Gavel in the Spotlight: Hon. Imanga Wamunyima Jr.’s Duty to Impartiality Is Not Optional
The role of a Parliamentary Select Committee Chairperson in Zambia’s National Assembly is built on one central principle: impartiality. When a committee is gathering submissions on a matter as important as a constitutional amendment, such as Bill No. 7, the Chairperson must act as a neutral referee, not a participant in the debate.
This is why the conduct of Hon. Imanga Wamunyima Jr., MP for Nalolo and Chairperson of the Select Committee, has raised serious concerns.He openly criticized the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) President during the committee session and later reinforced his position through a social media post, suggest a worrying breach of parliamentary norms and Standing Orders.
Under parliamentary procedure, a Committee Chairperson represents the Speaker when presiding over proceedings. This comes with one critical expectation: strict neutrality. The Chairperson is responsible for regulating debate, ensuring order, and allowing all witnesses to present their views freely. Committee sessions are not platforms for personal or political confrontation.
They are fact-finding forums designed to help Parliament make decisions based on objective, balanced submissions. When a Chairperson attacks, challenges, or pressures a witness, as was the case, it undermines the integrity of the process and violates the principle of fairness that is central to parliamentary democracy.
Beyond the committee room, Hon. Wamunyima’s decision to make a social media post immediately after the exchange—“eyes on the ball”, blurred the line between his official duty and personal political agenda. As Chairperson, he is expected to set aside his own views and facilitate open dialogue. Public commentary that appears to validate his earlier behaviour risks giving the impression that the proceedings were driven by partisan interests rather than the national interest.
For a constitutional matter that affects every citizen, this erosion of neutrality is not a minor issue; it threatens the legitimacy of the committee’s eventual report, especially given that the Bill 7 and the constitutional amendment process were declared illegal by the court. The behaviour of the Chair sends a troubling message that the Bill must pass regardless, and that the UPND government must be granted its “shopping list” through Bill 7.
This incident also has wider implications for democratic institutions. LAZ, a key stakeholder in legal and constitutional matters, plays a major role in safeguarding the rule of law. When the Chairperson publicly challenges the association’s official position during a hearing, it sends the wrong signal to other institutions and citizens who may wish to provide honest submissions.
Stakeholders must feel safe, respected, and free from intimidation when presenting before Parliament. Anything less risks silencing important voices and weakening the democratic process—already under strain considering how the UPND government under President HH has handled the constitutional reform process.
In the end, the Chairperson’s gavel is not a weapon for political argument, it is a symbol of integrity, decorum, and fair procedure. Zambia’s democracy depends on leaders who understand and respect this responsibility.
Hon. Imanga Wamunyima Jr.’s conduct serves as a reminder that the country is bigger than the Chairperson, and that those trusted with guiding national dialogue must rise above personal positions and political loyalties. Impartiality in parliamentary committees is not just preferred, it is non-negotiable.
The Struggle Continues
Sensio Banda
Former Member of Parliament
Kasenengwa Constituency
Eastern Province
Is persuading a pertitioner to argue for or against a sign of partisanship by the Chair Imanga Wamunyima? Definitely NO. The writer of the article is dead wrong. His manipulated thinking stinks like a ten day corpse. Former MP, you are offside
Well said. The former MP wants to intimidate us with his terminologys and warped analogy. Please sit down bwana. The LAZ President was not sticking to his written submission which he said he would present to the Committee. Why mislead the committee submitting on thing and saying another. Zulu is an embarassment to the profession and a disgenious person in character if that is how he going to conduct himself.
What was the Oasis Chairperson doing there? Is she part of LAZ? Zulu should be impeached for allowing another person to misrepresent the institution. A spade is spade not a shovel and these are the kind of people that pretend to pead but serve themselves in their “clothed” agendas.
Am glad this was shut down the manner it was. And shows the trite in the current LAZ leadership and Oasis forum to upsurp what might be a constructive attenpt to amend the said bill.