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). �0A;¶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