IF ZAMBIANS DON’T FUND MY CAMPAIGN, IT MEANS THEY’RE HAPPY WITH HOW THINGS ARE – SANGWA
MOVEMENT for National Renewal leader John Sangwa says he would rather not take part in an election than beg foreign interests to fund his campaign.
He adds that if he doesn’t receive campaign contributions from Zambians, it would indicate that citizens are satisfied with the current state of the country.
Meanwhile, Sangwa argues that Zambia’s judiciary is currently weak.
Appearing on the Justified Politics Podcast earlier this week, Sangwa said renewal was about trying something new.
“Renewal is not about doing the same thing, it’s actually about abandoning things that have been repeatedly done and trying something new. And no one has ever come out in Zambia to say I’m going to have my campaign fully funded by Zambians, we want to do that. And somebody asked me to say, what if you don’t get the money? Well, if I don’t get the money, it means Zambians are happy with the status and there is nothing I’m going to do about that, it’s as simple as that. I love my country and I can make sacrifices, but there is one line that I cannot cross and that is to start begging money from business interests and foreign interests, that I will not do. I would rather not take part in the election at all. If we don’t get the money, all what it means is that Zambians are happy with the way things are. If Zambians don’t fund it (campaign) then that’s it, I’ll respect that it’s a democracy after all,” he said.
Speaking on the independence of the judiciary, Sangwa said Zambia’s judiciary under the one-party state was more effective than it is now.
“What we have seen since 2021 is the complete distraction of oversight institutions. By oversight, I mean the Judiciary, you’re also talking about the National Assembly, you’re also talking about institutions like that of the Auditor General and all these institutions that are supposed to serve as a check on the presidency. They are either occupied by people that are sympathetic to the regime or they are just weak, underfunded and ultimately completely ineffectual.
They exist on paper but in real terms they are completely ineffective. What is worse in every country; I have a saying [that] it’s okay to have a corrupt and weak president, it’s okay to have a weak and corrupt National Assembly but you cannot survive to have a weak and corrupt Judiciary,” said Sangwa.
“Once you have that, you’re basically gone as a people and that is where we are. Not only is our Judiciary very weak but I have been practicing law for 36 years and I have never seen the Judiciary at this point in terms of weakness. In fact, the Judiciary we had during the time of one-party rule from 1972 to 1991 was a far more effective Judiciary than we currently have.
.So, really when you talk about Judiciary, you are not just being serious, this is an institution that has literally collapsed. Still on the Judiciary, the biggest problem is not really the structure of the institution, the biggest problem is the character of individuals appointed to these offices.
Recently they were recruiting some judges and I said as a way of improving the status of the Judiciary, can we have a transparent system of appointment? I’ve always challenged judges and some of them are my friends and I always say that none of the judges in Zambia often say they were appointed on merit. Not a single judge in Zambia can say ‘I was appointed on merit,’ why? There is no transparent system”.
News Diggers