Posts Tagged ‘Constitution’

A Comment on the New “People of This Way” Party

Sunday, April 17th, 2011

By HENRY KYAMBALESA

THE Registrar of Societies should not register the new political party called “People of This Way” or “People of The Way” announced on Muvi TV by Mr Bernard Mumba, and whose symbol is the Holy Bible. We should not allow any individual or group of individuals to use a religious platform to form a political party.

If it gets registered, it will open up a “can of worms” that will lead to those who believe in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism to attempt to establish and register political parties based on their religions.

There is a possibility that the formation of the new party is fostered by the Declaration of Zambia as a Christian Nation by Dr Frederick Chiluba at State House on 29th December 1991, which was later incorporated into the Preamble of the 1996 Republican constitution, and which the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) tried to retain in the failed Constitution of Zambia Bill, 2010.

It could also have been fostered by Article 16 of the same Bill about Christian Values and Principles, which could have provided for the State to “direct [its] … policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values, beliefs, ethics, and morals….”

For the umpteenth time, I wish to urge political, religious and community leaders in Zambia to guard against the imposition of any particular religion on the entire society. The Republican constitution particularly should be a neutral document that should not discriminate against atheists or pagans, or those who believe in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, or any other religious denomination.

In the long run, the Declaration is likely to make non-Christian citizens to feel that they are second-class citizens. And, as Venkatesh Seshamani has argued, a feeling of religious superiority is likely to develop among Christians by virtue of their religion having been accorded constitutional status, which may lead to bigotry that would prompt them to view non-Christians as lost souls.

Clearly, the Declaration was made without serious consideration of the dangers of dragging religion into the political arena. Religion is deadly if it is not handled with utmost caution. The precarious problem currently facing Algeria, Nigeria, the Sudan, Afghanistan, and a host of other countries around the world which are beleaguered by religious conflicts should serve as a clear warning to each and every peace-loving Zambian to refrain from creating a similar situation that will dog our beloved country in perpetuity.

We should not be blinded by our having experienced no serious religious conflicts so far, but as our country’s population and the membership of each religious denomination swells, we would be short-­sighted and naïve not to anticipate and make an effort to forestall the incidence of such conflicts. We need to act proactively. To wait until the consequences of our failure to reason are upon us is to leave serious problems for future generations to grapple with.

And such failure will eventually prove to us that experience, in relation to this issue, teaches fools, since we have thus far not been able to see beyond our noses.

What Zambia needs is a secular state that genuinely recognizes and safeguards each and every individual’s freedom of worship and the freedom to choose one’s religion. At the same time, we should enact legislation that should PROSCRIBE the following in a deliberate effort to forestall the potential for disruption of public order and socio-economic activities by cliques of fanatics from any religious denomination:

(a) The use of a religious platform by any individual or group of individuals to form a political party;

(b) The use of a religious platform by any individual to seek a leadership position in any of the three branches of government—that is, the legislature, the judiciary and the executive;

(c) Inclusion of denominational religious subjects in the curricula of schools funded by the government;

(d)  Religious sermons which are contemptuous to, or are designed to slight, other religious groupings or denominations;

(e) The use of public funds by a local or national government to set up a church or mosque, and/or to provide any form of support to any given religious group, institution or activity; and

(f) Official participation by government leaders in the affairs of any given religious group or institution, or official participation by any given religious leader or group in political or governmental affairs.

In countries where government leaders have not provided for these kinds of safeguards mainly due to lack of foresight, violent clashes among religious groups in their quest to dominate the political sphere, and to impose their religious laws on the citizenry, have become exceedingly difficult to contain.

As it is often said, prevention is better than cure!

Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohammad summed up the perilous nature of religious conflicts in his address to the World Evangelical Fellowship in May 2001 thus: “Once started, religious … [conflicts have] a tendency to go on and on, [and] to become permanent feuds.”

In a country that is already inundated by violence and threats of violence on a regular basis mainly by cadres from the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) and some of the opposition political parties, to add the potential for religious conflicts would be akin to spraying gasoline over burning charcoal.

In all, I am confident that religious institutions in Zambia will continue to provide the moral and spiritual direction to our nation in an era that has been high-jacked by unprecedented violence and moral decay, and to articulate the people’s demands on the government for a more democratic, more peaceful, more prosperous, more egalitarian, and more environmentally sustainable society.

Zambia: Moving toward a De Facto One-Party State

Sunday, January 2nd, 2011

By HENRY KYAMBALESA

Currently, Zambia can, by and large, be classified predominantly as a “repressive state,” that is, a nation-state where leaders impose sufficient repression on opposition political parties in order to keep them weak and maintain their own power, while adhering to enough democratic formalities that they might just pass themselves off as democrats.

Mildly, the country fits the description of a “criminal state,” that is, a nation-state where the government is oblivious to crimes committed by government leaders and the elite and, among other things, individuals with criminal records are appointed to positions of authority.

George Kunda

Vice President George Kunda on the onslaught

Zambia also temperately meets the characteristics of a “patrimonial state,” where government leaders treat the state as their own piece of property.  Moreover, the country fits the description of a “collapsed state,” that is, a nation-state in which common people are generally left to their own devices while government officials revel in conspicuous, state-financed luxury.

With respect to the country’s classification as a “repressive state,” we are very likely to see our beloved country turned into a de facto single-party state if the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) continues to rule the country beyond this year. I have provided a bird’s-eye view of the bases of my conclusion below.

MMD Manoeuvres:

Vice President George Kunda is apparently tasked to spearhead MMD’s onslaught on Zambia’s major opposition political parties and their leaders—the Patriotic Front (PF) and the United Party for National Development (UPND), and Hakainde Hichilema and Michael Sata. His incessant attacks and misinformation aimed at discrediting the PF-UPND pact and its leaders are unprecedented in our country’s history.

MMD leaders’ machinations against major opposition political parties are clearly and deliberately designed to impose sufficient repression on them in order to make them weak and maintain MMD’s stronghold on power. The poaching and appointments of Heritage Party, PF and UNIP members of parliament to positions of authority, and the constant invitations to members of opposition political parties to join the MMD, have the same rationale.

Constitutional Clauses:

Article 203(2) of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill 2010 states that “Any person or group of persons who desires to form a political party shall satisfy the Political Parties’ Commission that—(a) the party shall, within a period of twelve months from the date of its registration, have party structures in at least two-thirds of the number of provinces of Zambia. And in Article 205(1), it is stated that “The purpose of the Political Parties’ Fund shall be to provide financial support to registered political parties with seats in the National Assembly.”

Political parties are apparently expected to comply with the requirement in Article 203(2) with their own resources. Unfortunately, most political parties in the country do not have adequate financial and material resources to comply with this requirement. It is, therefore, essential for the Republican constitution to provide for a level-playing field so that it does not appear to favour political parties whose founders and members have deep pockets.

Such a requirement will eventually lead to a de facto one-party state, particularly in bad economic times, when political parties fail to raise enough financial and material resources to maintain the required party structures in at least two-thirds of the number of provinces of Zambia. It also imposes a one-size-fits-all type of organization structure on political parties. Some political parties may wish to operate from a single centralized location in order to reduce costs.

The question of whether or not a political party is regional or tribal should be left to voters. Voters are not daft; they will not popularly vote for presidential candidates from political parties which appear to be regional or tribal in nature. It is, therefore, enough to require all candidates for political office to have a specified number of supporters at the time of registration.

The Public Media:

Zambians are wary of the current situation whereby large segments of the mass media are state-owned, under tight controls by the MMD government, and the rights and freedoms of individuals and non-governmental institutions are subordinate to those of the ruling party and the state.

Unfortunately, this state of affairs has greatly and unfairly enhanced MMD’s competitive advantage over opposition political parties. And the continued push for statutory regulation of the media is a clear indication that MMD leaders represent their individual and partisan interests rather than the common interests of Zambians at large.

The express desire for statutory regulation of the media and the tight controls over public media institutions by the MMD are all partly designed to shut out the opposition and create a greater and unfair competitive edge for the MMD.

The Party and Its Government:

We have a political system that allows individuals to hold government and political party positions concurrently. This has inevitably distorted the boundary between national duties and party activities, and has culminated into what is commonly referred to as “the Party and Its Government” or “the PIG” phenomenon.

And we have failed to introduce provisos in the Republican constitution which would bar national leaders from actively performing political party functions. Also, we have failed to permit the Registrar of Societies to require all political parties in the country to include a clause in their constitutions providing for duties of party members who get elected or appointed to serve in either the judiciary or the executive branch of the national government to be assumed by incumbents of other offices within the party’s administrative and management structures.

The MMD is happy with the PIG since it has made it possible for the party to dominate the political arena through public resources used by government ministers during campaigns.

Conclusion:

Our country’s nascent political pluralism is clearly on the chopping block! If we ignore the foregoing signals and vote for the MMD later this year, we will actually be voting for a move to a new version of a one-party system of government. And we will be voting for a government that has thus far proved to be insensitive to the basic needs, expectations and aspirations of the majority of Zambians.

Nearly 20 years have passed since the MMD assumed the reins of power, but we still have a healthcare system which cannot meet the basic needs of the majority of citizens; tens of thousands of Grade 7 and Grade 9 students have continued to be spilled onto the streets every year; so many citizens have no access to clean water and electricity; and a critical shortage of decent public housing has compelled so many of our fellow citizens to live in shanty townships nationwide.

Moreover, public infrastructure and services are still deficient; civil servants are still not adequately compensated for their services; a lot of civil service retirees cannot get their hard-earned benefits; crime and unemployment are still widespread; taxes and interest rates are still very high; and, among many other socio-economic ills, the constitution-making process is still fraught with personal, partisan and short-term interests.

We need to pray hard for divine intervention in the governance of our Motherland. No sleep for our beloved country!

AN OPEN LETTER TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

Sunday, November 28th, 2010

By HENRY KYAMBALESA

It is encouraging that some of the suggestions made by Zambians regarding the contemplated new Republican constitution are incorporated into the just-released Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2010. We are clearly getting closer to the enactment of a Republican constitution that will stand the test of time!

I, however, wish to make a few comments and suggestions (relating to a sample of Articles in the Bill cited above), which are designed to make the Bill more acceptable to the majority of Zambians, and more credible in the eyes of the international community.

The Preamble:

The first three paragraphs of the Preamble should read as follows:

“We, the people of Zambia, by our representatives assembled in our Parliament,

ACKNOWLEDGE the supremacy of God Almighty;

UPHOLD the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion; …”

There is no country in the world today that can claim to be a Christian nation in its national constitution other than the State of Israel. But, unfortunately, the Holy Land DOES NOT even have an official religion! And only 2.1% of Israelis are designated as being Christian, while 76.3% are designated as being Jewish, 16% as being Moslems, and so forth.

What is really driving us to this level of religious fanaticism? Is it not enough to acknowledge the supremacy of God Almighty in the constitution?

Anyway, the Republican constitution should be a neutral document that should not appear to discriminate against atheists or pagans, or those who believe in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism. All these segments of Zambian society have a genuine stake in the Republican constitution and, therefore, deserve to be respected in spite of the fact that they are currently not as large as their Christian counterparts.

Christian Values and Principles:

Article 144 of the Bill, which is about Christian Values and Principles, should be removed because “directing the policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values” or beliefs which it espouses would be inconsistent with “upholding the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion” that is enshrined in the Preamble.

Zambian National Assembly

Coonstitution must embrace all religions

It is also not consistent with what is enshrined in Article 201(2)(a) of the Bill, which states that a political party shall not be founded on a religious basis, among other things. If it would be permissible for the national government to generate “policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values …,” why would it be wrong for a political party to fashion its existence and contemplated policies and laws that would have a religious bearing?

There is also a contradiction between Article 201(2)(a) cited above and Article 201(1)(g), which states that “A political party shall promote the objectives and principles of this Constitution and the rule of law,” which would essentially include the promotion of Christian values and principles!

By the way, there are no such things as “Christian values” or “Christian principles.” I know this because am actually a devout Christian! It is, therefore, not a good idea to load the Republican constitution with such unconventional terms.

Qualifications of Presidential Candidates:

The requirement in Article 34(1)(c) of the Bill that presidential candidates should have been resident in Zambia for 10 consecutive years preceding any given presidential election are clearly designed to exclude certain individuals from contesting the Republican presidency. It is obvious that this Clause could not have been included in the Bill if the MMD presidential candidate in the 2011 general elections—that is, Mr. Rupiah Banda—had been working or studying in a foreign country over the last 5 or so years.

What is really the rationale for such a Clause? Apart from mimicking other countries which have a similar requirement in their national constitutions, what is it supposed to achieve?

There are many reasons why Zambians temporarily reside in foreign countries, such as to pursue studies, to work for the Zambian government in foreign missions, to work at foreign-based branches of companies registered in Zambia, to pursue investment opportunities, to seek employment due to the widespread unemployment currently obtaining in the country, or to serve the country at the African Union, SADC and COMESA regional offices.

These are all good reasons why some Zambian citizens have, now and again, found themselves temporarily residing in foreign countries. Why, then, should their native country’s constitution deny them the opportunity to vie for the Republican presidency?

Besides, there is really nothing sinister about Zambians who may happen to reside in foreign countries for 10 years prior to any given presidential election. In fact, we should consider it a blessing to have citizens who have lived in foreign countries to contest the Republican presidency because of their wide exposure, as bystanders, to the strengths and weaknesses of different modes of governance applied in different national settings.

Technically, the requirement affects even citizens who are currently serving our beloved country in foreign countries, such as Dr. Nevers Mumba and Dr. Inonge Mbikusita-Lewanika, and politicians like Mr. Tilyenji Kaunda who, I believe, conducts a business in neighboring Zimbabwe. Or is there going to be subsidiary legislation designed to exempt such people from the requirement?

No Amendments, Please!

From the beginning of the on-going constitutional process, there has been a general clamour by Zambians for a completely new Republican constitution. Any deviation from this expectation is, therefore, autocratic and a reflection of the political malfeasance which has become ingrained in our beloved country over the years. And, by and large, Zambians expect the new Republican constitution to include the following:

(a) Provision for the appointment of ministers by the Republican President from among persons qualified to be elected as members of parliament, but who are not members of parliament;

(b) Provision for the election of the Republican President under a system where the winning candidate should receive not less than 50 percent plus one vote of the valid votes cast;

(c) Provision for the Republican Vice President to be elected as a running mate to any citizen seeking to be elected as Republican President;

(d) Provision for a consultative, transparent and accountable debt contraction law designed to give power to Parliament to oversee and approve all loans to be contracted by the government on behalf of Zambians; and

(e) Provision for religious neutrality by removing the declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation and any related Articles and Clauses.

If these concerns cannot be addressed now, we should hold the forthcoming tripartite elections under the 1996 constitution in its current form. There is really no wisdom in trying to push through a constitutional Bill which has so many contentious issues and inconsistencies—the kinds of issues and inconsistencies which are predictably going to elicit nationwide demonstrations and potentially culminate in losses of property and human life.