By 
A broad coalition of legal, religious and civil society organisations has taken the State to the Constitutional Court, arguing that President Hakainde Hichilema’s newly appointed Technical Committee on Amendments to the Constitution is unconstitutional, opaque and a direct assault on Zambia’s democratic order.
The petition — filed by the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), NGOCC, three church mother bodies (Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia, the Council of Churches in Zambia, and the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops), together with the LCK Freedom Foundation — seeks to nullify every act and document produced by the Committee, past, present and future.
The petitioners argue that the President’s unilateral establishment of the 25-member Technical Committee on 2 October 2025 was done without constitutional or statutory authority, without a gazetted legal instrument, and in violation of the binding principles in the landmark Munir Zulu judgment.
Read more: Hichilema denies he’s plotting tenure extension through Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7
They contend that the Committee is “an illegitimate creature of the Executive,” lacking independence, transparency and any lawful mandate. Among the remedies sought, the groups want the Court to declare that the President breached Articles 1(2), 5, 8, 9, 90, 91 and 92 of the Constitution by constituting the Committee outside the limits of executive power and by relying on provisions they say were “misapplied” to justify it.
They further argue that the Terms of Reference — issued only through a press release on 20 October 2025, rather than an enabling law — violate the doctrine of legality and are therefore null.
The petition anchors its arguments on the Constitutional Court’s own decision in Munir Zulu v Attorney General, delivered in June 2025, which held that any constitutional amendment process must be independent, people-driven and based on “wide consultations.” The Court stressed that the Executive must act only as a facilitator, not the architect, of constitutional reform.
Yet, the petitioners insist the government has done the opposite.
They cite the Committee’s composition, which includes several former members of the Electoral Reform Technical Committee whose recommendations form the basis of the now-deferred Bill No. 7 of 2025, arguing this creates a perception of predetermined outcomes.
They also reference public admissions by Solicitor-General Marshall Muchende, who reportedly told Phoenix FM that the Committee was essentially validating what the Government already knew — which, to the petitioners, confirms that the process is executive-driven and inconsistent with the Munir Zulu ruling.
Public participation, they argue, has been severely deficient.
The Committee allocated only 12 days for nationwide consultations across all 10 provinces, 72 districts and more than 1,800 wards.
They cite poor publicity, late venue announcements, inconsistent procedures and cases of leading questions that appeared to pressure citizens to alter their views. To them, the rushed approach was not only impractical but deliberately exclusionary.
The organisations are, therefore, seeking orders of certiorari to quash the Committee’s Terms of Reference, all consultations, findings, recommendations and any draft constitutional amendment Bill it may produce.
They further ask the Court to compel Government to restart the entire constitutional reform process through an independent, transparent, inclusive and legally established mechanism, in full compliance with the Constitution and the Munir Zulu precedent.
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.
Comments