HH PLOTTING UPND DOWNFALL
…taking us back to a Zambia we don’t want – Sishuwa
By Ernest Chanda
PRESIDENT Hakainde Hichilema is taking us back to a Zambia we do not want and digging his political grave, charges University of Zambia lecturer Sishuwa Sishuwa.
He argues that “by promoting tribalism in public appointments, ignoring and possibly participating in corruption, mismanaging a poor economy, arresting critics, undermining democratic institutions, and delaying institutional reform, President Hakainde Hichilema is taking us back to a Zambia we do not want and digging his political grave”.
Commenting on good governance activist Brebner Changala’s observations that President Hichilema was copying former president Edgar Lungu’s tribal agenda, Dr Sishuwa said he cannot understand why the Head of State is doing the same things Zambians opposed under the PF.
“Changala says Hichilema is copying Lungu’s tribalism. Hichilema is not copying; he is practicing his own tribalism with Lozis, Tongas and those from North Western Province being the biggest beneficiaries. Have you observed that many of the people who do not see tribalism in the appointments that Hichilema is making to key public offices (security, constitutional, boards, etc) are mostly those of us who hail from Western, Southern, and North Western provinces? Have you wondered why? We did not oppose Lungu’s tribalism so that Hichilema could initiate his own. We want an inclusive Zambia, where no one region dominates appointments to public office,” he said.
“One key criticism of Lungu’s rule was that he marginalised Zambians from Southern, Western and North Western provinces, regions that have historically voted for Hichilema. Most of Lungu’s ministers, for instance, were either from the Chewa-speaking Eastern province or from one of three Bemba-speaking provinces. This preference was also seen clearly in the top leadership positions of the police, army, air force, national service, and office of the president. Hichilema promised to do things differently if elected but has barely delivered.”
Dr Sishuwa said while President Hichilema’s Cabinet “is relatively representative of Zambia’s 10 provinces”, areas that historically voted for PF are grossly underrepresented while most ministers are from ethnic groups that have typically formed the core of the President’s base.
“The key ministries (home affairs, defence, finance, justice, education, local government and many more), the leadership positions of all the five security services, the leadership of the justice system, and most permanent secretaries in the civil service are all held by people from the region that has traditionally voted for Hichilema,” he noted.
“Added to this are most of the appointments to the diplomatic service, boards, State House, and more recently the Electoral Commission of Zambia. There has been a near complete reversal whereby yesterday’s victors have become today’s victims and vice versa. Among other things, this adds to the risk of a vicious cycle whereby each new leader continues this trend and makes it more likely that the next election will be driven by ethnic rather than policy considerations.”
Dr Sishuwa said another disappointing feature of Hichilema’s presidency has been in the area of institutional democratic reform.
“I am aware that Hichilema is soon to travel to the US for the democracy summit where Joe Biden is set to recognise him as one of the good leaders in Africa committed to promoting democracy and human rights. This premature recognition has little to do with Hichilema’s record on these issues, which is poor. It has more to do with Biden’s desperate attempt to counter what the US sees as the growing illiberal influences of China and Russia in Africa. After a year in office, Hichilema’s administration is yet to repeal laws that undermine human rights or enact legislation that strengthens accountable democratic governance. Yes, democracy and human rights were seriously eroded under Lungu, but the repressive legislation that enabled his authoritarian tendencies remains on the statutes. Indeed, Hichilema is now shamelessly presiding over the use of laws such as defamation of the president, which effectively criminalises criticism of the President, and the cyber security Act to arrest his critics and political opponents,” he noted.
“Even the notorious public order Act also remains intact. Hichilema’s pledge to pass a law on access to information has seen a similar lack of progress. Like many governments before it, the current one has also now dragged its feet on passing an Act – or even producing a draft bill – that would make government more transparent and corruption easier to observe. This procrastination is symptomatic of the new dawn administration’s lack of willingness to make structural changes that would strengthen accountable governance. As a result, Zambian institutions remain as susceptible to manipulation now as they were under Lungu. While in opposition, Hichilema promised wide democratic reforms. Now in office, his administration has recognised the advantage of leaving laws that restrict the opposition in place.”
And Dr Sishuwa says the biggest opposition that the UPND faces is an alert and politically engaged citizenry and not an organised political party.
“All considered, the President of Zambia is working hard to be voted out of office by promoting tribalism in public appointments, ignoring and possibly participating in corruption, mismanaging a poor economy, arresting critics, undermining democratic institutions and delaying institutional reform. I think many Zambians are now beginning to wake up to the ugly reality that Hichilema may not be what we thought he was. In a sense, Hichilema is Edgar Lungu with a better international PR (public relations). As did Lungu, the current President is taking us back to a Zambia we do not want and appears determined to unite Zambians against his leadership and plot the UPND’s downfall,” argued Dr Sishuwa.
“I get a sense that having been elected with a popular mandate, Hichilema thinks there is no credible opposition to unseat him. In my view, the biggest opposition that he faces is an alert and politically engaged citizenry, not an organised party. The latter will rise organically and should be the least of his concerns. What Hichilema must fear most is already in place: the voter. Discontent will not wait until there is an effective opposition party to harvest it. The voter in Zambia, unlike elsewhere, has taken over the traditional role of the opposition.”