent assembly and referendum would be too expensive for Zambia, where about 64 percent of the population lives on less than a dollar a day (this according to the 2004 Human Development Report, produced by the United Nations Development Programme).

Justice Minister George Kunda claims the referendum alone would cost 26 million dollars.

Under the programme envisaged by government, the president is expected to give the final stamp of approval to the new constitution. But, civic groups fear this will allow the ruling party to tailor the document to its own requirements.

“We have seen our own constitution bastardized before and we shall not allow it this time around,” says Oasis Forum spokesman Joe Komakoma, adding “Previously, most of the recommendations by the previous constitutional review commissions were rejected…That is why we want a people driven document to live the test of time.”

Tensions between government and civil society have deepened during the past three days, with Kunda describing the Oasis Forum’s attempts to influence the constitution-making process as unlawful – even treasonous.

The Oasis Forum and another civic group, the Citizen’s Forum, were scheduled to meet Mwanawasa Tuesday in the capital, Lusaka, to discuss their differences. However, the two groups cancelled the talks, saying they needed time to consider government’s latest pronouncements on the new constitution.

In recent years, constitutional negotiations have also presented challenges to other countries in the Southern African region, such as Zimbabwe. In February 2000, voters in that country rejected a constitution that was widely viewed as enabling President Robert Mugabe to tighten his grip on power.

The draft also allowed for the seizure of white-owned farms in Zimbabwe without compensation. Despite a number of efforts at land redistribution, most of the country’s prime agricultural land was still in the hands of minority whites in 2000.

The National Constitutional Assembly, which groups various civic organisations, continues to press for a new constitution to be adopted in Zimbabwe.

In Malawi, parliament in 2002 ruled against a proposal by then head of state Bakili Muluzi that the constitution be changed to remove limits on presidential terms. The law continues to stipulate that Malawian presidents may only serve two five-year terms.

Speaking during the African Union summit held in July in Ethiopia, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan underscored the importance of having constitutions that reflect the will of the people in African countries.

“Let us always remember that constitutions are for the long term benefit to society, not the short term goals for the ruler,” Annan noted.