A BRIEF HISTORY OF MEDIA REFORMS IN ZAMBIA – A DREAM DEFERRED
By Kellys Kaunda
In 1993, media associations met at Ibis Hotels in Chisamba to identify a series of laws that required reforms to make Zambia a more democratic country. In attendance were representatives from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Services. Prominent among the suggested reforms were the ZNBC Act, the need for the establishment of an Independent Broadcasting Authority, Freedom of Information, and the decriminalization of the defamation law.
Remember that this was barely two years after the historic 1991 multiparty elections which meant that the suggested reforms were intended to consolidate Zambia’s democracy. The media associations were acutely aware of the foundational nature of political reforms without which any other gains, including those on the economic front, would be fragile and unsustainable.
Tragically, political parties that Zambia has seen come and go have either implemented halfheartedly the suggested reforms, stalled the process or rejected them altogether. Irritatingly, the stumbling blocks have always been the political players and their supporters who, while in the opposition, speak loudly in favor of political reforms.
When the current Vice President, Mrs. Nalumango was Minister of Information, as media associations, we took her government to court when she raised concerns regarding the list of names the appointments’ committee had submitted to her to sit on either the IBA or ZNBC board (I can’t remember immediately which of the two institutions) which she was expected to take to Parliament for ratification. Our argument was that the Minister was a mere conduit for purposes of parliamentary ratification and that her concerns were not necessary, a position she vehemently rejected.
Tragically, that has been the attitude of every government in this country towards democratic reforms to this day. For politicians in this country, democracy is only useful when they are in the opposition because it serves the purpose of aiding their narrow self-serving agenda – use citizens to get them into office and damp the reform agenda once power is secured.
Under the “new dawn” government, the arguments once again are that President Hichilema is busy with more important things to concern himself with political reforms. Expanding the democratic space is, under the New Dawn government, a dream deferred.