By Venus N Msyani

The proposed constitutional amendments in Zambia have ignited intense debate, with citizens voicing concerns about their timing, intent, and implications. Since Minister of Justice Princess Kasune presented the amendments to Parliament, questions have been asked. Some have been addressed, others left unanswered, fueling suspicion and speculation. Chief among these questions is who was responsible for drafting the amendments?

For weeks, this question lingered, stoking fears of political motivations. Observers pointed to President Hakainde Hichilema’s vocal support for the proposals, leading critics to suspect his office’s involvement. These suspicions were confirmed during a meeting between President Hichilema and the House of Chiefs at State House on Sunday, April 13, 2025. In his remarks, the president indirectly admitted his role in drafting.

“I want to explain one item, Proposal 7, on nomination,” President Hichilema stated. “It was never meant; it was a mistake from our end. My team made a mistake, so I made a mistake. I always take responsibility myself; I don’t like skating around.”

The president clarified that the amendments proposed capping the number of nominated Members of Parliament (MPs) at a percentage of elected MPs. Using an example, he explained, “Currently, there are 8 nominated MPs out of 156 elected MPs, which is about 5%. This means that if there are 200 elected MPs, only 10 would be nominated, making the total 210. It’s a formula, 8 plus 2 equals 10.” He dismissed allegations that the amendments aimed to secure a two-thirds majority through excessive nominations, asserting that the matter had already been clarified publicly.

While the president’s willingness to take responsibility is commendable, his acknowledgment of involvement has intensified debates about the amendments’ motivations. Critics argue that his direct involvement undermines the impartiality of the process. This perception is exacerbated by the administration’s focus on constitutional amendments over pressing issues like economic recovery, the rising cost of living, and corruption; areas many Zambians feel deserve immediate attention.

The amendments have also sparked broader concerns about the lack of public consultation. A constitution is a nation’s guiding document, and any changes to it should reflect the will of the people. Critics have called for a more inclusive and transparent process, emphasizing the need for all voices to be heard. Rushing such a critical undertaking risks eroding public trust and undermining the amendments’ legitimacy.

Public sentiment leans toward delaying the process until after the 2026 general elections. Advocates for postponement argue that this would allow for broader consultation and greater public participation, ensuring the amendments reflect the nation’s collective will. They believe a delay could elevate the process to a level of trust and transparency that benefits all Zambians.

Refusing to delay the process raises significant concerns, particularly in light of the president’s acknowledgment of his role in drafting the amendments. While President Hichilema’s admission provides some clarity, it also raises critical questions about the motivations and methods behind the proposals. Zambians remain engaged, questioning and debating them. The omission of asset declaration, a straightforward yet vital issue, adds another layer of intrigue to the debate.

President Hichilema’s acknowledgment of his role in drafting the constitutional amendments has given people a clearer basis to evaluate whether the proposals are politically motivated. Postponing the process until after the 2026 general elections could act as a unifying measure, fostering trust and inclusivity.

Moving forward, this crucial undertaking requires thoughtful deliberation, inclusive consultation, and an unwavering commitment to the principles of democracy and accountability. Above all, the inclusion of asset declaration in the amendments is an essential step that cannot be overlooked.

With the rise of crypto gambling, many players wonder whether Bitcoin casinos are truly legit. While some offer fair gaming and fast withdrawals, others can be risky. In this guide, we’ll break down how to spot a trustworthy Bitcoin casino, what to watch out for, and whether playing with BTC is as safe as traditional online gambling. Keep reading to make sure you’re betting smart.

Bitcoin vs Traditional Casinos

When comparing Bitcoin casinos to traditional online casinos, the biggest difference lies in how transactions are processed. Traditional casinos rely on standard banking methods like credit cards, e-wallets, and bank transfers, which often come with processing fees, longer withdrawal times, and stricter verification requirements. In contrast, top crypto casino sites allow players to deposit and withdraw funds using digital currencies like Bitcoin and Litecoin, often completing transactions in minutes with lower fees. This decentralized approach also means fewer restrictions for Canadian players looking to access offshore gambling platforms, as crypto transactions bypass traditional financial institutions. Many of the best crypto casinos in Canada cater specifically to crypto users, offering fast, secure transactions and generous bonuses for digital currency deposits.

Another major distinction is anonymity and privacy. Traditional online casinos require personal details for verification, including government-issued IDs and banking information, which can be a concern for privacy-conscious players. On the other hand, the best Litecoin casinos and other crypto platforms often allow anonymous gambling, requiring only a crypto wallet address to process transactions. However, while this offers greater privacy, it also comes with potential risks—since many crypto casinos operate under fewer regulations, players must be extra cautious when choosing a legitimate platform. To ensure a safe experience, Canadian players should look for the best crypto casinos in Canada that hold reputable licenses, have transparent payment policies, and offer provably fair gaming.

Understanding Bitcoin Casinos

Bitcoin casinos are online gambling platforms that accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies for deposits, wagers, and withdrawals. Unlike traditional online casinos that rely on fiat currencies like CAD or USD, these casinos operate using decentralized digital currencies, allowing for faster transactions and lower fees. Many of the top crypto casino sites also accept other cryptocurrencies like Litecoin (LTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Tether (USDT), giving players more flexibility in their payment options.

The main advantage of Bitcoin casinos is their speed and privacy. Deposits and withdrawals are processed almost instantly, compared to traditional casinos that may take days to approve payments. Additionally, many Bitcoin casinos require minimal personal information, offering a more anonymous gaming experience. However, since not all crypto casinos are regulated the same way as traditional online casinos, Canadian players should choose carefully by checking for licensing, security features, and fair play certifications. The best crypto casinos in Canada will always provide clear terms, provably fair games, and reliable customer support.

Are Bitcoin Casinos Legal in Canada?

Bitcoin casinos exist in a legal gray area in Canada. While there are no specific laws banning the use of cryptocurrency for gambling, there are also no government-regulated Bitcoin casinos operating within the country. Instead, Canadian players can access top crypto casino sites that are licensed and operated offshore. These international platforms accept Canadian players, allowing them to deposit, wager, and withdraw using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies like Litecoin (LTC). However, it’s important for players to ensure they are using a legitimate and licensed site to avoid potential risks.

Canadian Gambling Laws and Crypto Casinos

In Canada, gambling is regulated at the provincial level. Provinces like Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec have their own government-run online casinos, but these platforms do not currently accept cryptocurrency. Offshore best crypto casinos Canada remain a popular alternative for players who prefer using Bitcoin and other digital assets. While these offshore sites are not illegal to use, they are not officially endorsed or regulated by Canadian authorities, meaning players must be cautious when choosing a casino.

Can Canadians Legally Play at Bitcoin Casinos?

Yes, Canadians can legally play at Bitcoin and Litecoin casinos, but they must use offshore platforms. The Canadian government does not prosecute individuals for gambling on international sites, as long as the casino is licensed in a recognized jurisdiction. To ensure safety, players should verify that the best Litecoin casinos they choose have proper licensing, secure payment methods, and fair gaming certifications. Additionally, they should be aware that cryptocurrency transactions are not protected by traditional banking regulations, making it even more important to select a reputable casino.

How to Choose the Best Crypto Casinos in Canada

With so many options available, finding the best crypto casinos in Canada requires careful research. Not all Bitcoin casinos are created equal, and since crypto transactions are irreversible, it’s crucial to choose a trustworthy and secure platform. Below are the key factors to consider when selecting a top crypto casino site for Canadian players.

Licensing and Regulation

A legitimate casino should hold a valid license from a well-known gambling authority, such as:

• Malta Gaming Authority (MGA)

• Curacao eGaming

• UK Gambling Commission (for international sites)

Avoid casinos with no licensing information, as they may not follow fair gaming practices.

Secure and Fast Payment Methods

Look for casinos that support multiple cryptocurrencies for deposits and withdrawals, including:

• Bitcoin (BTC) – Most widely accepted but with higher fees.

• Litecoin (LTC) – Faster transactions with lower fees (best Litecoin casinos often support this).

• Ethereum (ETH), Tether (USDT), and other altcoins – Provide additional flexibility.

Ensure the casino offers instant or fast withdrawals, as one of the main benefits of crypto gambling is speedy payouts.

Game Selection and Software Providers

The best casinos work with top-tier software developers, ensuring high-quality games and fair outcomes. Popular providers include:

• Pragmatic Play – Known for engaging slot games.

• Evolution Gaming – Best for live dealer games.

• Microgaming & NetEnt – Industry leaders in slots and table games.

A diverse game library, including slots, table games, and live dealer options, enhances the overall experience.

Fairness and Transparency

Reputable best crypto casinos Canada use provably fair technology, allowing players to verify game outcomes. Check for:

• RNG Certification – Ensures fair and random results.

• Provably Fair Games – Cryptographic proof that game results are not manipulated.

Always review the casino’s terms and conditions regarding payouts and bonuses to avoid hidden restrictions.

Bonuses and Promotions

Crypto casinos often offer generous welcome bonuses, but always check the terms before claiming. Look for:

• Low wagering requirements – Ideally under 40x for easier withdrawals.

• Crypto-exclusive promotions – Some sites offer bigger bonuses for Bitcoin or Litecoin deposits.

• Loyalty programs – Rewards for frequent players, including cashback and VIP perks.

Customer Support and Reputation

A good crypto casino should have 24/7 customer support, including:

• Live chat – Fastest and most convenient option.

• Email support – Useful for detailed inquiries.

• Community reputation – Check online reviews and forums for player feedback.

By considering these factors, Canadian players can find the best Litecoin casinos and other top crypto casino sites that offer security, fast payments, and a top-tier gaming experience. Always do your research and gamble responsibly.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Are Bitcoin casinos legal in Canada?
Yes, Canadians can legally play at offshore Bitcoin casinos, but these sites are not regulated by Canadian authorities.

2. What are the best cryptocurrencies for online gambling?
Bitcoin (BTC) is the most widely accepted, but best Litecoin casinos and those accepting Ethereum (ETH) or Tether (USDT) offer faster and cheaper transactions.

3. How can I tell if a crypto casino is legitimate?
Look for valid licensing, secure payments, provably fair games, and positive player reviews before depositing any funds.

4. Are crypto casino winnings taxable in Canada?
Casual gambling winnings are generally not taxed in Canada, but professional gambling income may be subject to taxation.

5. Can I withdraw my winnings in Canadian dollars (CAD)?
Some best crypto casinos in Canada allow CAD withdrawals through third-party exchanges, but most require converting crypto to fiat first.

Conclusion: Should You Play at Bitcoin Casinos?

If you’re tired of slow withdrawals, unnecessary banking restrictions, and outdated casino policies, then Bitcoin casinos are absolutely worth considering. The ability to deposit and cash out almost instantly, combined with bigger crypto bonuses and fewer verification hassles, makes them a game-changer. Traditional online casinos still have their place, but for players who value speed, privacy, and control over their funds, crypto gambling is the clear winner.

That said, not all crypto casinos are created equal, and the wild west nature of unregulated sites means you need to be smart about where you play. A legit, licensed Bitcoin casino with provably fair games and solid customer support is the sweet spot. If you do your research and stick to reputable platforms, crypto casinos can offer a superior gambling experience—one that traditional online casinos just can’t match.

In a political era where grandstanding often eclipses substance, President Hakainde Hichilema has quietly carved out a legacy not just of reform and economic recovery, but of deep, consistent compassion. One need not look far to find the latest evidence: the medical release of former Defence Minister Geoffrey Bwalya Mwamba (GBM), along with 11 other inmates suffering from terminal illnesses.

The President has not spoken about this in a press conference. There was no parade of praise, no choreographed show of benevolence. And yet, the action itself speaks volumes. For those who have followed his leadership closely, this is not out of character—it is the pattern of a man who governs not for applause, but for people.

Section 77(1) of the Zambia Correctional Service Act empowers the Commissioner-General, with the Minister’s approval, to release terminally ill inmates upon the advice of medical professionals. But laws, after all, are only as compassionate as the leaders who interpret them. In authorizing these releases, including that of a prominent opposition figure, President Hichilema demonstrated that his moral compass is not swayed by political lines.

Indeed, many would have expected the government to remain distant from such a decision, especially given GBM’s vocal opposition in the past. But the President chose humanity over hostility. This is the mark of true statesmanship—when compassion overrides political calculus.

Critics may argue that such actions should be made more visible. But perhaps it is this very humility—this refusal to trumpet his own mercy—that gives it authenticity. President Hichilema’s compassion is not performative. It is practical. Whether it is ensuring timely FISP delivery to vulnerable farmers or greenlighting medical discharges for terminally ill inmates, the President chooses to act rather than announce.

This same quiet resolve is also seen in his economic recovery strategy. While others demand overnight miracles, President Hichilema has steadily set the stage for long-term transformation: a growing network of roads under construction, the empowerment of communities through increased Constituency Development Fund (CDF) allocations, the launch of solar energy projects to ease the energy burden, the localization of farming input production, and a steady upsurge in tourism activity.

These initiatives are not slogans—they are seeds. And like any crop, they require time. It’s a wait-and-see moment for HH, but one that promises a harvest for the patient. The groundwork has been laid; the results will soon speak for themselves.

What many overlook is the broader message this sends to the nation: that Zambia is not a country that holds the sick and dying behind bars when there is no chance of recovery. That justice in Zambia is not vengeance, but fairness tempered with empathy. That leadership does not always shout—it sometimes whispers through deeds.

In a time when the world is hungry for leaders who lead with both strength and heart, Zambia can take pride in the quiet example being set at the top.

By Adrian Gunduzani, the silent observer

When President Kenneth Kaunda’s video resurfaced in which he ominously warned against then-candidate Hakainde Hichilema, I, like many who supported HH, brushed it off. Little did I know that ignoring his prophetic words would come back to haunt me. Kaunda, with the precision of a sniper, chose his words carefully, knowing full well the havoc the HH presidency would wreak on our beloved nation. Today, Kaunda’s urgent warning remains etched in our collective memory. He is daily haunted by our stubbornness. “I warned you,” I can hear him mourn from his grave, “this man is dangerous.”

President Kaunda’s admonition was not a whisper in the wind; it was an alarm—a kairos call to help us see Mr. Hichilema’s sweet promises for what they truly are: lies. To understand his humanity, one must see how he treats his opponents—he wants to drink their blood, just short of Idi Amin and Paul Kagame.

The showman-in-chief has since attempted to spin Kaunda’s words into a friendly embrace, smiling from beyond the grave. Yet the sting of Kaunda’s caution comes alive every time Hichilema utters KK’s name, goes to the airport, or sees his portrait. Incapable of governing, Hichilema, with his signature narcissistic flair, must hate Kaunda for so bluntly laying bare the hard truth. If KK is indeed what HH labels him—the father of the nation—then we’d be wise to heed his ancestral guidance about the man now at the helm.

Kaunda knew what many of us have come to realize: Hichilema cares little beyond the reflection staring back at him. He’s the “first president in history” to inherit a divided nation, negotiate with the IMF, and, of course, open the mines—an astounding list of “achievements” worthy of a reality TV show. Let’s not forget his historic crusade against corruption—did someone say monumental? Who investigates himself? Fortunately, he’s also the first to bask in the glory of unplastered toilets, all the while convincing outsiders that Zambia’s beautiful infrastructure is a testament to his visionary leadership. He is the first shameless man with the audacity to take credit for other presidents’ accomplishments—even things he openly demeaned. A champion, indeed! And how could we overlook that he’s the first president to honor the man who warned us he might be the most dangerous person to lead this country? Mr. Hichilema’s followers? Now shamefully terrified to chant “Bally will fix it” in public—there’s no louder applause than in the echoing silence of an unplastered toilet!

Enter the drama of “tribalism.” Like a character in a Nollywood drama, Hichilema weeps and wails, lamenting how his critics are Bemba tribalists and thieves.

One wonders: if the Bembas are tribalists, why did they vote for him? They must be either fools or the most patriotic Zambians—they can’t be both, surely! Yet it’s these “fools” who bear the brunt of the tribalist label. Today, they demand National Registration Cards for civil servants seeking promotions within their own departments. Tribe, village, and chief are now seen as patriotic qualifications! If you are not a commander, it is “passover!”

Today, questioning tribal loyalty is akin to declaring war on the very existence of God. Ministries like Agriculture are dominated by one sacred tribe, yet the president remains blissfully—or perhaps willfully—silent. It is not tribal favoritism, but tribal empowerment. It is affirmative action, the presidency once implied, having suffered years of oppression from despicable tribalists, hegemonists, and thieves. Thus, they do not promote tribes other than their own. Thick as thieves, they only affirm them, drawing the ire of the voiceless masses.

When it comes to voting, tribal patriotism shines brighter than a diamond in the summer sun. A three-decade-long love affair with one divine party and its Christ-like candidate—all aligned with their tribe. Don’t get me wrong! They’re not tribalists; they’re simply tribal patriots. Tribalists are often open-minded, but tribal patriots? They’re as closed off as a rusty lock. Only one among their ranks dares to govern, while the president hurls accusations of tribalism at other tribes yet turns a blind eye to the tribal patriots he relies upon, election after election. Without tribal patriots, his presidency is dead; his party is dead.

Tribalists from Luapula, Muchinga, and Northern gift him over 40% of their ballots. As for tribal patriots, 100% is assured to their sacred party. Why? Because tribal patriots know what’s best for their people—themselves. As for tribalists, they think of the nation. Anyone who promises them sweets, they follow. So did Levy Mwanawasa, Banda, Michael Sata, Edgar Lungu, and, of course, President HH! Like mercenaries, tribalists follow whoever has the purse. Nevers Mumba and Frank Bwalya? President HH is doing great—throwing tribalists into jail unless they kiss his boots. Chishimba Kambwili? Poor GBM? That once self-proclaimed champion, willing to die for HH? Well, now he’s dying in jail—a befitting end for a tribalist, hegemonist, and perhaps, a thief!

Kapya Kaoma!

Adalberto Costa Júnior and the New Wave of Accountability in Angola

Angola’s political scene is witnessing a surge of bold rhetoric from its leaders, challenging entrenched practices and calling for genuine transparency. Amid a climate of disillusionment over mismanaged public funds, two distinct voices have emerged as catalysts for change: the passionate social media outcries of parliamentarians and the uncompromising address of UNITA’s own Adalberto Costa Júnior.

In recent weeks, Angola’s legislative corridors have been reverberating with a new kind of dissent. Prominent lawmakers, including Arián Lusadisu Nhany and Anabela Sapalalo, have used Facebook as their podium to condemn what they describe as an endemic culture of unchecked favoritism and opaque public contracts.

Anabela Sapalalo’s post resonated deeply among citizens when she declared:

“No longer shall we stand by and watch Angola bleed from the hands of those who only serve themselves.”

Her statement, alongside similar sentiments voiced by Arián Lusadisu Nhany, has sparked widespread discussion online.  The main complaint of Anabela Sapalalo (Special Advisor to the President for Economic Affairs) is the lack of transparency in the government and its contracts: «This week, we had contact with the video of Activist Henrique Stress and the photo of the leaked document and it only confirms our doubts as citizens and people’s representatives in the National Assembly, the government is not being transparent. The public procurement model MPLA government has been using since 2017 (Direct Concession & Direct Procurement) does not guarantee free market competition, it directly affects the model recommended by IMF which is public tender. As a result, only a handful of companies linked to the regime continue to be favored and fattened with the accomplice look of Mr. President of the Republic. That’s very wrong. This document should be the target of investigation by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic, which at the headquarters of its functions, should look for the parties involved and here citing Mota-Engil and LAR, to explain the content of the letter and the model of project management. To be true, we are facing yet another case of corruption and influence trafficking on Lobito Corridor».

Ordinary citizens, frustrated by stagnant infrastructure and eroded public trust, have rallied behind these calls for accountability. The digital outcry not only reflects an urgent desire for reform but also signals a growing readiness among Angolans to demand that every public decision be subject to scrutiny.

The growing chorus of discontent reached a crescendo during the opening session of the XII parliamentary days in Cabinda, known as “Galo Negro.” Here, Adalberto Costa Júnior, the leader of UNITA, delivered an address that cut through the prevailing rhetoric with startling clarity and urgency.

Costa Júnior denounced the practice of awarding contracts without a public tendera method he described as the “new face of corruption.” He argued that these expedited, simplified processes have funneled vast sums of public money into private hands. According to his account, from 2018 until December 2024, an astonishing 32 billion kwanza (over 700 million dollars) was spent on such direct awards. For him, these figures are not mere statistics; they represent a systemic erosion of public trust and a dangerous opening for monopolies and emerging oligarchs.

“Large scale projects and essential public works are increasingly marred by cartel-like practices. From these off-the-record decisions, new millionaires and monopolies are being born this is corruption, but in a reinvented form that operates with impunity.”

This uncompromising critique not only challenges the current administrative methods but also questions the very foundations of how state resources are allocated. Costa Júnior’s address is both a call for immediate reform and a stark warning that if these practices continue unchecked, they will only further entrench a system that alienates the very people it is meant to serve.

These stirring voices come at a time when Angola’s promise of prosperity, buoyed by its natural resources, hangs in a delicate balance. The practical impact of bypassing standard public procurement procedures goes beyond financial mismanagement—it casts a long shadow over the country’s developmental prospects. While projects like the Lobito Corridor were once heralded as beacons of progress, they now risk becoming casualties in a system where short-term gains for the elite take precedence over sustainable national growth.

The combined force of grassroots digital activism and high-level political denunciations creates an unprecedented atmosphere of accountability. As citizens become increasingly aware of the mechanisms behind state spending, leaders like Costa Júnior and lawmakers like Sapalalo are positioned as potential harbingers of reform. Their messages underscore a crucial truth: genuine progress in Angola will require not only financial oversight but also a renewed commitment to democratic transparency.

The current momentum suggests that Angolans are no longer willing to passively witness a system that sidelines their future for the benefit of a select few. The dialogue initiated on social media, coupled with the formidable speeches in parliamentary halls, might well signal the beginning of a transformative period in Angolan politics. If these calls for transparency and reform gain sufficient traction, they could pave the way for more equitable governance and, ultimately, a brighter future for the nation.

By reimagining both the form and content, this piece shifts the focus from a mere exposé of corruption to a nuanced exploration of how brave political voices are challenging the status quo. It invites readers to consider that in the struggle for accountability, the power of honest discourse may be the most potent tool of all.