Thursday, 8th December, 2022

Printer Friendly and PDF

       Thursday, 8thDecember, 2022

The House met at 1430 hours

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]







The Minister of Justice (Mr Haimbe): Madam Speaker,I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Madam Speaker, the current Criminal Procedure Code Act, Chapter 88 of the Laws of Zambia, was enacted in 1993 to facilitate the application of the Penal Code Act, Cap. 87 of the Laws of Zambia, in matters relating to the procedure for criminal cases. However, from the time of the enactment of the Criminal Produce Code, the Act has never been comprehensively reviewed and it contains archaic provisions, including the death penalty and the offence of defamation of the President.

Madam Speaker, a review of the Criminal Procedure Code Act was prompted by an outcry from stakeholders in the criminal justice system who observed that the Criminal Procedure Code has never been comprehensively reviewed as aforementioned. In response to the concerns, the Zambia Law Development Commission (ZLDC) was tasked to carry out stakeholder consultations. The ZLDC submitted a report of its findings and a draft Bill to the Ministry of Justice in February, this year.

Madam Speaker, following the submission of the report and the draft Bill, the Ministry of Justice considered which provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code required to be amended urgently. The amendment has been necessitated by the need to align the legislation relating to the death penalty and defamation of the President with international best practices. Additionally, the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code are consequential to the amendment of the Penal Code which is also before this House.

Madam Speaker, it should be recalled that His Excellency, the President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr Hakainde Hichilema, stated during the opening of the Second Session of the Thirteenth National Assembly that amendments relating to the abolition of the death penalty and the law relating to criminal defamation of the President would be tabled before this House.

Madam Speaker, it is on the premise of the foregoing and in order to actualise the pronouncements made by the Republican President that the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill, 2022, is before this House for consideration. The amendment will further fortify the respect for human rights and liberties enshrined in the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, the objectives of the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill, 2022, are to replace the penalty of death with life imprisonment and repeal the penalty of defamation of the President. The amendments are made in order to align the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code Act with the provisions of the Penal Code, once the amendments are enacted.

Madam Speaker, it should be noted that the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code Act do not in any way contravene the provisions of the Constitution, Cap. 1 of the Laws of Zambia. This is so because Article 12 (1) of the Constitution makes it clear that the death penalty can only apply if there is a law providing for such a penalty. Further, the Constitution does not prescribe the offences that warrant a death penalty. Therefore, Article 12 (1) of the Constitution is drafted in a manner that allows for the death penalty, but the Article does not make it mandatory to have the death penalty on the statute book.

Madam Speaker, this Bill is very progressive and should be supported because the proposed amendment is intended to allay anticipated inconsistencies in the law and enable the country to comply with international best practice on the right to life, freedom of speech and defamation of the President. I urge hon. Members of this august House to wholeheartedly support it.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Miyutu (Kalabo Central) (on behalf ofMr Andeleki (Katombola)): Madam Speaker, the Committee on Legal Affairs, Human Rights and Governance was tasked to scrutinise the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill, No. 24 of 2022, referred to it by the House.

Madam, I wish to put it on record that the majority of the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and tendered in their submissions supported the Bill. Your Committee agrees with these stakeholders and also supports this Bill.

Madam Speaker, the House will not note that the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code have been necessitated by the amendments to the Penal Code Act through the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, No. 25 of 2022, which was also referred to the Committee.

It is, therefore, important for the House to understand that the main focus of the Criminal Procedure Code is on procedure for the administration of substantive criminal law in Zambia. It provides for the procedure to be followed in criminal cases when sentencing convicts. The Criminal Procedure Code operates in tandem with the Penal Code Act, Cap. 87 of the Laws of Zambia, which is the principal legislation that provides for various offences and the sentences thereof.

Madam Speaker, in view of this, I will not go into the details of the Committee’s observations and recommendations as I am confident that hon. Members have had occasion to acquaint themselves with what is in the report.

Madam Speaker, that notwithstanding, there are some technical issues which were raised by some of the stakeholders, which I want the Government to note. The first issue is with regard to the interchangeable use of the terms ‘life imprisonment’ and ‘imprisonment for life’. The criminal law experts who interacted with the Committee cautioned that there was a need to be careful with the use of these terminologies as they had different meanings and implications on the sentences that would be imposed on the different categories of offences that attract these penalties. The Committee has attempted to highlight this issue in its report with specific reference to Clause 8 of the Bill.

Secondly, Madam Speaker, regarding Clause 5 of the Bill, which seeks to amend Section 175 (1) of the principal Act by the deletion of the word ‘death’ and the substitution with the words ‘life imprisonment’, stakeholders submitted that this amendment would entail that the discretion of the courts to order compensation for the long list of offences currently punishable by life imprisonment would be taken away because such offences would fall within what is exempted from ordering compensation. Stakeholders were of the view that this is not the intention of the Bill. As such, the discretion to order compensation should be left as it is, but should not be applied to the offences that currently attracted the death penalty, namely murder, treason and aggravated robbery with a firearm.

Finally, Madam Speaker, with regard to Clause 6 of the Bill, stakeholders observed that once the amendment was effected, the life imprisonment sentence would now fall among cases which require a certificate of sentence to be forwarded to the President. This appears to be outside the intention of the Bill as the requirement of the certificate of sentence being sent to the President will now be redundant and should, therefore, be dropped.

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I wish to thank you and the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support and services rendered to the Committee throughout its deliberations.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, just by way of guidance, as we debate, let us bring out new issues to avoid being repetitive. We do not have much time. We have to manage our time, so that we can also allow as many hon. Members as possible who want to express themselves to be given an opportunity.

Mr Chitotela (Pambashe): Madam Speaker, reading through the report and listening to the hon. Minister speaking, I was at sea. I was a bit lost. That is why I asked for the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia and I want to look at Part III, which deals with the protection of human rights, specifically under Article 12 (1).

Madam Speaker, in the 2016 General Election, we, the people of Zambia, decided to go to vote and Zambians called for the amendment of the Constitution. Since Part III of the Constitution calls for the general participation of the Zambian people, we called for a referendum. This referendum was to allow Zambians to have a direct say on what they wished to be contained in the Constitution. Part III, specifically under Article 12, talks about a person’s life being taken away, and for avoidance of doubt, let me quote:

“No person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence under the law in force in Zambia of which he has been convicted.”

Madam Speaker, the offences that subject somebody to be executed are prescribed in the proposed Bill that the hon. Minister is bringing to this august House for the amendment of the Act. I have a problem us wanting to deal with a child leaving the father. I was of a strong view that His Excellency the President addressed the Zambian people and promised to deal with the matter of not executing Zambians as a form of punishment. The hon. Minister of Justice, on several occasions, has stood and said that we need to deal with non-contentious matters in the Constitution of Zambia. Once we had amended this clause in the Constitution, it would have been easier for us to deal with the sub-legislations, and these are the Bills we are considering today.

Madam Speaker, I have a problem supporting our move to amend the parliamentary legislation without dealing with the Constitution. This Bill may pass, but tomorrow, we will have Zambians that will go to the Constitutional Court and require the interpretation of this constitutional provision because the Constitution has provided for the death penalty although the cases under which a person must be executed are not listed in the Constitution, but in the sub-legislation. Now, we want to deal with the sub-legislation and leave the subject matter in the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, in Bemba, we say, “Ukunininaumutikumabula”, meaning that we are beginning to do things upside down instead of beginning with the contentions that the Zambian people have been talking about in so many commissions.I expected the hon. Minister of Justice to call a stakeholders meeting with hon. Members of Parliament and to present the matter that Zambians have been submitting through and through and ask that we deal with this subject by amending the Constitution. I do not think it would have been difficult to do that. However, amending the Act of Parliament and leaving the principal law in the Constitution standing, is not the right way to deal with things, bearing in mind that there are a number of provisions in the Constitution that we need to deal with.

Madam Speaker, I hope tomorrow, we will not see another amendment on the Electoral Process Act to deal with the delimitation to provide for more constituencies, with the view to amend the Constitution. My strongest view is that we can deal with the subject matter in the Constitution, and then deal with the sub-legislation. I felt of bringing that out so the Zambian people can understand that the Patriotic Front (PF) Government tried this route. We wanted to do things correctly, and we amended the Constitution. So, I understand that this provision requires a referendum. We had a referendum but, unfortunately, it did not pass. To again amend the Act that would subject somebody to be convicted for execution without dealing with the principal law in the Constitution, may be contradictory.

Madam Speaker, I strongly appeal to the hon. Minister to consider withdrawing this provision so we can deal with the Constitution. Once we amend the Constitution, it will be easy for us to amend this proposal. The hon. Minister must understand that human rights cannot be determined by this august House. This matter requires every Zambian to vote and it must be amended through a referendum, according to Part III of the Constitution of Zambia. It requires my mother in Chitotela Village and a grandmother in Chipata to vote on whether they agree with the thinking of the Government or not. However, if we begin by dealing with the sub-legislation without amending the Constitution, we will not progress.

Madam Speaker, as regards the removal of the defamation of the President, that is a good proposal, but the Office of the President must be protected. We can deal with certain matters as much as we want to, but we must not forget that African governance transcends from the chiefdom system and we know how kings and chiefs are treated in chiefdoms. This is not to take away the people’s liberty or opinion to criticise their leaders, but we must also bear in mind that certain positions come with certain responsibilities.

Madam Speaker, I strongly appeal to the hon. Minister to consider dealing with the subject of death penalty with the legal requirement it deserves. The Zambian people must vote over this matter through a referendum.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: We do not have much time. From the people who have indicated, we will start with the hon. Member for Kanchibiya, the hon. Member for Wusakile and the hon. Member for Shiwang’andu. Please, if you can yield some time, it will be appreciated. There is no need to repeat what other hon. Members have said.

Mr Chanda (Kanchibiya): Madam Speaker, thank you very much and I am guided. I will try to be as brief as I can be in my submission.

Madam Speaker, I believe the intention of bringing these Bills to Parliament is well noted. However, we must be clear about the society we live in, and whether or not, it is ready for these kind of reforms in our legal system.

Madam Speaker, we speak of the right to life and the argument anchored on protecting and defending human rights. As a matter of fact, a person has the right to life and no one has a right to take that life from him/her. However, we know that jurisdictions such as the United States of America (USA) prides itself as a defender and protector of human rights, and has still maintained this piece of legislation on its books, in all the twenty-seven states, if my memory serves me right. So, much as we want to change and change is inevitable, my appeal is that we need to reflect on whether as a society, we are at a point where we can have the death penalty off our statutes for the simple reason that many of us in this great assembly have been victims and we lost people who were very close to us. So, I do not know how seeing a criminal who takes away the life of your parent, brother, sister or mother would sit with what society is right now.

Madam Speaker, society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens and what murderers do is threaten the safety and welfare of society. As we seek to move in that direction, let us ask ourselves what message we will be sending to the would-be offenders or criminals in our society.

Madam Speaker, we also need to ask ourselves that if this is what we need to do, then what measures are we putting in place to ensure that a murderer committed to a life sentence, and probably at some point is released on parole, does not murder again? It is also very important for us to ask whether we do not need harsh penalties beyond life sentencing so as to serve as a deterrent to would-be offenders. What about issues of retribution for the victims, their families and society at large? So, these are some of the reservations that we have even as we seek to advance in that direction. My call would be that we ask whether as a society, we are at a point where we can live without this piece of legislation, and what role will parole continue to play. Is parole inadequate in ensuring that those who reform whilst in custody and are serving capital punishment sentences are released and still be able to join society at that point?

Madam Speaker, regarding the removal of the defamation of the President, again, I will place on record that the Office of the President is a critical institution. So, we need to understand where we are as society. We have the freedom of expression, but that freedom comes with certain responsibilities and can society handle such a decision? I am a believer in having freedom of expression; it is very important. However, whether society has come of age is a question I am battling with right now.

Madam Speaker, with those remarks, I submit.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kalobo (Wusakile): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for allowing me to comment on the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill and the Penal Code, and I will be very brief.

Madam Speaker, the amendment of this law requires us to start with the main law, not with the subsidiary law, so that we align it with international laws and address the duplication that arises in other laws.

Madam Speaker, in some Christian and Muslim jurisdictions, the death penalty is considered as a necessary law. However, there has been no clear evidence that capital punishment or the death penalty has been an effective deterrent to would-be offenders.

Madam Speaker, if you check, you will see that on one hand humanity, inherently, is evil, selfish and greedy. On the other hand, humanity is inherently kind, loving and capable of exercising self-control. Humanity by nature, is ubuntu. We exist as ubuntu and it outweighs the evil aspect of it. It is for this reason that we should be focused, as a country, to build a humane society. Our society does not need us to exercise aneye for an eye, otherwise, we risk having a blind nation.

Madam Speaker, let me briefly also comment on the defamation of the President. Defamation of the President is bad law.Historically,itemanates from the insults of the crown in the United Kingdom (UK). The architects of this law have done away with it. My expectation isthat it was supposed to be abolished completely.We were not even supposed to talk about it because our young democracy demands citizen participation in governance systems.

Madam Speaker, the citizen’s voice is very important in holding politicians, including the President, accountable where development is concerned. So, if we curtail the voice of citizens, then we are operating against the demands of our young democracy and we will never grow democratically. What we expect is the President to grow a thick skin. In the UK and America Presidents are insulted. There are several nasty comments that are put across to them and it has never been a deterrent in terms of development. They are still developing.

Madam Speaker, so, the proposal from the good people ofWusakile is that defamation of the President does not need any amendment. We just need to abolish this and do away from it completely. We should just strengthen the code of ethics. Our Constitution provides for this. Let us strengthen the code of ethics so that we can see how our citizenscan be controlled.

Madam Speaker, with these few remarks, I do not support piecemeal amendments. I do not support amendments that begin withthe subsidiary law, leaving out the main law.

I thank you.

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, I thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to make a few comments on the proposals by the hon. Minister of Justice.

Madam Speaker, indeed, it must be understood that the Criminal Procedure Code the hon. Minister is seeking to amend simply focuses on the procedure for administration of the substantive criminal law, which, I think later on, the hon. Minister will be putting on the Table , and that is the penal code.

Madam Speaker, like my hon. Colleagues stated earlier on, we, on your left side, have a difficulty to go with the hon. Minister on theproposals. Simply put, like Hon Chitotelastated, the issues that we are dealing form part of Part III of the Constitution which requires peoples’ participation. The people of Zambia must pronounce themselves on these matters through a referendum. We had an opportunity, which was missed in 2016, to deal with Part III, which as reminded in its current status in the old Constitution, to have expanded Bill of Rights.

Madam Speaker, what we need to be systemic is to revisit that opportunity. We can still create another opportunity so that we give people chance to speak to these very critical matters. It does not help by dealing with subsidiary legislation, like my hon. Colleagues have said, and you leave Part III to stand as it is. It means you have not abolished anything, and that is a piecemeal my hon. Colleagues are speaking about.

Madam Speaker, we would want to walk with the hon. Minister because we know these are matters that the people of Zambia would want us to reach a common understanding,the people on your right and ourselves,here, through the people. We do not want to misrepresent the people. If it was just an ordinarily legislation where we use the majority, it would have been straight forward. However, on this, the hon. Minister needs to have the peoples say.

Madam Speaker, we cannot use shortcuts to deal with Part III. This is what we are trying to do here. What are we desperately trying to cure, if I may ask? The Hon. Chanda, Member of Parliament for Kanchibiya, was talking about the provisoes that are in the Constitution to deal with the preservation of life even for those who are sentenced to death imprisonment.

Madam Speaker, Article 97 of the current Constitution provides for prerogative of mercy which is carried out by the Advisory Committee on Prerogative of Mercy, which advises the presidency on how the presidency can utilise Article 96. So, let us not take people rights away by pretending to be preserving their rights. It is not correct. We are very few here; only 156 elected members. The reason there was a cap to say that part of the Constitution can only be touched by ensuring that the people, the majority of Zambians, through referendum, make recommendations. There are reports that are available and I remember eminent persons like Mr Rueben Lifukagoing around the country to hear people’s voices on some of the matters.

Madam Speaker, we on your left have decided to not go with the hon. Minister on this piecemeal approach. We would like the hon. Minister to take a holistic approach to deal with the Bill of Rights, which is Part III of the Constitution. Today, even if we give it to them, using the numbers that they have, would we have abolished the death penalty or the cases that they are bringing? The answer is no.

Mr Chaatila: On a point of order, Madam.

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Chaatila: Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to rise on this point of order in accordance to Standing Order 65. Let me apologise to my hon. Colleague for disrupting his thought of debate.

Madam Speaker, the House needs to be consistent in the way we deal with issues. Last week, the Planning and Budgeting Committee brought to this House two Bills, in particular, the Securities (Amendment) Bill, which the your Committee recommended to not support.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Member of Parliament for Shiwang’andu rose and debated, that it would be very difficult to go against your Committees recommendations because, according to his words, that was your report.

Madam Speaker, today, your Committee on Legal Affairs, Governance, Human Rights, Gender Matters and Child Affairs, through the Acting Chairperson, has indicated that your Committee supported the Bill. Is the hon. Member of Parliament for Shiwang’andu in order to keep contradicting himself for him to fit his thoughts.

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier on, we need to be consistent. Let yes be yes and no be no. I seek your serious ruling.

Madam Speaker: As guided on that particular day when we were debating that Bill, the Report of the Committee is merely there to assist hon. Members in debating the matter that is before the House.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members are not going to vote on the contents of the Report but rather on whether the Bill should be read a second time. There are so many rulings to that effect. So, by way of guidance, hon. Members, a Report of the Committee on a Bill, is not binding on the members of that Committee.

Ms Mulenga: Long live Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Shiwang’andu, you may conclude your debate. However, as you do that, please, do not repeat what has already been said. We are trying to manage time hon. Member.

Mr Kampyongo: Madam Speaker, I want to place on record that we have had two Heads of State from the legal fraternity, President Levy Mwanawasa, may his soul rest in peace and the recent past President, Edgar Lungu. They were very much alive to these provisions.


Mr Kampyongo: I want to say to my colleagues who are laughing that I have been at the centre of these issues for a very long time. So, you must understand that.

Madam Speaker, the situation, as we have had it, is that Zambia has observed a moratorium. I can debate that in detail as we come to the Penal Code. We have had a moratorium in so far as the death penalty is concerned and the execution of those people who are sentenced to death since 2007. If all those Presidents who were there thought this was the quickest way to do it, I assure you that they would have done it but they were alive to the fact that Part III of the Constitution must have a people’s say. The option they all chose to go with, including the other two Presidents, was to observe a moratorium and utilise Article 97 by commuting those death sentences to life imprisonment. We know the challenges that have gone with non-execution of those who are sentenced to death. The space that these people are kept in, the condemned section, has been very limited. However, we did realise that and that is how we started working on the new facilities in order to expand the correctional service facilities.

Ms Mulenga: In Mwembeshi.

Mr Kampyongo: So, there is not much that we are going to achieve by taking this piece meal approach because like I have stated, it is about the President not exercising his final authority to commit or get these people who are sentenced to be executed.

So, Madam Speaker, we would want the hon. Minister to reconsider this approach and do the right thing. First things first, we should not use this shortcut of dealing with subsidiary legislation and forgetting to deal with Part III of the Constitution as it stands.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mtayachalo: Withdraw the Bill.


Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, let me begin by thanking the hon. vice chairperson of the Committee on Legal Affairs, Human Rights and Governance for the report and for supporting the Bill currently under consideration. May I also thank the hon. Members who have taken time to debate this particular Bill, in particular, hon. Member for Pambashe, the hon. Member for Kanchibiya, the hon. Member for Wusakile and last but not the least, the hon. Member for Shiwang’andu. Your contributions add value to the debates on the Floor of this House even though, of course, there are a number of misconceptions that have been put forward in the debate on the matter.

Madam Speaker, to the Committee, we note the technical issues that have been put forward and we are grateful for the guidance given. They are duly noted and will be taken into consideration as the Bill progresses on the Floor of the House.

Madam Speaker, there is perhaps, a matter that needs serious clarification as we wind up debate on this particular Bill. The English say that the ends justify the means. I think, that is something that we ought to seriously consider as we look at the matter at hand and the legal processes that are being undertaken in order to give effect to the will of the people of Zambia to do away with the death penalty. To start with, the fact that it is the will of the people of Zambia has been demonstrated over the last twenty-five years as debated by one of our colleagues. Zambia has enjoyed a moratorium on the death penalty since 1997. What is the implication of this? We all agree and accept that the people choose elected representatives to exercise their will. The elected representatives of the people of Zambia have for twenty-five years consistently said we will not allow the death penalty. We will not allow execution of individuals under capital punishment in this country. That is already an expression of the supreme will of the people of Zambia and all the New Dawn Government is doing is saying, instead of having a de facto abolitionist state, it is time we put skin in the game. It is time we changed the law to show that we mean what we say as a people of Zambia after twenty-five years of not executing anyone. That is the will of the people of Zambia speaking.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, President Hakainde Hichilema represents the people of Zambia and has spoken on their behalf in saying that we must abolish the death penalty, de jure and not just de facto. We must begin to put an end to these matters, if we are serious about them, and not simply say I can sign when I deem it fit to do so or not. We all know the implications of Article 97 of the Constitution but that means we are leaving a serious issue like the life of another individual to the whims and caprices of the person holding the Office of President or, indeed, those who advise on whether or not the prerogative of mercy should be applied.

Madam Speaker, we are removing subjectivity and saying each and every Zambian who finds themselves in that situation must be protected by the law.

Madam Speaker, to suggest that because Part III of the Constitution, in particular, Article 12, provides a ceiling that we cannot change the floor is to take a view that is narrow because the only way that one can implement the provisions of the Constitution, which protects the right to life, is to remove the power given in the Constitution and subsidiary laws for a Court to pronounce a Death Penalty. It follows, as a matter of logic, that when the death penalty is removed from the statute book, then it means that the provision in the Constitution which says that the right to life can be detracted on the basis of subsidiary law, seizes to have effect.

So, Madam Speaker, talking about amending the Constitution …

Mr Kalobo: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Mr Haimbe: …as the only means to achieving the same ends, is, ...

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Minister!

Sorry to disturb you.

Hon. Member for Wusakile, you were given an opportunity to debate. So, please, let us listen, so that we hear both sides of the story.

Mr Kalobo interjected.

Madam Speaker: You were given an opportunity to debate. Do not –


Madam Speaker: May the hon. Minister continue.

Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, I was saying that by taking away that power, we are giving effect to the true intention of Part XII of the Constitution, which is to protect the right to life. It is very straightforward and simply logical. The people of Zambia have participated in that process through their representatives, as earlier demonstrated and even as your Committee deliberated.We all know the processes that are followed when a Bill is before the Floor of this House, and public participation is one of them. So, it is not correct, with due respect, for anyone to suggest that the people of Zambia have not spoken on this issue.

Madam Speaker, it was suggested that, perhaps, the removal of the death penalty is intended to not take care of the interests of the victims. Nothing could be further from the truth. Victims are always as important as the perpetrators when it comes to the right to life and to closure.

Indeed, the hon. Member for Kanchibiya raised an important point that we need to put in place mechanisms to allow for closure for those that have been victims or whose relatives have been victims of capital offences. We never take away from them. They are as important as, or even more important than, the perpetrator. However, the plight of the victim cannot be a justification for taking away the life of the perpetrator.

There are means and ways, and this Government is looking effectively at bringing in those means and ways once it implements this provision, including more effective policing by law enforcement agencies as a means of preventing or, at least, curtailing some of these offences from occurring and putting in place institutions that will help manage the process of closure from end to end. Indeed, there are many mechanisms that can be put in place to take care of the interests of the victims. We are not saying that we condone the offence. We are simply saying that a life for a life is a principle that does not respect the human rights that we all promised, as a people of Zambia, through our Constitution, to protect.

Madam Speaker, on the defamation of the President, contrary to the assertion that there is a piecemeal amendment that is being put in place, the entire provision under the Penal Code is being repealed. It will cease to exist. So, the hon. Member can take comfort in that fact. However, the point to take away, of critical importance, is that with the freedoms that we are guaranteeing as the New Dawn Government, by the removal of some of these provisions, come responsibility. It is the responsibility of all of us in this House, including my colleagues on the left, to now begin to understand that those freedoms must be protected by each and every one of us. We must take responsibility and stop the scourge of politics of insults. Unnecessary insults. Yes, his Excellency has demonstrated that he has a thick skin. The very first in a line of Presidents to be brave enough to say I will remove this 1930s –

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Hon PF Members: Question!

Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Nobody else has done it. It is a fact whether you question or not. The only one that has been brave enough to say I will put it in black letter law that I will not allow this instrument called the defamation of the President to be used as a weapon, the way it was in the past. That, Madam Speaker, is commendable. It is for every right-minded Zambian to say we are moving forward as a people with progressive provisions that are aimed at protecting our fundamental rights and freedoms, the right to life and the freedom of expression.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Chitotela: On a point of order,Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Chitotela (Pambashe): Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order pursuant to Standing Order 65 which demands that the information that we give to this House and to the people of Zambia must be factual. Therefore, is the hon. Minister, in his debate to wind up on a matter of life, in order to mislead the people of Zambia that we, here, elected as their representatives, have the power to tamper with what is enshrined in Part III of the Zambian Constitution, which requires a referendum?

I seek your serious guidance.

Madam Speaker: Hon Member for Pambashe, that was your augment against the second reading of the Bill. You are still bringing it now as a point of order. That goes to a legal argument. What you are presenting is a legal argument. You have presented your side and the hon. Minister has rebutted. It is up to hon. Members to decide. So, the hon. Minister is in order. That is his interpretation. He is the one with the mandate to bring the Bill before this House. Whether hon. Members agree or not is a choice that they make themselves.

Question put and agreedto and Bill read a second time.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Friday, 9thDecember, 2023


Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to make a few remarks on the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill No. 25 of 2022.

Madam Speaker, the current Penal Code, Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia has, among others, archaic provisions that are reflective of a colonial legacy and do not conform to the advancements in society and international law and best practice.

Madam Speaker, as already alluded to in the debate relating to the Criminal Procedure Code. A review of the Penal Code Act was prompted by an outcry from stakeholders. Accordingly, we have brought this Bill before the Floor of the House in order to address those concerns.

Madam Speaker, pending the holistic review of the Penal Code in its entirety, there is a need to urgently align legislation relating to the death penalty and defamation of the President to the internationally best practice.

Madam Speaker, it is on the premise of the foregoing and in order to actualise the pronouncements made by His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia that the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill No. 25 of 2022 is before this House for consideration.

The object of the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, No. 25 of 2022 is to promote the right to life and the freedom of expression, as enshrined in the Constitution, and to ensure that Zambia, as aforementioned, conforms to the internationally best practice.

Madam Speaker, it should be noted that the amendments of the Penal Code Act do not, in any way, contravene the provisions of the Constitution and, indeed, that the removal of the death penalty from the statute book will not, in any way, contravene the provisions of Article 12 of the constitution, aforementioned.

Madam Speaker, it should be noted that previous Republican Presidents have exercised a moratorium on the death penalty since 1997 in exercise of their powers under Article 97 of the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, this Bill is progressive and should be supported because the proposed amendment is intended to allay any inconsistencies in the law.

Madam Speaker, in view of the earlier debate, I urge hon. Members of this august House to whole heartedly support the proposed Bill to amend the Penal Code.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Miyutu (Kalabo Central): Madam Speaker, your Committee on Legal Affairs, Human Rights and Governance was tasked to scrutinise the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, 2022, referred to it by the House.

Madam Speaker, in carrying out this important task, your Committee anticipated that it would generate a lot of debate and controversy and was thus, deliberate in selecting stakeholders who represented a cross-section of society. In this regard, various stakeholders were drawn from Government and quasi-Government agencies, civil society organisations, their royal highnesses representing the House of Chiefs, church mother bodies, academia, criminal law experts and the media.

Madam Speaker, the proposed Bill seeks to amend the Penal Code Act, Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia so as to replace the penalty of death with life imprisonment and repeal the offence of defamation of the President.

Madam Speaker, from the outset, I wish to put on record that most stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and tendered in their submissions supported the Bill. Stakeholders noted that by seeking to remove the death penalty from the statute books, Zambia was indirectly aligning itself with the requirements of the second optional protocol to the international covenant on civil and political rights, which was aimed at abolishing the death penalty. In this regard, your Committee urges the Government to accede to the protocol.

Madam Speaker, some stakeholders argued that the proposed amendments to abolish the death penalty were inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution of Zambia which even if it guarantees the right to life, the right was not absolute as it could be taken away in execution of the sentence of a court in. Other stakeholders argued that the Penal Code Act has all along provided for the death penalty which requires a person to be hanged by the neck until pronounced dead.

Madam Speaker, it was clarified that a reading of Article 12(1) makes it clear that the death penalty can only apply if there is a law providing for it. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not contravene the Constitution because Article 12(1) is drafted in a manner that it allows for the death penalty, but does not make it mandatory to have it in the statute books.

Madam Speaker, your Committee is persuaded by the latter argument to the extent, however, that whenever the opportunity to amend the Bill of Rights presents itself in future, this particular article should be amended to completely abolish the death penalty so that there is no room for its reinstatement in future.

Madam Speaker, with regard to the repeal of Section 69 of the Penal Code, which seeks to remove the offence of defamation of the President from the Penal Code, some stakeholders noted that this offence is a creation of the colonial authorities, which was used to suppress dissenting voices to the political establishment. This law had been maintained post-independence and had continued to be used from time to time by successive governments to suppress opposition political opponents.

Madam Speaker, media stakeholders submitted that the offence of defamation of the President was not desirable in a democratic state as it watered down the freedom of expression and speech and was often used by the security wings to effect arbitrary arrests of journalists. Those who opposed to the removal of the defamation of the President were of the view that once removed, the Presidency would be exposed to hatred, ridicule and disrepute in view of the sometimes polarised political climate in Zambia. They further argued that the freedoms of expression and speech were not absolute as they would be taken away in the event that their use threatened public peace and security.

Madam Speaker, your Committee is cognisant of the fact that in 1991 when the country reverted to multi-party politics, it put itself on a path of democracy, which entails the promotion and protection of fundamental freedoms that are necessary in a democratic society of which the freedom of expression is number one. To this end, your Committee is in support of the proposed amendments, especially that there are other provisions within the penal laws of the country which can be invoked in case of unwarranted attacks on the Presidency.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker; I will be failing in my duty if I do not pay tribute to the stakeholders who tendered valuable information to your Committee during its meetings.I also thank you and the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support services rendered to your Committee throughout its deliberations.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: For the purpose of managing time, I will call upon two hon. Members from my left. Please, I am again appealing to you not to repeat your arguments. The Whip will let me know or advise the second hon. Member who will debate. For now, I call upon the hon. Member for Kawambwa who has not said anything.

Mr Chilangwa(Kawambwa):Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to add a voice to the arguments that were put forward by my colleagues earlier on, as what we are dealing with now is basically a continuation of what was already discussed.

Madam Speaker, in my hands, I am holding a copy of the Zambian Constitution and according to this Constitution, Part I reads as follows:


1.         (1) This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic ofZambia and any other written law, customary law and customarypractice that is inconsistent with its provisions is void to the extent of the inconsistency.

(2)        An act or omission that contravenes this Constitution is illegal.

(3)        This Constitution shall bind all persons in Zambia, State organs and State institutions.”

Madam Speaker, I end there.

Madam, the arguments put forward by Colleagues are very valid and we need to take them very seriously.You cannot start by dealing with subsidiary legislation before dealing with the main issue, whichis here, according to the Bill of Rights. What is the hurry about? What are we trying to cure, especially on the issue of the death penalty? Is it wanting to look good that we have now started doing the right things, after doing all sort of wrong doing things since August 12th? I do not think that is what we should be here for. I think we should be here to do the right things at the right time. If the Executive wants us to deal with issues in the Constitution, it cannot start from the back door. No, it not right. Let us deal with the issues as they come.

Madam, I take Hon. Kampyongo and Hon. Chitotela’s submissions as my own. For me, I am putting the icing onthe cake. We all stood here, in front of you, and swore to uphold the Constitutionof this land. We cannot start adulterating the Constitution through the back door. That will not be acceptable and it would not be right. It may sound nice and look very good that we are showing the people of Zambia that we are men and women of our words because what we said during campaigns is what we are now starting to implement. Lo and behold, because of the so many other things that have not been implemented that were said during campaigns, it would be wrong to proceed with amending the Penal Code in the manner that we want to. We should actually first look at the Constitution, do away with the Penal Code, but we must go back to Part III of the Penal Code.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, let me make it clear that we have no problem with the issue of the death penalty being abolished. However, what weare saying is that we must follow the right procedure.

Madam Speaker, your Committee said:

“By the Minister seeking to remove the death penalty from the statue books, Zambia was indirectly aligning itself with the requirement of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,aiming at the abolition of the death penalty.”

Madam Speaker, it is understood.We have been abstaining on voting on this matter simply because we have had the death penalty on our statues despite observing a moratorium.  That is why we have been abstaining.By amending this subsidiary legislation, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation will not go to the United Nations (UN) and vote for abolishing the death sentence for as long as it remains in Part III. That is what hon. Chilangwa was lamenting. What are we trying to cure? We all understand that, yes, the death penalty still stands and sentences continue to be passed, but we have not had executions since 2007, and the facilities to keep inmates have been expanded until we do the right thing. That is why, by its own admission, through the Chairperson, your Committee said:

“Whenever the opportunity to amend the Bill of Rights presents itself in future, this particular Article should be amended to completely abolish the death penaltyso that there is no room for its reinstatement in future.”

Madam Speaker, what are trying to achieve by dealing the subsidiary legislation?

Ms Mulenga: Nothing.

Mr Kampyongo: Because here, your Committee is saying that even if we do this, we are not abolishing the death penalty. It still remains under Part III of the Constitution. So, what are we rushing for?  If it has to be aligned with thesaid protocol, I said, the hon. Minister will not go to the UN and vote with those that have abolished the death penalty because it still stands under Part III of the Constitution. So, what justification is going to be used? So, all I am saying is that let us give the people of Zambia the opportunity your Committee is taking about. Your Committee is talking about the referendum. It is the only available opportunity to deal with Part III of the Constitution.

Madam, we agree with the hon. Minister that we desire to have this off our statues. That is without a question. I am very happy, as former hon. Minister of Home Affairs, to never have conveyed any death warrant papers for any convict because we understand the rights of our citizens. The reason we kept it that way, was to wait for an opportunity, which your Committee is pointing to. We cannot deal with part III of the Constitution here. That is why it has remained like that. If there were any other option as the hon. Minister seems to be suggesting, Part III would have been dealt with. These consequential amendments would not have even arisen, but because we missed that opportunity, the responsibility the hon. Minister has in advising the President correctly is to find another opportunity where we can go and explain to the people of Zambia to make a decision on the Bill of rights. What is it that you want?

Hon. Government Member: Are you a lawyer?

Ms Mulenga:Atiare you a lawyer?

Mr Kampyongo: That is being people’s representatives. So, we are not going to do piecemeal amendments, which your Committee has confirmed.

Madam Speaker, with regard to the defamation of the President, I think my Colleagues have adequately debated it. What is important is just to strike a balance. How do we preserve the office and allow people to critics the office objectively because that is a public officewhich must be scrutinised by citizens.The authority that is deposited in that office comes from the people of Zambia. They decide who goes to occupy it. They decide on how they should keep a check on what a particular individual they have put in the presidency is doing. That comes with responsibility. I do not think combining the two in this manner was a fair decision. The hon. Minister of Justice should have distinguished the two because the other is a very critical one. 

Madam, we have tried it before. Let me put it on record that under our administration, we had people who were sentenced to death but are now free and living in society. We have learnt many of things from the reaction of the public, which the hon. Minister must reflect on before talking this route. That is why it is very cardinal to allow the people of Zambia to voice out their opinions. This should not be left to the few of us in here. Those of us who had an opportunity to go around the country when people were making their views on these matters still appreciate people’s emotions on the death penalty. Yes, it is not desirable. That is why I am said, I left that ministry without having made any conveyance because that is one of the heaviest responsibilities one would have to undertake. So, it is not only just the presidency. The President is just a person to make a final decision. If it was just straightforward, judges would pass judgement andexecutions would be carried out, but because it is key, that is not the case. So, the President is chosen by the people and that is why those who designed it and put a caveat on how Part III of the Constitution should be treated, made it very clear and mandatory, that to deal with Part III, we must go back to the people, and that is what we are advising the hon. Minister. We are not just refusing that we do not want the Government to abolish this. We are saying, let us follow the right procedure. If we deal with the Constitution, all this will just fall in place.


I thank you, Madam.

Mr B Mpundu (Nkana): Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity. Let me add my voice to the debate on these two issues that have been proposed for amendment, namely the death penalty as well as the defamation of the President.

Madam Speaker, I want to start by stating that unfortunately, the justice system in our country has changed or evolved. Previously, or the idea was that any one person accused of having committed a crime was supposed to be held innocent until proven guilty. However, the system has now changed to a position where anyone who is accused to have committed a crime is right away pronounced to be a criminal.

Madam Speaker, you may be aware that there are people who have languished in prison for years,particularly, those charged with murder or suspected to have committed murder. The non-bail-ability of such cases are extremely unfair because there are certain people who have been victims of circumstances who have beenheld in prison for many years because of the justice system.

Madam Speaker, that is why, because of these things, I am prompted to add my voice to the effect thatZambia is said to be Christian Nation, and so, if we are a Christian people or if we are Christians, the Bible clearly tells us that no one has the right to take away the life of any other person. Therefore, why should it be on our hands to be able take away the life of another?

Madam Speaker, however, you are aware and the hon. Members in here have heard of cases where people have been convicted wrongfully and have spent years in prison for wrongful imprisonment. Now, what chance does anyone have? I was watching a movie where a man spent thirty-seven years in prison in the United States of America having been convicted of having committed a murder, which he did not commit. He spent thirty-seven years in prison. Until after appeals and appeals, it was found that he was wrongfully imprisoned. Now, you can imagine pronouncing that person or subjecting him to a death penalty. What chance does he have to prove his innocence?

Madam Speaker, it is therefore, evident or clear that we need to give chance to people to prove their innocence. This is because there are different circumstances that have made people end up behind bars. Moreover, the prison system now has evolved and become a correctional system where we give chance to people who may have committed crimes to reform and become normal members of our communities. So, we do not have the power to take away the life of an individual. That is why I am very reluctant even though this is double edged sword. This is because again, if you make it very open that anyone who commits murder should not be hanged or otherwise, it will be free for all. However, I want to appeal to the conscience of the hon. Members of Parliament here and state that we do not have the power to take away the life of individual. Only God has that ultimate power. So, for me, I would tilt towards supporting that we remove the death penalty because we do not have that power to take away the life of an individual.

Madam Speaker, as regards the defamation of the President, the President is just a human being whom we have given so much power to enjoy. The President must not be immune to criticism. A President must not be immune to ridicule. Therefore, this law on the defamation of the President is archaic. It was coined to make the President the alfa and omega. I think in today’s times, we do not need t a President who cannot be ridiculed and criticised even though that too, is a double-edged sword, because a President needs to be respected. However, there are sufficient laws that provide for dealing with matters such as a person who insults the President. There is a law which deals with insults. If somebody insults the President, there is a law that provides how to deal with that individual. However, to make it just plan that anyone who goes against the views of the President or criticises the President must be punished as the case is now, is not correct.

Madam Speaker, we must also deal with the issue of the enforcement of these laws that we enact. Sometimes, certain laws have looked so bad in the eyes of the general public because of how we enforce them. An example is what is happening now. This particular law on the defamation of the President looks very bad because of the manner our colleagues, the law enforcers, are enforcing this particular law. So, for any law that we enact in here, it is also important that we go beyond its face and look at how particular laws are being enforced.

Madam Speaker, the issue of the Public Order Act, as an example, has been very contentious for years. Not because it is completely a bad law, but because of how selective and biased the enforcement of this law is. Therefore, it is important that the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security and the hon. Minister of Justice ensures that they continue to work towards helping our colleagues, the law enforces to censure them or to help them understand that when they are given that power or the authority to administer or to manage these laws that we enact in here, they must act reasonably and normal.

Madam Speaker, I just wanted to be on record and say we do not have the power to take people’s lives. So, it is only important that we agree that anyone who commits grave offences like murder, should be kept in prison for life. Why do we want to take away their life? We are not God. Certainly, a President is just a human being. In fact, criticism builds people. We should allow a President to be criticised. It builds somebody, it builds the President. The problem is that we want to worship Presidents. They are being destroyed in the name of being worshiped. We must subject them to criticism. We must subject them ridicule. After all, there are sufficient laws that provide for both. I just wanted to be on record.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, without belabouring the point or, indeed, being repetitive, I would like to begin by thanking the chairperson of the Committee on Legal Affairs, Human Rights and Governance as represented by the hon. vice-chairperson, for supporting the proposed amendment.

Madam Speaker, I note, in particular, a very cardinal point made by your Committee through the report by the vice-chairperson, the interest that was taken by your Committee in selecting stakeholders, to quote the hon. chairperson:

“selecting stakeholders who represented a cross section of society”.

Madam Speaker, this must allay any fears that the people of Zambia were not involved in the process of arriving at the determination made by your Committee, including the fact that there where experts who were included.

For emphasis, Madam Speaker, those that were consulted included legal experts; the Government; the civil society; quasi-Government organisations; our chiefs, their royal highnesses who, at another revel, represent the people of Zambia; the media; and church mother bodies, which equally represent the people. Therefore, I reiterate that any argument that suggests that the work done by your Committee was, in any way, lacklustre does not seem to speak to the hard work that has been done. It is well done to the Committee. Its work is commendable.

Madam Speaker, may I also thank those who have debated this proposed amendment; the hon. Member for Kawambwa, the hon. Member for Shiwang’andu and the hon. Member for Nkana, for their valid contributions. I would like to take the opportunity to clarify, for the sake of the people of Zambia who are watching our deliberations today, that in this House, we are duty bound to make our submissions, arguments and debates on the basis of consistency and, indeed, to ensure that we do not mislead the people of Zambia.

Madam Speaker, it was suggested that the proposed amendment is, in some way, inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia.

Madam Speaker, to put it in layman’s terms, if I may use that expression, the Constitution of Zambia, in respect of the death penalty, under Article 12, does not say go out and kill people, no. The Constitution provides for the protection of the right to life. It says do not kill anybody unless there is a sentence of death pronounced by a court of law. So, a law that says we are removing the death sentence so that a court of law cannot pronounce it can in no way and by any stretch of imagination be said to be inconsistent with the Constitution because the Constitution says thou shout not kill rather than go and kill.

So, I hope this helps the people of Zambia who are watching us to understand that it is a misconception to suggest that the proposed amendment is, in any way, in contravention of or inconsistent with the Constitution.

Now, Madam Speaker, talking about the consistency argument, perhaps, we can underscore the point a little better through an example. I have selected Article 20 of the Constitution; protection of the freedom of expression and Article 21, which relates to the protection of the freedom of assembly and association. In a nutshell, these provide, in respect of the freedom of expression, that one will be free to enjoy one’s freedoms except where there is a law that provides a restriction.

What we are doing, in respect of the defamation of the President, is to remove that provision which can derogate from Article 20, which gives the freedom of expression. So, why are we not saying that we are being inconsistent and piece meal when we amend or propose to amend the defamation of the President provision? It is exactly the same thing we say in law, ‘On all fours’. So, if we can do it with the provision on the defamation of the President to protect and enhance the right to the freedom of expression, what makes the removal of the death penalty different?

We must be consistent in our debates and tell the people the truth. So, if it is good to remove the provision on the defamation of the President and enhance the freedom of expression, it must be good also for Article 12, relating to the death penalty. It is logic.

Madam Speaker, we can take the argument further. Article 21 guarantees the freedom of assembly and association. We have argued on the Floor of this House and in the public domain about the Public Order Act. We are all agreed that it needs amendment in order to enhance the freedom of expression. Nobody on the left or, indeed, on the right has ever said that that should not be done, again, consistency by saying we amend the Public Order Act. Indeed, in the Christine Mulundika case, the court pronounced itself and said you can enhance that right by removing that provision of the law. What makes it different to do the same voluntarily in relation to the death penalty? Nothing. All these provisions of the statute law, once repealed or replaced, effectively enhance the constitutional provision. That is what we are about today, nothing more and nothing less. There is no piece meal work here. It is about an effective means of achieving the required ends. I believe that has been made absolutely clear.

Madam Speaker, indeed, we are duty bound, as I mentioned earlier, to ensure that we do not contradict ourselves as I have demonstrated by taking the step of amending the provisions of the Penal Code under consideration now. We will be consistent in what we have done over and over again in relation to the protection of fundamental rights when it comes to the statute law.

Madam Speaker, I also take the opportunity to agree with the hon. Member for Nkana in entirety. In his debate, he brought out very pertinent issues that are crosscutting. I make special acknowledgement of that debate. I thank the hon. Member.

With those few words, Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Thank you.Before we proceed, hon. Member for Shiwang’andu, you have indicated to raise a point of order. It will be unprocedural to call upon you.

Can we make progress.

Question put and agreedto and the Bill read a second time.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Friday, 9th December, 2022.


The Minister of Science and Technology (Mr Mutati) on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane)): Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Pension Scheme Regulation Act so as to provide for the approval of pension scheme rules by the Pensions and Insurance Authority.

Madam Speaker, I beg to move.

Mr Mutale (Chitambo): Madam Speaker, your Committee on Delegated Legislation was tasked to scrutinise the Pension Scheme Regulation (Amendment) Bill, No. 30 of 2022 referred to it by the House on Friday, 18th November, 2022.

Madam Speaker, the Bill seeks to amend the Pensions Scheme Regulation Act, Cap. 255 of the Laws of Zambia so as to provide for the approval of pension scheme rules by the Pensions and Insurance Authority. Further, this Bill also intends to aid the streamlining of private pension schemes supervision and regulation.

Madam Speaker, in scrutinising the Bill, your Committee interacted with various stakeholders. From the outset, I wish to put on record that the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and tendered in their submissions supported the Bill.

Madam Speaker, I also wish to take this opportunity to inform the House that your Committee also fully supports this Bill. concerns raised by stakeholders as well as your Committee.

Madam Speaker, under Clause 2(d), stakeholders were of the view that the Bill must expressly state the retirement age at which an employee can access his/her pension benefits as fifty-five years for early retirement, sixty years for normal retirement and sixty-five years for late retirement.

Further, Madam Speaker, stakeholders noted that Clause 2(e) provided that the rules of a pension schememust state that pension benefits will be paid at early retirement as a consequence of a medical discharge of an employee or normal retirement. Notably, the Bill has excluded the payment of pension benefits on late retirement. This means that an employer will be obliged to ensure that pension benefits are paid only to employees who opt for late retirement when they attain the age of normal retirement. In that regard, the wording in Clause 2(e) suggests that an employee cannot claim his/her pension benefit from a pension scheme at late retirement.

Madam Speaker, since the Bill would allow employees to work until they attain the age of sixty- five, they should also be allowed to claim their pension benefit at late retirement and not at normal retirement only.

Madam Speaker, your Committee recommends that the amendment in Clause 2(e) regarding early retirement due to an infirmity of body or mind should be in line with the treatment of medical discharge benefits under Section 38(6) of the Employment Code Act No. 3 of 2019, where such benefits are calculated without regard to the age of the employee.

Madam Speaker, under Clause 2(g), your Committee notes that the provision on the commutation of a pension payment is at retirement. The Bill does not stipulate that this payment is at retirement and as a result, some stakeholders assumed that the commutation can be done at a time while one is still in employment. This implies that once enacted, it could be subject to misinterpretation.

Madam Speaker, I am confident that hon. Members have read your Committee’s report and, therefore, permit me to conclude by paying tribute to the stakeholders who tendered valuable information to yourCommittee during its meetings. Finally, I thank you and the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support and services rendered to yourCommittee throughout its deliberations.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutati: Madam Speaker, I thank your Committee for supporting the Bill.

Madam Speaker, I also wish to take note of the observations made by your Committee aswell as the points that the Chairperson raised.

Madam Speaker, let me indicate that the proposed amendments are, indeed, to enhance regulation of private occupation pension schemes with the objective of improving pension scheme membership protection.

Madam Speaker, let me indicate that your Committee raised an issue that the wording under Clause 2(e), on when one should qualify for early retirement was only referring to a situation where someone retires due to infirmity of body and mind.

Madam Speaker, I wish to indicate that we have since submitted an amendment to Clause 2 (e) to clarify that the payment of the pension on retirement of an employee may be made:

  1. on or after attaining normal retirement age;
  2. on attaining early retirement age, or
  3. due to an infirmity of mind or body.

Madam Speaker, your Committee also recommends that the retirement due to an infirmity of body or mind should be in line with how medical discharge benefits are administered under the Employment Code Act.

Madam Speaker, I wish to agree to the recommendation of your Committee to the extent that the pension benefits issued on the basis of an infirmity of body or mind will not be tied to the age of the beneficiary and the proposed amendment addresses your Committee’s concern.

Madam Speaker, your Committee also raised a concern that the Act does not provide for payment of a pension at late retirement age of sixty-five. I wish to indicate that the Act actually provides that the payment of a pension can be made on or after attaining normal retirement.

Madam Speaker, your Committee also raised a concern that we should emphasise on the commutation on terminal benefits in the Bill. I wish to submit that Section 10 (2) when read in its entirety addresses the concerns of your Committee, as it requires all conditions to be made including the attainment of retirement age before a pension becomes payable in accordance with what is payable under Paragraph 10 (2) No. G.

Madam Speaker, I beg to move.

Question put andagreedto and the Bill read a second time.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Friday, 9thDecember, 2022


THE VALUE ADDED TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2022

Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.

THE PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX (Amendment) Bill, 2022

Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.


Clauses 1, 2 and 3 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Title agreed to.



[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

The following Bills were reported to the House as having passed through Committee without amendments:

The Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2022

The Property Transfer Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2022

The Mines and Minerals Development (Amendment) Bill, 2022 

Third Readings on Friday, 9thDecember, 2022.





Vote 80 –(Ministry of Education–K20,297,311,396).


2023 Budget Estimates and Policy Direction

The Minister of Education (Mr Syakalima): Mr Chairperson, when the House adjourned yesterday, I was about to outline the 2023 Estimates of Expenditure for my ministry. Let me now outline the 2023 Estimated Expenditure. The 2023 budgetary allocation to the Ministry of Education stands at K20,297,311,396 compared to K14,173,396,102 allocated in 2022.

Early Childhood Education

Mr Chairperson, in terms of Early Childhood Education (ECE) Programme, the programme allocation has increased from K102,615,365 in 2022 to K462,191,493 in 2023. This is attributed to the Government’s efforts to enhance early childhood education through the Zambia Enhancement of Early Learning (ZEEL) Project as well as the increase in personal emoluments due to ECE teacher recruitment.

Primary Education

Mr Chairperson, primary education being the largest sub-sector providing education for grades one to seven, the Primary Education Programme has been allocated K12,151,383,170 in 2023 compared to K7,961,447,684 in 2022. The increase is largely attributed to the newly recruited teachers.

Secondary Education

Madam Chairperson, the ministry has increased the allocation to the Secondary Education Programme from K3,959,641,117 in 2022 to K4,974,729,443 in 2023. This is largely attributed to the increased personal emoluments for the recruited teachers. In addition, K1,119,382,895 has also been allocated towards capital expenditure under the Secondary School Programme, largely for completion of construction of school infrastructure and rehabilitation of school-managed weekly boarding facilities. Out of this amount, the Zambia Education Enhancement Project (ZEEP) has been allocated K600 million to commence the construction of 120 secondary schools.

Secondary Education

MrChairperson, the ministry has increased the total allocation to the Secondary Education Programmefrom K3.96 billion in 2022 to K4.97 billion in 2023. This is largely attributed to the increased personal emoluments for the recruited teachers. In addition, K1.1 billion has been allocated towards capital expenditure under the secondary schools programme, largely for completion of construction of school infrastructure and rehabilitation of school-managed weekly boarding facilities. Out of this amount, the Zambia Education Enhancement Project (ZEEP) has been allocated K600 million to commence construction of 120 secondary schools.

Youth and Adult Literacy

MrChairperson, my ministry continues to place paramount importance on the quality of the youth and adult literacy programmes offered to learners. The programme has an allocation of K4.8 million in 2023 out of which K958,000 has been provided for personal emoluments and K3.9million for non- personal emoluments.

University Education

MrChairperson, as aGovernment which is concerned about the welfare of students and one that sees the need to increase access to tertiary education, my ministry has allocated K1.55 billion to the university education in 2023 as compared to K1.2 billion in 2022. The increase in allocation will facilitate there-introduction of meal allowances and increase in the number of student loan beneficiaries in 2023.

Sir, K930 million has been allocated to support student loans and scholarships of which K43.9 million has been allocated for tertiary scholarships for girls who were supported under the Keeping Girls in School (KGS) initiative at secondary school level.

Management and Support Services

Mr Chairperson, to ensure efficiency and effectiveness in service delivery at all levels, my ministry has allocated K1.2 billion to this programme.

Mr Chairperson, I want to conclude by stating that my ministry remains committed to the overall management and administration of early childhood, primary, secondary, university and teacher training, licensing and enforcement of standards and alternative modes of education provision.

Sir, I now call upon theHouse to support the budget estimates for Vote 80.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutelo (Mitete): Mr Chairperson, thank you so very much for according me this chance to debate Vote 80–Ministry of Education.

Mr Chairperson, to start with, I will continue stating facts as they are. I thank the hon. Minister and the New Dawn Administration for employing teachers. Thank you so very much. Now every school in all the constituencies has a teacher. However, some teachers who have been employed have been on the streets for a long time. Some have been on the streets for three years, five years, seven years...

Mr Munsanje: Even ten years!

Mr Mutelo: ...others for ten years.

Sir, when the hon. Minister mentions of efficiency, I should think the newly recruited teachers needed some refresher course. You take someone to college, but he or she goes on the street for ten years, and you employee him or her, thereafter.To some extent, certain things could have been lost. So, we should think in those lines.

Mr Chairperson, for Mitete and other rural constituencies like Kaputa, Sesheke…

Mr Kangombe: Shiwang’andu!

Mr Mutelo: …and Shiwang’andu, the Government should put a caveat on teachers because in the past, we saw many rural/urban transfers. The teachers will report for a month, and some would not even report. In the past, others used to go to report with a transfer letter in their hands. He/she would go and report, and say that I was posted to Mitete, but I am on transfer. Let us put a caveat on such tendencies. Otherwise, our rural communities will suffer.

Sir, what has come out again, is that a great number of those who have been employed, be it diploma or degree holders, do not want to teach Grade 1s or Grade 7s. They are saying they are secondary school degree holders. I think the Government should introduce and start offering (Doctor of Philosophy)PhDs programmes and degrees to those who specialise in teaching Grade 1s and early childhood.The Government must also look at what it gives them. Maybe, that could be the reason for their movements.

Mr Kangombe: Motivation!

Mr Mutelo:There must be something to motivate them.

Sir, if you lose the foundation, whatever you will be building on a poor foundation will be very weak. We will be destroying a nation.

Sir, I heard the hon. Ministertalk about standards.During our time, and the years of the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security, there used to be inspectors of schools, who would sit in a classroom to see a teacher teach. That is something that is now called standards.

Mr Chairperson, standards have fallen. If I heard the hon. Minister correctly, he said K2 billion has been allocated for standards. Let that money work in that area of standards. No wonder there aremanyPhDs. Sorry to mention,some have such degrees and diplomas because of the famous talk–leakage,where they just buy a paper. Those who have papers genuinely have no problems. Therefore, the Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA) must work and see which ones are fakes and the ones that are genuine. You may employ someone with good qualifications,which are fake.

Hon. Government Members: From Matero!

Mr Mutelo:Sir, I want to mention one thing. People say, we do not say thank you very much. Allow me to say thank you very much to the past regime for starting some boarding secondary schools,although it abandoned them. It is like giving birth to a child and then you abandon the child for three, four or five years. You would be removed from power. So, let us see to it that all the boarding secondary schools like Mitete Boarding Secondary School, which were abandoned, get finished.

Sir, the schoolfeeding programme must also be introduced in Mitete.

Mr Chairperson, finally, I saw the hon. Minister flagging off the distribution of desks. We are waiting for the same in Mitete.

Sir,the Washishicommunity is waiting for the hon. Minister to go there.

I thank you, Mr Chairperson.

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Business was suspended from 1640 hours until 1700 hours.




Mr E. Banda (Muchinga): Mr Chairperson, I thank you very much for giving the people of Muchinga an opportunity to add their voice on the debate on the budget for the Ministry of Education.

Mr Chairperson, allow me to thank the hon. Minister of Education and the New Dawn Government for employing teachers and making sure that our learners have proper and adequate education. Allow me, also, to thank the Government for implementing the Free Education Policy, which has been received well by the people in our constituencies. However, this will not go without some sentiments that I will bring to the attention of the hon. Minister for consideration as we move towards providing education to the people of Muchinga, and Zambia at large.

Mr Chairperson, we have seen a problem in this Ministry of Education. Promotions are not done according to the expectations of the people who work in that ministry, the teachers. We had a case in Serenje where people had been acting for many years as heads of department (HOD) and others as headmasters and deputy headmasters. However, when promotions came, the people who came to take over their positions came from other provinces. This left our people very frustrated. I think this has to be looked at because it demoralises our teachers.

Mr Chairperson, we also have an issue, and I know very well that the construction of some schools is directly under the Ministry of Education. There are schools in my constituency whose construction was started in 2008 by the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD)Government. However, from 2011, nothing has happened. Nevertheless, those schools where opened in 2018; Mailo, Kanona and Chibale secondary schools.

Mr Chairperson, in the case of MailoSecondary School, we do not even have proper sanitation, but pupils are learning. I have been to the Permanent Secretary’s (PS) office in the Ministry of Education and she has assured me that the contractor will be on site soon. Probably, that was somewhere in September, but to date, the contractor has not been on site, and this applies to the other schools.

Mr Chairperson, we believe that the New Dawn is not a Government of failures. It has already shown that things will happen as seen by what has been done within a year that it has been in the Government. This appeal comes because I believe that something is going to be done.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr E. Banda: Mr Chairperson, I am alive to the fact that these contractors where already paid, but have not come on site, meaning that the Government has made a commitment. So, please, it is just a matter of following them up so that they can come on the ground and complete these schools.

Mr Chairperson, as I come to this point, whatever little I had to contribute on the debate on the Vote that we are debating, I have come to the end. However, let me mention that the people of Muchinga really support this budget. They are asking for more money to be allocated to this ministry in 2024 so that we can have a lot of projects in our constituencies regarding the education sector.

I thank you,Mr Chairperson.

The Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member, for those who will be picked to debate, it is advisable that they do not exhaust their eight minutes so that others can have the chance to debate.

Mr Mabumba (Mwense): Mr Chairperson, I thank you for the opportunity.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mabumba: Before I proceed with my debate, I join other hon. Colleagues who have conveyed their heartfelt condolences to the Ngulube family. May the soul of the departed rest in peace.

Mr Chairperson, as we debate this important Vote, Vote 80 – Ministry of Education, we have to note that economic transformation all over the world is anchored on education, as is the case with the Asian Tiger countries. Many of those countries in Asia, at one time, went through economic turbulence. What did they do? They invested in their education. So, I am not saying that the hon. Minister of Education is the most important hon. Minister, but that he is holding a key ministry to the economic transformation of this country and all of us need to give him the support that he requires.

Mr Chairperson, in giving the hon. Minister the support, we are going to raise the following issues: The K20 billion that has been given is not enough, and I will explain why. When you look at that budget, 75 per cent of it is going to personal emoluments, which means that he is only going to remain with K5 billion. With the K5 billion, the hon. Minister has very important deliverables. He has issues to do with school infrastructure, quality of education, examinations and all sorts of issues. So, that money may not be enough, which leaves my focus on the debate on the four parameters of the education delivery system. These are public school infrastructure, education quality, education financing as well as education digitalisation.

Mr Chairperson, when you look at education financing all over the world, it has been agreed that 20 per cent of the total Budget would be, at the least, an acceptable level of education financing. However, like I said, the Ministry of Education has K20 billion, which is not sufficient. Therefore, I appeal to the hon. Minister to continue lobbing the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning that despite this money sounding to be a lot, it is not sufficient for him to deliver many things. This is why, when I come to education infrastructure. For example, I am aware that a number of people in here have made complaints.

Mr Chairperson, the Patriotic Front (PF) did its part, the rest has been left with the current Government. In 2011, we found only 645 secondary schools. If the hon. Minster checks the statistical bulletin now, he will see that at the time we left office, there where almost a thousand secondary schools.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mabumba: So, when you look at that, it was not a mean achievement; from 645 to over a thousand secondary schools in ten years when, in 2011, forty-five years after independence, we only had 645.

Mr Chairperson, you can see that we did our part. For the rest, it is for the hon. Minister to provide leadership. The leadership that we want the hon. Minister to provide is on the complaints that he has received from hon. Colleagues about the uncompleted secondary schools. Of the 115 secondary schools that were under construction, many were completed. Only about fifty were not completed. Therefore, over the K1.5 billion that the ministry has been given, the hon. Minister should provide leadership.

Mr Chairperson, I can see institutional memory and talent seated there, institutional talent (pointing at the technocrats). If the hon. Minister uses those people, they will help him deliver with the K1.5 billion for the over fifty secondary schools that have not been completed. On the Zone Improvement Plan Project, we moved away from the bigger secondary schools and when Hon. Musokotwane presented the Budget, he mentioned my name not in bad faith because we did not finish Libonda Secondary School. It is important that the hon. Minister provides leadership, like I have said, and ensures that the secondary schools are completed, and that is why we brought in the Zone Improvement Plan Project. The design for the Zone Improvement Plan Project was changed so that we can spend less money, and we delivered eighty-two secondary schools with the support of the World Bank.

Ms Mulenga: Quality!

Mr Mabumba: Mr Chairperson, what is it that I want to tell the hon. Minister? There has been misinformation that that project was designed around politics. No. The World Bank is still here in this country. The project was designed in areas where the World Bank had operational presence and that is why secondary schools were not constructed, through the Zone Improvement Plan Project, in some provinces like the Copperbelt. That is why additional financing of K600 million has been allocated to the ministry to ensure that it goes to the provinces which did not benefit from the earlier allocation.

Mr Chairperson, I want to focus on the quality of education. Despite the support that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning has given the hon. Minister, he cannot deliver quality education because it revolves on learning outcomes. We want children with numeracy literacy levels. When it comes to examinations, after the hon. Minister announces the results, we will have to look at how the children performed. The hon. Minister cannot deliver quality education when the institutional framework is not there. I am aware that the structure for the ministry has changed, but the hon. Minister needs to provide leadership. When the hon. Minister goes to London, he should go and meet the colleagues from Ofsted, the quality assurance agency in London, so that he can learn how we can improve the quality of our education system.

Ms Mulenga: Quality

Mr Mabumba: Mr Chairperson, when we used to have inspectors, we had quality education and standards, but these standards have fallen over time. It is, therefore, important that we have a quality assurance agency away from the ministry. The ministry does not need to spend any money because there is the Teaching Council of Zambia (TCZ). It can look at how it can transform the TCZ to become an umbrella body and the Permanent Secretary at the ministry, Mr Kamoko, whom I cannot see, comes from that institution. The TCZ can be transformed and made a quality assurance agency independent from the ministry, and it can advise the ministry independently on how it can reinforce standards in our education system. Therefore, if the hon. Minister combines the money the ministry has been given with the money that the TCZ collects from the teachers, the ministry will have resources to deliver quality education to the Zambian people.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear! Quality!

Mr Mabumba:Mr Chairperson, the hon. Minister is aware that an examination is part of the learning outcome. We provided leadership by stopping leakages, but we have heard that the leakages have started surfacing. I plead with the hon. Minister to provide leadership by making sure that examinations are printed in Zambia and that leakages are stopped, and we can do that. In terms of policy direction, we need to have an Electronic Examination (e-Examination) system. There is so much investment in optic fibre and communication towers, and we can transit to the e-Examination System because that is what will stop the examination leakages.

Mr Chairperson, let me wind up because I do not have enough time.

Mr Chairperson, public health systems were affected because of the Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, we need to look beyond a classroom. COVID-19 may have stopped, but we are not saying that pandemics have stopped. The hon. Minister may require to work with Hon. Mutati so that we invest in education digitalisation, and that will help the ministry to reduce its budget on curriculum development and materials. When you look at the budget that has been provided for the curriculum, it is very small. What can one do with K5.9 million? However, when the ministry invests in education digitalisation, this will lower the cost of text books and ensure that it provides e-examinations. Once it does that, I am sure we can then begin to talk about the quality of education in this country.

Mr Chairperson, I thank you, and I support the budget.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Tayengwa (Kabwata): Mr Chairperson, thank you for giving the good people of Kabwata an opportunity to contribute to the debate on this Vote.

I want to first start by quoting what Albert Einstein said about a worthless physician. A worthless physician is a person who could have created a problem and can never be part of the solution of that problem which he created. Mr Chairperson, I am sure you will be able to differentiate who a worthless physician is because some people may actually give points as if they can solve situations which they created, and we call such people worthless physicians.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Tayengwa: Mr Chairperson, I thank the New Dawn Government for employing almost 30,000 teachers and for also providing free education.

Mr Chairperson, I want to state that the free education that was introduced by the New Dawn Government requires that we transform it into quality education. With the monies that have been allocated to the Ministry of Education, I believe and trust that the hon. Minister is equal to the task, and the ministry will be able to translate the free education into quality education by providing the 120 schools that were mentioned in the policy statement and on the Floor of the House when the President opened Parliament.

Mr Chairperson, quality education centres on the things that affect the Ministry of Education.


The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Madam, you are not the only hon. Member in the House but you want to be the loudest.

Ms Mulenga: No, I was not even talking.

The Deputy Chairperson: When Mr Mabumba was on the Floor, the hon. Members on the right were quiet, but why are you trying to distract the –


The Deputy Chairperson: Okay.

Hon. Member, you can continue. We will ensure that whoever tries to distract the hon. Member talks from outside.

Mr Tayengwa: Mr Chairperson, I was saying that the quality of education is centred on the amount of money that has been allocated to the Ministry of Education, and I believe and trust that the hon. Minister is equal to the task in providing that.

Mr Chairperson, for the ministry to attain quality education, I feel there are certain things that the hon. Minister has to attend to. I believe that the hon. Minister knows that the combining of schools brought about a big problem in our education system. The hon. Minister should find time to look and study that issue, and come up with a way he can abolish that system because this has disturbed the foundation of our education system. You find that most classes for the Grade 1 pupils are taken up by the pupils in upper grades. So, I urge the Ministry of Education to consider abolishing the combined schools.


Mr Chairperson, I also want to say that the expansion of existing infrastructure is cardinal. There is a need for the Ministry of Education to expand existing infrastructure so that it can cater for more children. The introduction of free education has actually led to most children going to Government schools, and that is a plus for us, but there is a need for us as hon. Members of Parliament to utilise the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) so that we can expand the existing infrastructure.

Mr Chairperson, I also want to talk about the facilities in schools. There is a need to ensure that there are not only desks for the children but that the schools are well equipped with furniture for the teachers. There is no way a teacher can be motivated when he/she sits on a desk that looks like it came from a war zone. So, there is a need to look at that.

Mr Chairperson, the other issue I want to bring to the attention of the hon. Minister is that of reforming the loans and bursaries committee. I believe there is a need to add other institutions, universities or colleges so they too can be providing bursaries, so that more children can access bursaries.

Mr Chairperson, I know the monies are not necessarily equal to complete everything. However, I suggest that through the allocation, there is need to look at the issue of housing for teachers. You will discover that most of our teachers in many schools are not able to occupy institutional houses because most of them are occupied either by retired teachers or children whose parents were teachers. So, there is a need to come up with strict measures to see how best we can accommodate the serving teachers who are renting houses outside the school.

Mr Chairperson,let me also to talk about the issue of allocating more money into the planning and information system. When you look at our curriculum, it is good. However, there is need to introduce subjects like mental health. The reason I am insisting on mental health is becauseI have discovered that most of the cases that are being perpetrated by school going children are happening because they suffer from mental health problems. There is need for the Ministry of Education,through its research department,to consider coming up with subjects that deal with mental health so that our children can start learning about mental issues. The issue of mental problems is affecting almost everyone.

Mr Chairperson, before I resume my seat,let me state and emphasise that a worthless physician will never ever give you a solution to a problem that he created. They may sound good, but to be honest, they do not qualify to offer a solution because they had their chance.

Mr Chairperson, I thank you for this opportunity, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kasandwe (Bangweulu): Mr Chairperson, thank you very much for the opportunity given to the people of Bangwulu to make some comments on the budget for the Ministry of Education.

Mr Chairperson, the issue of employing teachers should be put in context. It should be put in a historical perspective so that we understand where we are coming from, other than simply shouting 30,000 teachers. If we do not debate this matter, in its context, those who will be debating will be using a butterfly context. Why do I say so? When the Patriotic Front (PF) took over in 2011, in the 2012 Budget, there was an allocation to employ 5000 teachers. On the market that year, there were only 2000 teachers available. So when the PF employed 2000 –

Ms Mulenga: Quality.

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Mr Kasandwe: Mr Chairperson, maybe to help the noise makers, today, I am using certified data from Parliament, which I will lay it on the table. There was a plan to employ 5000 teachers but there were only 2000 on the market. By 2013, there was no single teacher on the market to be employed.

Hon. Government Member: Question!

Ms Mulenga: He will lay it on the Table.

Mr Kasandwe: Mr Chairperson, moving from there, the PF Government went out of its way to engage the private sector so that we could see the number of trained teachers increase. That is why we now have seven public universitiesfrom two. We now have more than sixty universities in the public sector because of the engagement bythe PF and realising that by that time, there was no single teacher who was not employed. When you read the Educational Statistical Bulletin of 2011, you will learn that there were 77,000 teachers. By the time we were leaving Government there were 118,000 teachers. Meaning that in the ten years of the PF, there were 41,000 teachers employed, compared to the teachers we found in –


Mr Kasandwe:Muleimikainshitangabalepangaichongobalya

Mr Chairperson, from 1964 to 2011, when we took over Government, there were only 77,000 teachers. Statistically, from 1964 to 2011, to compare the ten years of PF, PF did extremely well. I thought of putting that into context. So, starting from 2013 to 2017, we saw the private sector engaging in training teachers. That is why saw colleges in the back yards. So, by that very fact, the sector was opened up in such a manner that wenow began to see an increase in the number of teachers being trained in the country.

Mr Chairperson, I will now move to university loans. We need to put things in context. In 2004, the Ministry of Education decided to migrate from a bursary scheme to a loan scheme starting with the University of Zambia (UNZA) and the Copperbelt University (CBU).As we begun to navigate, we realised that since the number of people who graduated at grade seven was increasing and the bursary committee could not absorb every student that applied for bursary,the PF, in its wisdom tried to compare the value addition between increasing the number of students and maintaining the meal allowance. It brings me to the reason the meal allowance was set aside. When the meal allowance was set aside in the 2020/2021 academic year, the hon. Minister is already aware that when that was done, there were 19,631 students who were on the loan. The money that should have gone to meal allowances went to more than 19,000 students to access tertiary education.


Mr Chairperson, I thought of putting into context the reason we had to put the meal allowance aside. We also expanded the loan scheme. For the first time in the country, the loan scheme was extended to KapasaMakasa University with 477 new students, Mukuba University with 331 new students, Mulungushi University with 1363 students, and Chalimbana University with 520 students. So, it was a deliberate policy to increase the number of young people accessing tertiary education. We wanted to strike a balance and see which way will add more value. So, for PF, the removal of meal allowance was deliberate.

Mr Chairperson, today, let me talk to the students in the five new public universities that could have not accessed the higher tertiary education if the meal allowance was maintained. In fact, it was just a deliberate move to ensure that we increase the number of students.

Mr Chairperson, I know that people have spoken a lot about the 30,000 teachers. You are aware that some of the teachers who have been deployed have not been put on the payroll. So, as the hon. Minister comes to respond, I, on behalf of the people of Bangweulu, want him to inform the House when he will put them on the payroll. He is already aware that for four months, they have not been put on the payroll.

Mr Chairperson, another issue I want to talk about is still in relation to the 30,000 teachers. Why did we see the number of vacancies? The reason is that between 2011 and 2020, 54,000 teachers left the ministry due to various reasons. That is why there were vacancies that the New Dawn was trying to fill.

Mr Chairperson, I am assuming that the reason some teachers are not on the payroll is because there are no Payroll Management and Establishment Control (PMEC) vacancies. There are new PMEC vacancies that have been created. If the fact is the opposite, the hon. Minister will give us facts.

Madam Speaker, what the Government did on the employment of the 30,000 teachers was to fill vacancies. So, now, I am appealing to the hon. Minister to create vacancies for the seventeen teachers in Bangweulu Constituency, Samfya District who are not on the payroll, so that they may start getting their salaries. They have gone for four months without any salary.

Sir, I thought I should put this matter to rest and put the debate in its historic perspective.

I thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Hon. PF Members: Quality!

Mr Kamboni (Kalomo Central): Mr Chairperson, may I begin by first thanking the hon. Minister of Education for allocating some teachers to Kalomo and for giving us other educational materials. We are also requesting for one school from the 120 schools that the World Bank gave.

Mr Chairperson, education is not something that should be taken lightly. Any country that invests in education benefits a lot. All the problems that we have, of unemployment, poverty and failure to understand climate change, can be solved by education. Some countries have no natural resources as we do. Singapore is one of them. However, through education, they moved from being a third world country to a developed nation. The internet that we use is all because of education. All the things that we have are because of education. This why, any Government that puts resources in education deserves a pat on the back. So, increasing the budget from K14 billion to K20 billion is a welcome move and for that, I thank the New Dawn Government.

Mr Chairperson, we are looking at money issues. I will begin with the Examinations Council of Zambia (ECZ). From the start, during the Patriotic Front (PF) Government, the ECZ was receiving very little money by design, but at least now, it is getting K22 million for Grade 12 examinations. However, Grade 7 and Grade 9 examinations still fend for themselves. I am humbly asking if that could also be considered because we are looking at money issues.

Sir, now I come to the education system. The curriculum is what education is all about. Education in Africa has not produced what we need. The colonial masters designed it and somehow, we have continued along that way. It was designed to only keep us reading and be end-users of what our friends create. We are producing learners who are looking for employment. We need to reform the education system. Why can we not create learners or graduates whowould look for people to employ? We can change the curriculum. We must reform the education system so that the people we produce start to look for people to employ, and we will solve the employment problem. However, we now have all the graduates moving with files, looking for employment. Who is going to employee the other? You cannot spend seventeen years in school, yet you still look for employment.

Sir, when our grandfathers taught you how to fish, you fishing with them and within three years,you were able to marry. You could fish and earn a living, but the ones we are producing now are all looming the streets. They do not know what to do because the curriculum has become irrelevant. We had changed the curriculum–by the way, the hon. Minister knows. This now is the eighth year. We are supposed to analyse the current curriculum. When I looked at the curriculum, I saw that it was a copy and paste document and that nothing had changed. Allthey did was to merge geography and history. The content was the same and then they called it social studies,but claimed to have changed the curriculum. They also hurriedly wrotetextbooks with the same stuff.

Mr Chairperson, I think we now have a very well-educated hon. Minister and a Government that has the political will. So, we need to start the reforms to come up with a curriculum that will make sense. There is no way I can be driving my child to school to learn nothing. After he completes his university studies, he still lives with me. He cannot do anything and he is looking for somebody to employ him as an office orderly or as a taxi driver. We do not need thatkind of education. We need to change the conversation on education. We need to sit down and plan.Whether it takes us fifteen years or more, we needto come up with a curriculum that can change the livesof our children and which will make education meaningful. We cannot have people go to school and all they learn is to operate computers, and they think that is education, so that when others manufacture things, we know how to use themand they make money from us. We wantto be the ones startingup new things.

Mr Chairperson, let me comment on science. Science in this country is almost dead. In the past years of the PF rule, there were only two doctors involved in real science at the National Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research(NISIR)along Airport Road. The two scientists were also involved in administrative work. When we took a trip to Kitwe to look at the Sondashi Formula 2000 (SF2000),the same doctor who received us in Lusaka, also received us in Kitwe, in Mwinilunga and at the Scientific Research in Chilanga. We need to gather a number of scientists because we can make money through science. We need to start projects that can last fifteen years. We need to start discovering somethings and find solutions to the problems that we have. For instance, we have climate change to deal with. We need to change our ways of farming. So, we need scientists to come up and teach adaptive methods of farmingthat can survive under climate change to the people in the villages. Otherwise, as it is now, the environment is movingfar well ahead of us.

Sir, we do not deserve poverty in a country with so many natural resources. What we are lacking is the correct curriculum. Why and for what should my child, Memory, learn and memorisethe birth and death of Shaka? It is irreverent even to even ask me to memorise my phone number. I can get data onmy phone, everything is there, and I can back up my data. So, the education system has to change.

Mr Chairperson, even the methods of teaching being employed are no longer relevant. Our instructionalmethods have remained outdated. We need to change them. Why should I learn and after I do so, I forget? We do know that when you tell me, I forget. When you teach me, I remember, but when you involve me, I understand. So, the instructional methods we use need to change.We need outcome-based education, which will improve and allow many of us to work together.

Sir, our education system does not also include attitude. You find that somebody gets a distinction fromthe University of Zambia (UNZA) orany university, but when it comes to work, he/sheis sluggish because he thinks he is everything. Let us work!He cannot cope up, but someone who got a pass at the university is a better worker. Why? Becausethe education system has overlooked the aspect of attitude. Somebody can be a slow learner, but just having the attitude of willing to do things must also be recognised. So, we need to look at the instructionalmethods and change them so that the curriculum can solve our current problems. Yes, we have desks and other things, but above all, we need to change the curriculum so that it can adapt to the current situation. My education must help me to live in my country comfortably using the resources and the surroundings we have.

Mr Chairperson, with these few words, I urge the hon. Minister to continue doing a good job. May the Lord bless him.

Mr Chairperson, I thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

We have to make progress. I have been availed two lists, one from the right and another from the left, but not everyone can speak. We do not have much time at our disposal. So, Mr Sampa will be the last speaker, and the hon. Minister will respond. I know everyone wants to speak, but we have to make progress.  We still have more Votes to deal with.

Mr Sampa (Matero) Mr Chairperson, today, I will go straight to the point.There are no greetings from the Paramount Chief.

Sir, I thank the hon. Minister of Education, Mr Douglas Syakalima. I followed his statement, but I just want to highlight a few issues. I will be very brief, in the interest of time.

Mr Chairperson, on free education, my hon. Colleague brought in the issue of the CoronavirusDisease 2019 (COVID-19), which is another thing. Free education in our schools, in our constituencies countrywide, has brought many pupils into our classrooms and most of them are sitting on the floor. Therefore, all the intentions, just with that aspect,are defeated. Firstly, the ratio of teachers to pupils –

Mr Muchima interjected.

Mr Sampa: Obviously, Hon. Muchima, this debate is addressed to the hon. Minister of Education.

The ratio of pupils to a teacher is obviously distanced now. The quality of education, with that, obviously comes down. However, I want to zero-in on the issue of desks.

Mr Chairperson, I looked through this budget and there is no line highlighting how much money the ministry intends to put up for desks in 2023. Hon. Muchima is screaming ‘Constituency Development Fund (CDF)’. Does a constituency office have a workshop to make desks?


Mr Sampa: Mr Chairperson, our constituency offices only have two members of staff; one executive professional assistant and an administrative assistant. They have no idea on how to make desks. Even in our premises, as hon. Members of Parliament, there are no workshops. The CDF, as it is, has not been practical. We have put it that desks will be done at that level. However, the approval process is in a one-year lag. What we are implementing now, as hon. Members of Parliament, under the CDF, was approved under the Patriotic Front (PF) Government in 2021. That is what is being launched by all hon. Members of Parliament, including the United Party for National Development (UPND) hon. Members of Parliament.

Mr Chairperson, for the 2021 CDF, zero of what was recommended has been implemented. So, if money is taken to the CDF, by the time it is approved, it will be 2026, which will be too late for the people on your right and the UPND Government.

Mr Chairperson, let me move to the last point as regards school feeding.


Mr Sampa: As you are talking, even your pupils in your constituency need desks. They are sitting on the floor in Ikeleng’i.


Mr Sampa: Mr Chairperson, the last point is on the School Feeding Programme. I looked at the budget. In 2021, the budget that was inherited from the PF had K852,000 for the school feeding programme. This is where our pupils in our schools are fed. Not everyone comes from a rich family. For example, I would go to school at break time. I had no lunch box and no money to buy ifitumbuwa. I would just look at the rich people’s children enjoy at break time. When I go back to class, I would still be hungry. It was hard to concentrate. I had to fight and fight, but, ultimately, I ended up beating those who were rich people’s children academically. I was resilient, but not the majority in rural constituencies. Even in Matero, in areas like George Compound, at break time – these kids have been summoned from their parents who are poor to go to school because it is free – they have nothing to eat. They just watch others eat.

Mr Chairperson, there was a programme under the PF called the School Feeding Progamme for poor children. The budget that the UPND inherited was K852,000. In the first budget of the UPND for 2022, it was increased by 15 per cent to K979,000. Now, from 2022 to next year, it is not increasing or reducing. The UPND has just looked at it. It has remained the same. For next year, it is proposing the same amount as last year, which is K979,000. There is zero increment. It only means that it is not giving this line the importance that it deserves.

Free education failed in Ghana, partly, if you read and research, because poor children could not afford to eat at break time and stopped going to school due to hunger. So, this amount, K779,000, maybe is just enough for two constituencies, Chirundu and Ikeleng’i, but what about the other constituencies? It is not enough. So, the hon. Minister did not put money on that programme. That is where I have a problem.

Mr Chairperson, lastly, I was looking for this opportunity to express this thought now that there is a football world cup, and I must say that I am not plagiarising. I picked this from the Parliament of Ghana, but it is so true of the hon. Minister of Education and many other hon. Ministers. It is about a football player who plays for Manchester United called Harry Maguire. In practices, he was scoring. In friendly games he would score and the net would shake. Even in simple games, he would score, but when it came to the Football Association (FA) Cup Final or when he was called to the England National Team, he started scoring own goals only. He was vibrant while in the Opposition.

Hon Government Members: Question!

Mr Sampa: That is what is happening to the hon. Minister of Education. He was vibrant while in the Opposition. That is what is happening to the hon. Minister of Education.


The Deputy Chairperson: Hon. Member, you have a very bad tendency of debating your friends. We do not debate ourselves. You have extended it even to the Chairperson. So, I think you have to change your style of debate. We do not debate ourselves.

You can continue.

Mr Sampa: Mr Chairperson, I am well guided and I concede. I will just give an example. When people speak theory, they say I will do this and I will score, but when you give them a chance, instead of scoring in the other net, they start scoring own gaols upon own goals. However, it is not too late. It is only in the first quarter of the first half. The first quarter has finished. We are not even half year gone. The game takes five years. So, we will go to the next half, half time and the second half. However, at this rate it is only own goals upon own goals.

Mr Chairperson with that, I support the Vote for the Ministry of Education.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, maybe, let me start by responding to my friend, Hon. Sampa. I am expending my energies to correct ills. So, if he has seen that the vibrancy is not there, it because it is going towards work. That time I wanted them to work, they were not working. I have been given an opportunity to work, and I am working. So, I have shifted now to working. If he has seen, the President also is working. What we are doing is mirror him. We may not be like him because, maybe, he is running at a faster rate. However, even us, as hon. Ministers, his lieutenants, have to have a reflection of the President. So, if he has not seen me talking a lot, it is because I am everywhere. That is why, when I became an hon. Minister, I traversed this country and found out the damage.

Mr Chairperson, Hon. Mabumba was saying that he has seen leakages. There are no leakages even today. There are teachers who are giving answers to pupils and they are being caught. That is the damage that they created in those teachers.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Syakalima: So, I am trying to reconfigure them. You know, damage of ten years is quite huge. So, I am trying to reengineer them on how to come out because it is immoral to do that.

So, now, I have been explaining to teachers that if they do that, those children will get six points and go to the university in the school of medicine. Since they are used to doing dubious things, they will become doctors and will kill the same teachers. They will become engineers, but when they design bridges, they will fall the next day. So, we need to reconfigure our people.Many of the things that my hon. Colleagues have said – if you check the budget, it has increased. One hon. Member talked about desks, and let me tell my good friend that the Zambia Education Project Implementation Unit (ZEPIU) is producing desks. Rather than only using the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), there is a company producing desks. Immediately the President told us that he does not want to see any child sitting on the floor by next year December, we started running around. Within one month and a half, we have produced 6,000 two-seater desks and one seater desks, and our aim is to produce 12,000 desks. When we came in, we sent monies to the Provincial Education Officers (PEOs) to rehabilitate desks and more than 6,000 desks were rehabilitated. If we had started making desks a long time ago, today, we could not have been seeing pupils sitting on the floor. In fact, we must be ashamed of ourselves that despite having forests, some children sit on the floor. It is unacceptable, and we must accept that something went wrong somewhere.

When your colleagues try to mend the things that you actually did, you must appreciate. Like most of my colleagues have said, when you do politics in education, you destroy a country. That, I can tell you. The damage was immense; that I can assure you. So, when hon. Members check the Yellow Book, they will find that most allocations have been increased. In fact, I did not follow Hon. Kasandwe properly because he was just defending the Patriotic Front (PF) Government without looking at the Yellow Book. So, it is important that we counter check.

Mr Chairperson, talking about recruiting teachers, even if we employed all the teachers, we would still have a deficit. If we did not employ the 30,000 teachers, in the next twenty years, we would have had a real deficit. When we employed the 30,000 teachers, guardians and parents realised that the Government was employing, and colleges of education started receiving applications. Otherwise, it was dry. This is why I usually say that the President does not know what he did by employing 30,000 teachers at the same time. He has saved the next two other Presidents. Otherwise, there would have been a real crisis. My good friend Mr Fube told me that he has no problem with over employing teachers. I am so grateful to Hon. Fube because this is as it should be. When things are happening, we must be able to say that they are happening.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Syakalima: So, in education, what will help us is working together. The children we send to school must be taken care of. Those are the people who will be leaders in the 21st Century. If we do not take care of them, we are going to lag behind. Africa lagged in the agrarian revolution; the industrial revolution. Today, we cannot lag in technology and these are the things that we are trying to work on. There are budget constraints but the Budget is increasing. One hon. Member said it looks like K20.6 billion is too much. It is a way forward because there are other monies like the CDF. If you calculate the money disbursed to various places, you will find that it is almost 20 per cent because the increment was 43.2 per cent. There has never been such an increment in the education sector and this is the first time.

Mr Chairperson, Mr Emmanuel Banda talked about promotions. Yes, this is another cancer that we have to cure. I agree with the hon. Member that there were problems, but now, we want to be promoting people. I have told teachers that there will not be any more connections. Teachers are only connected to their work and the child. There is nothing like I am connected to somebody. I told the teachers that no one is connected to anybody. They will earn a promotion out of what they have and nothing else. So, again, that was another damage and I agree with the hon. Member. So, we must be able to change the way we do things.

Mr Chairperson, quality education actually starts with employing teachers. That is the first thing. When you employ teachers, you set the standards. We have allocated money for standards and this component had actually died. The ministry will now be going to check what is obtaining on the ground in order for us to know. The children in school must move from early childhood, primary, secondary to university. When half-baked students are produced, there must have been a problem where they came from. That is what we are trying to deal with and we will start from early childhood. Like my brother said, we need to have early childhood so that the children grow with morals, attitudes and everything like that.

Mr Chairperson, on reviewing the curriculum, we are reviewing it. Today, a cabinet memorandum was brought on my table so my colleagues can check it. So, we are on the right highway. We will make an effort to ensure that our education system is competitive. Our children must fit in the 21st Century thinking and transformation.

I thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

The Minister of Technology and Science (Mr Mutati) (on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane)): Mr Chairperson, I beg to move that an amendment on page 686, Table 4: Programme Budget Allocation by Economic Classification, under item 03: Transfer, Sub-item 01 Primary School Grants, by the deletion of K318,660,140 and the substitution therefor of K321,260,139 and on page 690, Table 4: Programme Budget Allocation by Economic Classification, under item 03: Transfer, Sub-item 06 Promoting Equity in African Schools (PEAS), by the deletion of K3,410,462 and the substitution therefor of K810,463.

Mr Chairperson, as regards the rationale for the amendment,the Ministry of Education and PEAS entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), in which PEAS would provide free education to vulnerable learners at secondary school level. The grants that the Government allocates to PEAS cater for the user fees for every learner and are used to pay teachers their salaries as well as purchase requisites, and cater for operational costs of the school.

Mr Chairperson, as hon. Members may be aware, before the year 2022, there was no free education at secondary school level. Hence, PEAS would help the vulnerable secondary learners. However, in 2022, the Government introduced free education at early childhood, primary and secondary school levels. In this regard, the Government, through the Ministry of Education, has decided to reduce the grants to PEAS from K3,410,000 to K800,000 and increase school grants to primary schools from K318,000 to K321,000, because it is now able to provide free education to all the learners from early childhood, primary to secondary school education.

I thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Kampyongo(Shiwang’andu): Mr Chairperson, we understand the amendment that has been proposed by the Acting Minister Finance and National Planning to adjust the two major budget lines. However, it would have been prudent to circulate the budget adjustments because they are quite significant. The procedure requires that they circulate the amendments before the hon. Minister comes to move them. We appeal to the Acting Minister of Finance and National Planning to not take budgeting as an afterthought; it is a process. They had a process and idea. The free education did not come from nowhere. It is a policy that the hon. Minister brought to the august House. Therefore, when he was deciding to make the budget expenditure line adjustments, it should have been prudent that he factored the adjustments in his budget estimates before it was taken to the Expanded Budget Committee. So, we expect him to attach importance to matters of the budget process.

Mr Chairperson, I submit, however, I would like to get justification either from the Ministry of Education or the Acting Minister of Finance and National Planning because these are significant changes that they have made to the budget lines. Like I said, procedure requires that they circulate the amendment in advance and way ahead.

Mr Deputy Chairperson: Mr Kampyongo, every hon. Member in this House is on the forum where all hon. Member’s numbers are included. Yesterday, in the evening, the amendment was circulated. So, check through your phone you will see that it was circulated.

Mr Kampyongo: I appreciate. We are on that forum and we get the circulations. However, the cardinal point is that the changes to the budget line are quite significant. Like I am saying, the amendment is coming but the budget had been taken to the Expanded Budget Committee where the adjustments could have been made. So, I am requesting that the two hon. Ministers to give us an adequate explanation as to why the adjustments are now coming at this stage when they could have been done before the budget was taken to the Expanded Budget Committee.

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, amendments are acceptable here. I am not quite sure why he wants to say or ask me why we are amending here. Are we not right to amend here?

Mr Chairperson, the amendment was circulated and it was admitted. So, to start asking me why I am amending now is unfair.

I thank you, Sir.

The Deputy Chairperson: Though I am a first timer, I am a year and some monthsold. What I know is that amendments are supposed to be done by this Committee. That is why at this stage, we can move figures as long as we just confine to the budget presented. So, I am the chairperson of this Committee and that is where amendments are done. If we want we can reallocate money. It is in order. So, all amendments are supposed to be done by this Committee

Dr Mwanza (Kaumbwe): Mr Chairperson, I take you to page 691, Programme 5503, Sub Programme 3006 – Infrastructure Development – K1,119,382,895. Let me just take advantage of this time since I was not given a chance to debate. It is just an appeal. With the introduction of free education there is over enrolment in our classrooms. Therefore, the technical team at the Ministry of Education needs to relook at the design of the 1 X 2 or 1 X 3 classroom blocks. We are talking about the Floor space area. It needs to be adjusted. I have looked at the standard design in my constituency. It is just a 7m by 11m floor space which is 77sq. m. It is not enough. The enrolment for pupils is above forty-five. Forty-five people in one classroom of a small space is not good enough.

Mr Chairperson, I also thank the hon. Minister for visiting Kaumbwe Constituency to look at NgombeniMatole School. I hope we are going to benefit by completing that school

Hon.Members: What is NgombeniMatole?

Dr Mwanza: It is a school.

Mr B. Mpundu:Ngombe what?

Dr Mwanza: The school is called Ngombenimatole.


Dr Mwanza: Sure, that is the name.


Mr Chairperson, thank you so much and I hope that the K1,119,382,895 will be part of the allocation to the only stalled boarding secondary school that we want to have in Kaumbwe Constituency.

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, it was not really a question. I think he was just happy with me. The hon. Member asked about the boarding secondary school. I will check if it is part of those that we are trying to adjust. Not really this one. We had an allocation for those secondary schools whose construction has stalled this year. However, we will check if it was one of those.

I thank you, Sir

Ms Nyirenda (Lundazi): Mr Chairperson, thank you for giving a chance to the people of Lundazi to seek a clarification. As we already know, our school should be in this programme. Page 681, Programme 1001 – Early Childhood Education – K462,191,493 and  Sub Programme – 1003 – Teacher EducationSpecialised Services– K561,521 , which I notice was increased to K944,997 but now has reduced to K770,439. However, the same Programme under Primary Education which is looking at Teacher Education And Specialised Services was K118,880, it was increased to K1,064,446 but now it has gone to K10,867,823. Equally, the same programme under Secondary Education has increased to almost K5,270,747. What specialised services are these that reduce at early childhood and then they increase at primary and reduce at secondary. I hope they include services of phycologists at early childhood. They can be able assist us access the learners especially those who are autistic and those others who may be having special educational need. I submit.

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, I will answer this in advance, in case many hon. Members ask this again.

Sir, wherever we have increased, it is because it was necessary. Apart from the printing of the curriculum, where we have reduced, the reduction is small and it is because of budget constraints. If hon. Members check, they will find that under the curriculum review, we do not want to overprint.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Menyani Zulu (Nyimba): Mr Chairperson, may I have clarification on page 684 and 691. Thank God there is an increment in the allocation for Early Childhood Education from last year’s budget of K102 million to K462 million. On page 691, the same figure my colleague from Kaumbwe asked about on Programme: 5503, Sub-programme 3006– Infrastructure Development – K1,119,382,895 which has increased sufficiently. The hon. Minister may agree with me that with regard to infrastructure development in the Eastern Province, a good number of schools are incomplete.Kacholola Boarding Secondary Schoolis not complete although its operational. Chibale Boarding Secondary Schoolis also not complete and some of the buildings are almost falling. Those two schools serve people from Lusaka. That is known because 90 per cent of the kids who at the said schools come from Lusaka. It now that our kids are going into those good schools because of the bursary scheme.

Mr Chairperson, there is also Vizimumba High School where kids graduate with Grade 12 certificates–

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Mr Zulu the word ‘kids’ is unparliamentary.

Mr Menyani Zulu: Mr Chairperson, sorry.

There is also Vizimumba High School where our male pupils graduate with a certificate whereas the female pupils graduate with both a certificate and a pregnancy because there is no accommodation. This is a school which serves two constituencies, Kaumbwe, where Dr Mwanza comes from and Nyimba, but we do not have enough facilities because the school is incomplete. Yes, for now, we are fighting to put dormitories at the school, but we will not have enough money from the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to put up necessary facilities such as the kitchen and other things required for it to be turned into a boarding school. So, from the allocated K1.2 billion, are we going to see an adjustment to the school so that we decrease the amount of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD) and pregnancies our pupils are graduating with?

Sir, in addition to that, are we going to see Chibale Secondary School fully opened so that the laboratory and the kitchen start working because the schools are at 97 per cent and 98 per cent. So, that is my question.

Mr Chairperson, we are thankful to the Government for increasing the money for early childhood education. However, the Government only gave eight or ten teachers for early childhood education, if I am not mistaken. Nyimba Constituency is the biggest constituency in the Eastern Province. It holds about 10 per cent or 15 per cent of the entire province. So, the teachers we have been given are very few. Are we seeing the Government replacing the sixty-two or forty-two teachers who were taken from Nyimba?

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, I think the hon. Member was not really asking a question, but he was talking about his constituency and not the budget itself. Which Chibale is it? There is also Chibale in–

Mr Menyani Zulu: The one after Kacholola when coming from Lusaka.

Mr Syakalima: Sir, if it is part of the schools that were incomplete, I think there must be a contractor on site now. We called all the contractors who had run away because of incompletion. However, when I visited Nyimba, I promised the hon. Member that we were trying to work on it. I even inspected the school. This is where the contractor had locked something like a hole. I think it is part of the forty-seven schools we are trying to complete. We called the contractors, gave them some money, and asked them to go back on site. Unfortunately, there is another school where the contractor said he was still busy. I do not know which contract he was working on on the Copperbelt. So, we will countercheck. Nonetheless, we released all the money to the contractors, unless they are not moving fast, but they have moved into most of the schools. So, we will take care of everything that the hon. Members has said.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kang’ombe (Kamfinsa): Mr Chairperson, may I have clarification on page 681, Programme 5503, Sub-programme 3006 – Infrastructure Development – K1,119,382,895. As the hon. Minister may be aware, I come from the Copperbelt Province under Kamfinsa Constituency in Kitwe. The hon. Minister may also be aware that on the Copperbelt, we have a boarding school in Mpongwe and in Chiwala, in Ndola rural, under Masaiti. Under the provision of Infrastructure Development, the hon. Minister has allocated K1.119 billion. Is there a provision for the upgrading of, at least one, existing secondary school in Kitwe and transforming it into a boarding school so that children who are being sponsored under the secondary boarding schools facility could have a boarding facility within Kitwe District, which currently has five constituencies?

Sir, I also want to assure the hon. Minister that Kamfinsa has the infrastructure and land that could be upgraded into a boarding school so that children from the Nkana, Kwacha and all the other constituencies can come to one boarding school in Kitwe. So, my question is: Is Kitwe covered under this K1.119 billion for upgrading of at least one secondary school into a boarding facility?

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, the hon. Members of Parliament are very clever today. They are all talking about their own constituencies. They are debating indirectly. I may not speak about Kitwe per se, but the Government’s desire is to build schools where girl children are and the distances are long. If the hon. Member listened, I said, like my friend there (pointing at Mr Menyani Zulu) said that girl children graduate with certificates and pregnancies. That pains a lot. So, wherever we see a problem of that nature, we want to move in quickly before the pupils are spoiled. The essence of a boarding school is to keep pupils safe. This is why my colleague talked about mental health. When pupils rent accommodation in the compounds, they come across people who do not respect them.

Mr Kang’ombewas talking to another hon. Member.

Mr Syakalima: Hon. Kang’ombe, I am answering you.

So, that is the desire of the Government. So, I am putting it broadly because this is what we want to do everywhere. If there is no money, we will look for it. If there is money in the budget, which we cannot stretch, and Kitwe is not included, it means it will be included in the next budget.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mung’andu (Chama South): Mr Chairperson, I just want to emphasis what the hon. Member for Kaumbwesaid over the size of classroom blocks. If the hon. Minister does not act now, we might have problems. We have a standard one by three class room block, which comes with three classrooms and a head teacher’s office, with good storage. However, what we are witnessing from these contractors now is that they are building 11meters, which is something that he needs to quickly check on the ground.

Mr Chairperson, may I have clarification on page 684, Programme 5501 – Sub-programme 1001– Early Childhood Education Provision – K301,187,986 and Sub-programme 1002 – Open and Distance Learning – K30,000. Last year, we approved K31,496,218 from K11, 000,000 the previous year,2021. For next year, the hon. Ministeris proposing K301,187,986, which I must mention is a commendable increment. What change should people, particularly children in Buli, Mangwele, Chifunda, Mapamba and Pondo in my Constituency, Chama South,expect with this increment so that at the end of the year, we hold him accountable?

Mr Syakalima: Mr Chairperson, now everybody will be asking the same question. The problem is that he has also put the children in his constituency. So, he is campaigning for his children and not children in the country. I am looking out for all the children in the whole country.

Mr Chairperson, on Programme 5501 – Sub-programme 1001– Early Childhood Education Provision – K301,187,986, the increase in allocation is meant to cater for the introduction of the new project, which I had read. Had the hon. Member been listening, he would have heard because I had read this in my policy statement.

Mr Chairperson, there is a project called Zero Improvement Plan (ZIP), which will construct 110 ECE hub centres – whether some of the110 will be part of his constituency is not here – 330 ECE satellite centres countrywide and provide teaching, learning and capacity building for ECE teachers as well as care givers.

I thank you.

Mr E. Banda (Muchinga): Mr Chairperson, my question is general, covering the whole country.

Mr Chairperson, I think the hon. Minister is aware that teachers who are tasked to invigilate exams do not get allowanceseven when they are sent to invigilate in areas very far from where they come from. Therefore, with the increment of the budget, considering that last year, it was K10 billion and this year, we are talking about K20,297,311,396,could such teachers expect that there could be some allowances provided, going forward?

Mr Syakalia: Mr Chairperson, the hon. Member is now swerving from the budget. This time is about pages in the Yellow Book. So, the issue that the hon. Member has brought in is very new. Off cuff, I cannot categorise what the money will be used for. Wanvela?

I thank you.

Vote 80 – ordered to stand part of theEstimates.

VOTE 85 – (Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources – K 194,781,294)

The Minister of Lands and Natural Resources (Mr Muchima): Mr Chairperson, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to present the Budget Estimates for the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources for the year 2023.

Mr Chairperson, my presentation shall outline the vision and mandate of the ministry as well as highlight some of the major achievements during the 2022 financial year. I shall, further, highlight the challenges encountered during the period under consideration and share the significant policy measures for the coming year, 2023, in relation to the Estimates of Expenditure for the ministry.

Mr Chairperson, the mandate and portfolio functions of the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources are outlined in the Government Gazette Notice No. 1123 of 2021, Volume 57, No. 90. To be specific, the functions are outlined as follows:

  1. land policy;
  2. land surveys and mapping;
  3. land administration;
  4. registration of lands and deeds;
  5. beaconing;
  6. control of unauthorised settlements;
  7. Natural Resource Policy; and
  8. natural resources research and training.

Mr Chairperson, in addition, the ministry is responsible for the following statutory bodies:

  1. the Agricultural Lands Board;
  2. the Compensation and Advisory;
  3. the Lands Commission;
  4. the Lands Tribunal; and
  5. the Survey Control Board.

Mr Chairperson, land, as a natural resource, is a fundamental resource in any society that ensures the continued existence and survival of all life forms. As such, the ultimate vision for the ministry, as espoused in the Land Policy, will be:

“A transparent land administration and management system for inclusive and sustainable development by the year 2035.”

Mr Chairperson, in order to attain this vision, the ministry will continue to execute its mandate of strengthening land administration and management through the implementation of effective land administration forms and sustainable management of natural resources. It is for this reason that our mission statement for 2023 and beyond will be:

“To administer and manage land and natural resources in a responsive, equitable and inclusive manner for sustainable socio-economic growth.

Major Achievements in 2022

Mr Chairperson, during the 2022 fiscal year, the ministry was allocated K130.2 million and in the 2023 fiscal year, the ministry is proposing a budget of K194.8 million. During the period under consideration, the ministry scored a number of achievements. For instance, the ministry was working on enhancing countrywide land titling, production of certificates of title, conducting survey mapping, beaconing on chiefdoms and national boundaries, enhancing natural resource management through the biodiversity strategy and strengthening the land management information system. Specifically, the achievements attained were as follows:

  1. Revenue Collection

The ministry collected K140,100,253,747. There was a reduction of 29 per cent compared to the revenue collected in 2021. The reduction was due to the removal of survey fees and the realignment of the functions such as forestry to another ministry;

  1. Land Registration and Titling

Under the registration and systematic national titling, the ministry issued 58,058 certificates of title while under the sporadic land titling, 18,000 certificates had been issued by the end of the third quarter. These are ongoing activities that aim to promote the security of tenure of properties;

  1. Land Surveying

One of the critical functions of the ministry is to conduct land surveying. To this effect, the ministry successful installed part of the boundary beacons along the Zambia Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) border. The ministry planned to survey 24,000 properties by December, 2022. However, 42,410 properties have been surveyed surpassing the target due to the high demand of survey services as this is usually customer driven. Additionally, twenty-six boundary primary pillars were installed and 122 boundary intermediate pillars were completed. The refurbishing of boundaries between Zambia and Mozambique was completed in terms of the field survey. These activities are undertaken to ensure the integrity of our national boundaries.

Natural Resources

Mr Chairperson, in simple terms, natural resources refer to materials that occur naturally in the natural environment and are used to support life and meet people’s needs while natural resource management refers to the sustainable utilisation of resources such as land, water, soil, plants and animals, with a particular focus on how their management affects the quality of life for both present and future generations. Therefore, in an effort to raise awareness on the responsible management and utilisation of natural resources, the ministry carried out public education awareness campaigns. Two public awareness campaigns were conducted, one during the commemoration of the International Wetlands’ Day in February, 2022, and the other one during the Biodiversity Day in May, 2022.

Land Development Fund

Mr Chairperson, the ministry is committed to ensuring that land that is opened up is also developed. To this effect, the ministry disbursed the Land Development Fund amounting to K16,570,954.89 to ten local authorities for the survey works, electrification, access roads and water reticulation. The local authorities are Chirundu, Lupososhi, Chasefu, Chongwe, Lundazi, Ikeleng’i, Kasempa, Itezhi-tezhi, Kasenengwa and Ngabwe town councils.

Digitalisation of Services

Mr Chairperson, the ministry recognises the impact digital technology has in changing business models and providing effective ways of collecting revenue and delivering services. The ministry plans to launch the Zambia Integrated Land Administration System (ZILAS) by December 2022. Currently, the system developers are working with the Smart Zambia Institute and conducting capacity building for officers.

Major Challenges In 2022

Mr Chairperson, despite the achievements –

The Deputy Chairperson: Hon, Minister, your time is up, but you can wind up. You should just be a bit quicker.

Mr Muchima: Mr Chairperson, thank you. I was saying, despite the achievements that have been highlighted during the period under consideration. The ministry encountered various challenges during the implementation programmes. These included the following:

  1. reduction in revenue collection due non-collection of survey fees and the non-payments of the 25 per cent penalties.
  2. encumbrances on some properties as matters are before the courts of law; and
  3. Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) restrictions where officers could not go in the field

Policy Outlook for the Year 2023

Mr Chairperson, in 2023, the programmes and activities will be aligned to the priorities and targets outlined in the Vision 2030, Economic Recovery Programme of 2020 to 2030, and the objectives of the Eight National Development Plan (8NDP). Therefore, the focus shall be on three major programmes. These are:

  1. strengthening the land administration and regulation,
  2. management of natural resources, and
  3. management and support services for improved service delivery.

Mr Chairperson, through you, I urge members of the august House to support the Estimates of Expenditure for Vote 85, Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, which has been allocated a total of K194,781,294. Hon. Members, with your support, you are assured of having an inclusive and responsive land administration and management of natural resources for sustainable socio-economic growth.

With these few remarks, I beg to move.

I thank you, Mr Chairperson,

Mr Jamba (Mwembezhi): Mr Chairperson, thank you very much for allowing the people of Mwembezhi to add a word on the debate for Vote 85.

Mr Chairperson, I support the budget and what the hon. Minister is doing.

Mr Chairperson, I noted that amongst the challenges the hon. Minister said he had this year, he left out a very important aspect of the degazetted forests, which are a thorny issue. He has not mentioned, in his statement, the challenges of degazetted forests and how he is going to sort them out.

Mr Chairperson, I will not shy away from saying that the degazetion of the forest in Kawena of Mwembezhi, in Shibuyunji District was scrupulous, criminal and one of the worst degazetions in the country and in the history of Zambia. Last year, we said that we wanted to have the degazetted forest looked at again because the people who shared it were those who used to sit on your right, just a year ago. Now, I cannot even hear them talking –

TheDeputy Chairperson: Order!




[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

(Progress reported)


The House adjourned at 1840 hours until 0900 hours on Friday, 08thDecember, 2022.