Is the Deregistration of NAQEZ Legally Justified or a Threat to Civil Society? Did NAQEZ Act Ultra Vires?
By Joe Prince Makungu – The VOICE
The Government has NOT publicly provided a detailed LEGAL JUSTIFICATION for the recent deregistration NOTICE issued to the National Action for Quality Education in Zambia (NAQEZ). Consequently, the LEGALITY of this move remains a matter of SPECULATION and growing concern within legal, academic and civil society circles.
Did NAQEZ Act Ultra Vires?
The term ULTRA VIRES refers to actions taken BEYOND the jurisdiction or legal powers/ authority granted to an organization by its constitution, laws or governing statutes.
At present, there is no publicly available evidence suggesting that NAQEZ acted ultra vires. The organization seemed to have been operating within its established mandate of ADVOCACY for quality education, policy dialogue and representation of educators’ interests.
Its recent call for a nationwide teachers’ STRIKE, though controversial, arguably falls WITHIN the legitimate scope of civil society’s rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly, as enshrined pursuant to Articles 20 and 21 of the Zambian Constitution and in accordance with Zambia’s obligations under international human rights instruments.
Furthermore, Article 118(2)(e) of the Zambian Constitution mandates all authorities to promote alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, implying that deregistration should only be used as a LAST resort, not the first step.
Unless the government can clearly DEMONSTRATE that NAQEZ violated provisions of the NGO Act, breached its own constitution, or engaged in prohibited activities such as inciting violence or participating in PARTISAN politics, any claim that NAQEZ acted ULTRA VIRES remains legally unsubstantiated.
CRITICISM of government policy or peaceful mobilization of professional stakeholders does NOT in itself constitute reasonable grounds for deregistration.
LEGAL CONCERNS AND DUE PROCESS OF LAW
The primary concern is the apparent lack of DUE PROCESS in the deregistration action. Even if the government believes NAQEZ VIOLATED legal provisions, it remains bound by constitutional and administrative law principles to:
☑️Clearly inform the organization of any alleged violations;
☑️Offer an opportunity for the organization to be heard through a fair and impartial process;
☑️Provide written reasons for its decision;
☑️Allow for an appeal or judicial review.
FAILURE to observe these procedural steps raises the risk of arbitrary administrative action, which could be CHALLENGED in the courts as unconstitutional.
CONCLUSION
In the ABSENCE of official documentation outlining the legal grounds for deregistration, the government’s action against NAQEZ appears legally QUESTIONABLE. There is no public indication that the organization acted OUTSIDE its legal mandate. On the contrary, the LACK of transparency and DISREGARD for due process of law could be viewed as ULTRA VIRES on the part of the regulatory authorities themselves.
The IMPLICATIONS are serious. This move may send a chilling MESSAGE to other CIVIL SOCIETY organizations that SPEAKING OUT against government policy, even lawfully — could result in PUNITIVE action. Such a precedent undermines Zambia’s stated commitments to democratic governance, transparency and FREEDOM of expression.
As the situation evolves, attention now turns to the government’s NEXT steps. Will it provide a credible LEGAL BASIS for deregistration? Will NAQEZ seek legal redress? And will civil society, regional bodies and international observers rally to DEFEND the rule of law and constitutional freedoms?
Ultimately, how NAQEZ is treated will serve as a LITMUS TEST for Zambia’s commitment to DEMOCRATIC values. In a functioning democracy, the VOICE of CIVIL SOCIETY is not a threat, but a necessary force for progress.
By Joe Prince Makungu – The VOICE
Unless Mr Joe Prince Makungu wants to play politics (together with NAQEZ), what’s so difficult to see about NAQEZ’s mischief where it is now behaving like a full fledged trade union. Was it registered to be calling for national work stoppages and strikes? Objectivity can really be scarce for some people eehh!
@ EMC, Exactly the point. An NGO is different from a Trade Union. A Trade Union has affiliate members who contribute for representation and do enter a recognition agreement with the employer. They set between them rules of engagement and how to handle certain pressing issues through dialogue. In the case of NAQEZ it’s an NGO with no recognition agreement with government as a teacher Union. Being an advocacy group alone is no sufficient grounds to call for Strikes and work stoppages as these are the preserve of trade union and guided by the respective collective agreements. How can an organisation without Membership and collective agreement recognition call for a strike action? In whose interest is such an action called? What would be the wider implications of such an NGO ACTION to the smooth industrial relations across all labour sectors in the country?
But what does NAQEZ stand for where teaching service is concerned.I have never seen multiple of unions in any organization than the teaching service.The teachers must not allow this kind of disorganization.These UNIONS are just too many.The Registrar of societies must call them all and make an understanding as to who is who and who stands for what.The teaching service is a professional body and it must exhibit some smart organization in representation of our teachers in our country.The symptoms of monopoly of good thinking in the other organization causes confusion.It like they play a role of consultancy yet they want to engineer unnecessary actions.They must be checked well before they cause havoc.