By Paul Shalala
 |
| A voter |
Zambia has
failed to pass several progressive human rights amendments to its constitution following
the failure by voters to reach the 50% threshold needed to approve the
amendments in a referendum.
On Thursday
last week, Zambia went to the polls in a general election which was also tied
to a referendum on the bill of rights which had progressive laws.
Due to the
attention given to the presidential election, the counting and announcing of
referendum votes was halted and postponed to today to allow for the
presidential results to be announced first.
According to
Zambia’s Referendum Act, the country needs at least 50% of its citizens above
18 years to vote in a referendum.
Further,
half of those who show up at the polling stations must vote YES for the
referendum to succeed.
However,
today, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) announced that last week’s
referendum failed to reach the threshold.
ECZ
Chairperson Esau Chulu disclosed that only 44.4% of the eligible voters turn
out and the referendum failed by 5.6%.
According to
the Central Statistical Office, Zambia has an estimated total of 7,528,091
people above the age of 18 and this means that for the referendum to go
through, 3,764,046 should have voted.
However, according
to Justice Chulu, only 3,345,047 showed up and of those, only 1,852,549 voted
YES for the referendum.
The ECZ and
some civil society organisations ran sensitisation campaigns urging people to
come out and vote in the referendum.
The ruling
Patriotic Front campaigned for a YES vote while the opposition UPND and other
parties campaigned for a NO vote.
Despite the
general election recording a 56.4% turn out, the referendum recorded a 44.4%.
After voting
for President, Member of Parliament, Mayor and Councillor, some voters did not
proceed to the referendum booth to also vote in the referendum despite both
processes being held in the same polling stations.
 |
| The Referendum Question On the ballot Paper |
Some of the
progressive laws which were provided for in the bill of rights were a provision
of 19 years as the marriage age, banning of abortion, providing access to
information, freedom of the media, social, economic, cultural and political
rights and fair trial.
Since the
announcement of the referendum results, some Copperbelt-based civil society
organisations have told this blogger of their disappointment.
“We are disappointed
that the referendum has failed. We had hope that if the bill of rights was
passed, we were going to be granted access to information which we have been
championing for years. We also hoped that the public media would be given
freedom. But this now means we get back to our drawing boards and start pushing
parliament to enact the access to information bill,” said Andrew Sakala, President
of the Press Association of Zambia.
Since 2002,
the Zambian media has been involved ina back and forth game with governments for
the access to information law to be taken back to parliament for enactment.
Not much
progress has been made in realising this dream as successful governments have
been failing to take back the bill to the floor of the house since its
withdrawal from the standing orders 14 years ago.
For those
involved in governance issues, the failure of the referendum means a major
setback to their countrywide advocacy activities in the past three months.
“We are very
disappointed by this development. We blame opposition parties who politicised
this process. They campaigned against the referendum and now the people of
Zambia have been denied their social, economic and cultural rights. This should
be a lesson to Zambians and they should know that some parties don’t mean well,”
said Gerard Mutelo, President of the Kitwe-based Democratic Governance and
Human Rights Advocates.
For some
governance activists, the failure by Zambian voters to pass the bill of rights
has hurt them hard.
“We are disappointed
and annoyed. We spent a lot of money in sensitising the masses. What have the
opposition parties gained in this…… People are not celebrating this development….
What have they achieved?” said an angry looking Poster Jumbe, the Copperbelt Province
Coordinator of the Anti-Voter Apathy Project, a youth-led organisation which
champions the involvement of young people in public affairs.
 |
| Some of the advocacy material for referendum |
Among other
provisions, the bill of rights called suggested 19 years to be made the
marriage age in light of the conflict between customary and statutory laws
which recognise marriage at different ages.
“It is very disappointing
that the bill of rights has not been passed. We hoped that if it passed, it
would have raised the marriage age to 19 and helped stop early marriages which
are rampant in Zambia,” said Sharon Chisanga, the Copperbelt Province
Coordinator for the Young Women Christian Association.
Ms Chisanga
coordinates several programs aimed at discouraging early marriages which are
common on the Copperbelt Province which has the second highest rate among
Zambia’s 10 provinces.
If passed,
the bill of rights would have also outlawed the detention of pregnant women.
Currently,
pregnant women can be jailed and several women are incarcerated and raise their
children in prison.
The bill had
also provided for quick trials to avoid the common practice of suspects
spending months and possibly years before their cases are disposed off by the
courts of law.
With Zambia's conservative society, the country added a clause which defined marriage as union between two people of opposite sex.
This clause was clearly stated to avoid any chances of same sex marriages in a country which is constitutionally recognised as a christian nation even though it also respects other faiths.
With Zambia's conservative society, the country added a clause which defined marriage as union between two people of opposite sex.
This clause was clearly stated to avoid any chances of same sex marriages in a country which is constitutionally recognised as a christian nation even though it also respects other faiths.
Before Thursday’s
referendum, the last time Zambia had such a vote was in 1969.
