Veteran politician and founding member of the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD), Prince Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika, has accused the UPND government of repeating Zambia’s historical “playbook of constitutional molestation” through what he calls a stage-managed and predetermined constitution-making process.
Speaking on the Emmanuel Mwamba Verified programme, the seasoned nationalist said the ongoing constitutional review is neither people-driven nor sincere, but a tightly controlled presidential project meant to entrench power ahead of the 2026 elections.
“They are repeating the playbook of constitutional molestation that has been taking place in Zambia from the very beginning,” Aka charged. “You utilise your over-centralised presidential powers to propose a process of constitutional amendment which has a predetermined outcome.”
He explained that the tell-tale signs of manipulation are already in the open: the list of items to be changed was published weeks before the terms of reference were even announced; the committee is working without any legal framework; and the President has given it only one month to produce a draft.
“If the items that are being recommended to be changed in the Constitution are announced before the process, then it’s quite clear the goal is predetermined,” he said.
“It is the outcome that is being dressed up as consultation. The timetable itself, one month for something we’ve failed to fix for 61 years, is a sign of desperation for a goal which is not national.”
Aka said the process mirrors earlier attempts to manipulate Zambia’s supreme law, from the removal of the referendum clause in 1969, to the Chona Commission of 1972, the Mwanakatwe Commission in 1993, and other selective reforms that served partisan interests.
“In 1972 they removed the power of the people over the Constitution and transferred it to a partisan Parliament under the thumb of the presidency. The same is happening today,” he warned.
“You add some sweetness, goodies that sound attractive to sections of society, so that when they say yes, they are saying yes to the total package, including the poison that secures the ruling party’s tenure.”
He dismissed government claims that the amendments are meant to empower women, youths, and persons with disabilities, describing such provisions as “fake excuses” aimed at disguising an electoral agenda.
“You don’t need to rush a constitution to have women in leadership,” he argued.
“Look at Namibia, they have a female President, Prime Minister, and Speaker without changing their constitution. So these supposed inclusions are political bait, not reform.”
Aka linked the constitutional process to a broader anti-democratic environment, where the state has tightened control over political participation and institutions of governance.
“It is now harder to form a political party than it was in the one-party state,” he said. “Names of officials are being submitted to government and used by state agents to follow and terrorise them. If they are teachers or contractors, their livelihoods are threatened.”
He said such repression, combined with the rushed and secretive constitutional process, tilts the political field against democracy, freedom, and equal treatment before the law.
“This attempt to change the Constitution on the eve of elections is another tell-tale sign that its purpose is electoral,” Aka warned. “It has nothing to do with lacunas or neglected groups. It’s an old trick, crude but visible, and it must be resisted.”
The veteran reformist called on Zambians to be vigilant and to reclaim the process as their own.
“I welcome the crudeness of this attempt, it makes it easier for our people to see through the game,” he said.
“The ball is in our court. It’s time to take control and advance genuine freedom, real decolonisation, and people-driven democracy.”
Prince Akashambatwa, who played a central role in Zambia’s return to multiparty democracy in 1991, said history is repeating itself, and that only courage, honesty, and national unity will stop the country from sliding back into authoritarianism..