"Constitution review process has unnecessarily been long"

"Constitution review process has unnecessarily been long"
By George Chellah
Sun 27 June 2010, 04:00 CAT

CIVIL Society Organisations (CSOs) have stated that the constitution review process has unnecessarily been long and divisive. And the CSOs have stated that it is necessary for the government to present a full roadmap on the constitution review process.

In a statement following the launch of the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) draft constitution, the CSOs stated that they cautiously welcomed the launch of the draft constitution and reports by the NCC for public comments.

However, they stated that the review process had been divisive instead of rallying Zambians around a common cause.

The CSOs that issued the statement are Caritas Zambia, Southern African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes, Transparency International Zambia, Citizens Forum, Centre for Trade Policy and Development (CTPD), Civil Societyfor Poverty Reduction (CSPR), Non-Governmental Organisations Coordinating Council (NGOCC) and Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection (JCTR).

“It is a process where the interests of the general public, have been sacrificed at the altar of political expediency. It is our sincere hope therefore that the launch of the draft constitution and report will go a long way in uniting Zambians in coming up with a people-driven and people centred constitution,” they stated.

“The Zambian people have long desired for a constitution that commands their respect and obedience, a constitution that addresses their aspirations for a fully democratic country - where the rule of law is paramount and the ordinary man and woman - recognized as full participants in national development.”

The CSOs stated that they had their concerns and apprehensions on the whole process of adopting the constitution through the NCC.

They stated that they had previously expressed their worry about the long delay in concluding the exercise.

“… And we are still concerned about the prospects of Zambians going to the polls in 2011 on the current constitution, knowing fully well the inadequacies of the electoral process and systems,” the statement read in part.

They stated that it was their intention to engage in this process mainly by sensitizing the general public on what the NCC was proposing and enabling them to participate from a well informed basis.

They added that they would continue to advocate for the adoption and enactment of a new constitution anchored on common shared democratic principles.

“We do however, note with sadness some inadequacies in the whole process of receiving comments from the public and we are concerned that these could affect the participation of the majority of Zambians. Some of our observations are as follows:

The launch of the draft constitution and report took place without a prior notice.

Indeed the public generally knew that the report would be launched soon but NCC should have taken a leaf from the Electoral Commission of Zambia which has been running public notices in the mass media to sensitise the public of the voters registration exercise,” they stated.

“NCC, knowing fully well that the public only has 40 days to comment on the draft constitution, should have preceded the official launch with public sensitization – unless the intention is not to have as many people participating in this exercise.

There is an apparent lack of preparedness for this exercise and this can be illustrated by the fact that the launch took place at the time when Government Printers is still printing copies of the documents, all the websites mentioned had not uploaded the document for access by the public and the issue of translation is not yet decided. In the meantime, the countdown of the 40 days has begun. These are basic logistics which should have been put in place before the launch – and if people cannot yet access these documents – what was NCC launching?”

They stated that it was a pity that the translation of the draft constitution and report were not a given and contingent on availability of resources.

The CSOs stated that the NCC and the government should have prioritized public participation as opposed to the largesse spent on endless sittings of the NCC.

They stated that they were worried that the whole process could soon become exclusive and the preserve of the literate and yet all Zambians needed to have a say.

They stated that the NCC chairperson should have taken advantage of the launch of the draft constitution to equally avail to the public a programme of how they would facilitate public engagement in this process.

“Is the NCC going to organize public meetings and if so - where and when? Further details should have been given on how rural areas which are far away from the district centres are going to access the documents.

The question which still lingers is how will communities in the rural and remote areas participate in this process? Is the NCC in discussion with churches, NGOs or other stakeholders working in these areas to reach out to these communities? Related to the above, it is necessary that NCC indicates how many copies of the draft constitution and reports will be or have been sent to each district and how the people can access these copies,” they stated.

“Another issue that requires clarification from the NCC is the manner in which differences between what the NCC is recommending and what the people and institutions who comment on the draft constitution and reports propose, will be resolved.

For instance, the NCC, in its draft constitution has proposed a minimum degree qualification for a prospective presidential candidate; assuming that the majority of the people and institutions (more than the numbers at the NCC) canvass for removal of this article - how will NCC handle this development?”

They stated that the process of reviewing and integrating the proposals from the public should be made clear from the onset so that it does not turn out as an academic exercise.

“Given the stage that this process has reached and some of the issues raised in the draft constitution, it is necessary for government to present a full roadmap as to what will happen after 31 August 2010.

There should be a sense of forward planning on the part of government and thus ensure that this process does not stall after August 2010 but reaches its logical conclusion,” they stated.

“Government, for instance, should consider appointing a Referendum Commission which should start working out modalities for a referendum as soon as possible. Such a step will be a sign that government really means well and that a new constitution is a possibility before the next elections.”