Has this parliament lived up to expectations?
By Christopher Mapani
FOLLOWING the dissolution of the Fifth Session of the 13th National Assembly dissolves yesterday, Friday, May 15, 2026 we are presented with an opportunity to reflect and ask whether it has lived up to expectations. It in-turn also presents an opportunity to further question whether recent changes to our legislature, introduced by Bill 7, are justified.
The session began with a lot of hope and excitement, not only because we had a female Speaker for the first time in our country’s history – Mrs Nelly Mutti, but because we had the United Party for National Development (UPND) that had long sat on back benches with some of the most formidable debaters, taking the front benches while the former ruling Patriotic Front (PF) took back benches.
Mrs Mutti had developed the reputation of an intelligent but calm and cool headed lawyer. And for the first time, we had a National Assembly dominated by relatively young men and women. It was therefore hoped that the house would be characterised by vibrant debates and effective checks and balances against the executive. Has this Parliament then lived up to the expectations of Zambians? I don’t think so.
We saw the vibrancy of UPND MPs drastically reduced. I can hardly recall an MP from the ruling party being critical of an Executive action. In fact, some former vibrant UPND MPs barely uttered a word during the last five years. Rather than hold the Executive accountable, we saw MPs from the ruling party ask questions that made you wonder how they advanced the interests of their voters. Instead of raising pressing issues, Vice President’s Question Time increasingly became a time to prove party loyalty – asking questions such as ‘how the administration was able to perform so exceptionally?’
With the expansion of Parliament with more proportional seats going to the ruling party, we can only expect more of such questions. One then wonders whether this expansion, particularly given our nation’s dire financial position, is justified.
On top of all this is the historical problem of MPs appointed as ministers effectively stopping to represent their voters. They essentially begin to represent the Executive. Regrettably, the Hakainde Hichilema administration even rejected the proposal by its own Technical Committee, echoing long lasting demands by Zambians that ministers be appointed from outside the National Assembly.
On the other hand, it became almost impossible for urgent matters to be admitted by the Speaker. Almost every MP raising urgent matters was being requested to put in a written question.
Then we had altercations between the Speaker and individual MPs which worsened as leadership wrangles in the PF intensified. While the PF can not be completely exonerated, the Speaker could have handled these better, more so against the former leader of the opposition Brian Mundubile. The same could be said about altercations she had with individual MPs like the former Lumezi, Mambilima and Nkana law makers. Undoubtedly, some of these MPs could have conducted themselves better.
Overtime, the Speaker’s rulings also became predictably in favour of the Executive and the ruling party. Perhaps the lowest point, in this regard, was her last ruling to the effect that opposition MPs had not crossed the floor. Apparently, she only relied on the word of the same MPs, leaving one to wonder whether she had conducted her own investigations.
It also didn’t help that rather than remaining independent, she would often step in and respond on behalf of the Executive. Her deference to the Executive climaxed when she danced on the floor of the House after the passage of Bill 7. This mortally wounded her reputation. Moreover, how come that to date, the list showing how MPs voted on Bill 7 has not been made public? What does this say about our Parliament and Speaker Mutti?
As for most young promising upcoming parliamentarians, Bill 7 was their Archilles heel. The sense of betrayal felt by Zambians is deep and palpable. Interestingly, I do not recall a single MP, particularly those who voted in favour, engaging their electorate on how to vote on Bill 7.
As we go to the polls to elect new members of Parliament, let us not just look at how ‘popular’ one is but one’s character and, for those who seek re-election, how they have conducted themselves in the past. Have they been your true representatives or representatives of their political parties? We should not allow certain individuals to treat parliamentary seats as personal to holder.
The author is a lawyer
