Attorney-General says challenge to Bill 7 legally impossible

The Attorney-General, Mulilo Kabesha, has mounted a robust defence of Bill No. 7 of 2025, insisting that the petition challenging its legality was “misguided” and legally impossible to sustain because the Bill has already become part of Zambia’s Constitution.

Responding to a petition filed by lawyer Makebi Zulu, Mr. Kabesha told the Constitutional Court that critics had overstated the implications of the Munir Zulu and Celestine Mukandila judgment, wrongly portraying it as a fatal blow to the constitutional amendment process.

“The petitioner seeks to expand the effect of the Munir Zulu judgment beyond its express holding, which is untenable,” Kabesha argued.

He stressed that the court never declared Bill No. 7 void nor ordered that the legislative process be restarted. Instead, he said, the judgment merely pointed out defects in the public consultation process—defects he insisted were later cured through lawful means.

“The procedural concerns identified by the court were addressed through the establishment of a Technical Committee that undertook consultations,” he submitted.

Kabesha dismissed claims that the consultation period—allegedly shorter than 20 days—was inadequate, calling the accusation “wholly misconceived.”

“There is no constitutional requirement prescribing the length of public consultations,” he argued, adding that the sufficiency of consultation cannot be measured by timelines alone.

He further rejected allegations that the government ignored the Technical Committee’s report or that remarks by Chief Government Spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa amounted to constitutional violations.

Central to his argument was the fact that President Hakainde Hichilema assented to Bill No. 7 on December 18, 2025, transforming it into Act No. 13 of 2025.

“Upon assent, the Bill became law and now forms part of the Constitution pursuant to Article 79(5)(a),” Kabesha told the court.

He added that under Article 1(4) the Constitution was supreme and cannot be questioned once duly enacted.

“No state organ or other forum may challenge or question its validity,” he said.

Kabesha warned that entertaining the petition would effectively reopen settled constitutional processes and undermine legal certainty. He described the matter as an abuse of court process, pointing to similar cases already before the court, including LAZ and Others v AG and Brian Mundubile and Mukandila v AG.

The Attorney General is urging the court to dismiss the petition in its entirety, arguing that it is legally untenable, repetitive and overtaken by events.

“The petition is devoid of merit and infers a wrong ratio decidendi of the Munir Zulu judgment,” Kabesha submitted.

WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.