PRESIDENT SIGNS NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL CONFERENCE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LUSAKA 001019

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/05/2017
TAGS: PGOV PREL ZA
SUBJECT: PRESIDENT SIGNS NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL CONFERENCE
BILL; CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS STILL UNSATISFIED WITH
CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROSPECTS

REF: A. LUSAKA 734


B. LUSAKA 510

LUSAKA 00001019 001.2 OF 002


Classified By: Ambassador C. Martinez, reasons 1.4 (B) and (D).


1. (C) Summary. President Mwanawasa signed the
government-sponsored National Constitutional Conference (NCC)
bill on August 31. The bill calls for a
nationally-representative Constitutional Conference to either
draft a new constitution or suggest amendments to the current
one. The Oasis Forum, a civil society umbrella group, says
that it may boycott the NCC and continues to insist that it
will only accept a new Constitution drafted by a constituent
assembly and ratified by a national referendum, as
recommended by the 2005 Constitutional Review Commission.
Opposition parties have been restrained in their criticism of
the NCC and it appears that the GRZ has taken the initiative
on constitutional reform away from civil society by
presenting a plan that at least moves the ball forward.
Civil society groups now face a difficult task in deciding
whether to work within a reform process designed by an
executive branch determined to protect its privileges or to
risk being marginalized by refusing to participate. End
summary.


2. (U) When signing the National Constitutional Conference
bill on August 31, President Mwanawasa urged a speedy
implementation of the constitutional issues at stake. The
Constitutional reform process began in 2003 with the
formation of the Constitution Review Commission (CRC),which
was charged with identifying problems in the 1996
Constitution and recommending improvements. Important
recommendations in the CRC report include requirements that
cabinet ministers and deputy ministers come from outside
Parliament (currently the opposite is true),that the
president and vice president be elected by a minimum of "50
plus 1" percent of the vote (currently the candidate with the
most votes wins); that the president may not appoint members
of parliament (he is allowed to appoint eight currently); and
that public media must provide equal and balanced coverage to
all persons and parties participating in the elections (not
provided for in the current Constitution; this was raised by
many observers as a shortcoming iof the national elections
held in 2006).


3. (U) The CRC report has been the focus of debate (see
reftels) since its release in December 2005, with the GRZ
originally accepting its recommendation of a constituent
assembly to draft a completely new Constitution that took
into account its recommended provisions. The GRZ laid out a
very technical process under which adopting a new
Constitution would necessarily entail an amendment to the
current Constitution, as well as an expensive census and
referendum. The Oasis Forum insisted that the law was more
flexible and that the GRZ should form a Constituent Assembly
to draft a new constitution, which could then be submitted to
a national referendum. In late June the President briefed
donors on a more nuanced GRZ view that most constitutional
changes could be done through selected amendments rather than
wholesale change (ref B).


4. (U) The GRZ tabled the National Constitutional Conference
bill on August 2. The bill establishes a conference of
persons representing all walks of Zambian life, including all
members of Parliament and specific numbers of representatives
from political parties, trade unions, church groups and
religious associations, government commissions, professional
associations, traditional healers and chiefs, media,
universities, military, the judiciary, civil servants, local
government and former freedom fighters. The Conference is
charged with studying the CRC's report and drafting a new
draft Constitution or suggesting necessary amendments for
submission to the Parliament.


5. (U) During Parliamentary Committee consultations on the
bill, criticism centered on the strong hand dealt to the
executive branch in the proposed NCC process. The GRZ agreed
to several changes, including the election of the Chair and
Vice Chair of the conference (the original bill called for
Presidential appointment) and increasing the number of
political parties represented on the Conference. However,
the members of the Conference itself are appointed by the
Secretary to the Cabinet, a position fully controlled by

SIPDIS
President Mwanawasa. In addition, the mechanics of how the
Conference's recommendations will be translated into law are
somewhat vague - the original bill called for the Conference
only to "recommend" amendments or a new Constitution to the
Minister of Justice. The revised bill apparently now says
that the Conference should "submit" its language to the MOJ,
and civil society is still uncomfortable with the ambiguity

LUSAKA 00001019 002.2 OF 002


of the new language.


6. (C) Civil society umbrella group the Oasis Forum reignited
the constitutional reform debate in April of this year (ref
B) by calling for a constituent assembly that would draft a
completely new constitution. The Forum still insists on this
plan and has said that they would prefer no constitutional
change to the piecemeal changes they feel are most likely to
result from the NCC. At a recent meeting with donor
representatives who fund governance initiatives, Forum reps
said that they are considering withholding participation in
the Conference. Opposition parties, however, have been muted
in their reaction to the bill and apparently are waiting to
see how the process proceeds.


7. (C) Comment: The NCC process is far from perfect and the
executive branch has maintained its upper hand in protecting
presidential powers. The President has already expressed his
preference for change through amendment, but in offering at
least the possibility of an entirely new Constitution, the
GRZ has taken away some of civil society's momentum. Groups
such as the Oasis Forum now face a difficult decision:
whether to participate in -- and therefore legitimate -- a
process that is stacked against them, or to stand on the
sidelines and risk marginalization. Given such a choice, it
is easy to see why distrust of the government is so high.
End comment.

MARTINEZ