KALUSHA IS ELIGIBLE FOR FAZ PRESIDENT: Only Those Who Hate Democracy & Have An Agenda Against Zambian Football Want Him Disqualified

By Augustine Mukoka

KALUSHA IS ELIGIBLE FOR FAZ PRESIDENT: Only Those Who Hate Democracy & Have An Agenda Against Zambian Football Want Him Disqualified

As the FAZ elections approach and candidates line-up, there’s a calculated attempt to disqualify formidable opponents in the court of public opinion and later by abusing the so called integrity test.

Among those being targeted for disqualification is 2012 Africa Cup of Nations winning FAZ president Kalusha Bwalya. The incumbent at FAZ has told his associates that Kalusha will not pass the integrity test.

Unfortunately, even those recruited to parrot this agenda are referring their readers or supporters to the FAZ Constitution & the electoral code but they are not citing specific provisions that stop Kalusha from contesting the election.

Let me help a number of those going about with their Not Eligible song understand why Kalusha is eligible unless someone is just scared of the dictates of democracy.

It’s given that Kalusha suffered an infraction that attracted FIFA’s wrath and was later reprieved. He was allowed to continue playing a role in football and his CAF position was restored. So, the question about his encounter on the wrong side of FIFA is a bygone. It can never be used against him in his future aspirations to seek football office.

This position is backed by the FAZ Constitution.  The FAZ Constitution is explicit. An individual can be jailed for three years, e.g for stealing goats or any other infraction, but should such an individual later seek FAZ office, they’re welcome to do so provided they meet other qualification criteria.

Therefore, the issue that Kalusha had with FIFA is a closed matter. In fact, he served less than three years and was expressly written to by the same FIFA and told to be free to participate in any role in the game. So why should one plan to use a closed chapter against Kalusha? Fear of competition at the ballot is a symptom of dictatorship.

Secondly, there’s an argument that Kalusha has not served football actively at executive level for three years in the 10 years preceding the election. Unless you’re a bogus financial expert, you should know that the 10 years preceding next year’s election dates back to 2015.

Kalusha was FAZ president up-to March 2016 when Andrew Kamanga took over. It means Kalusha was in active football administration for one season – 2015 to 2016.

The last two seasons, Kalusha has been a registered board member of Inter Lusaka FC. That, therefore, should solve the three year active administration requirement in the last 10 years. Critics would argue, Kalusha’s year between 2015 and 2016 was not with a FAZ member. Well, that argument applies to Kamanga as well in the last nine years – he has been head of the FAZ ExCo which prevents him from being an official at a club. That’s why he has not served any member of FAZ but by virtue of being in the executive, the operation of the constitution considers him to have been active in administration just like Kalusha was from 2008 to 2016. Any active administration before 2015 does not count in meeting the 3 year requirement ahead of the 2025 FAZ election. Nonetheless, two seasons with Inter Lusaka FC & one season as FAZ president cures that requirement for Kalusha.

Thirdly, there are those who claim Kalusha is not resident in Zambia. The fact that the FAZ Constitution status you ‘Must Ordinarily’ be resident in Zambia does not make it mandatory to live in the country. All that the FAZ Constitution has done is to request a candidate to maintain a residence in the country. And Kalusha has a residence in Zambia – his country of birth which he has served diligently and with honours.

For the avoidance of any, according to the FAZ Electoral Code,

The candidate or holder shall be deemed not to have passed the integrity check, if he:

a) has been subject to criminal convictions or disciplinary sanctions by a state court, in particular if the offence in question was a substantive issue and not a minor infraction or procedural misconduct;

b) has been found guilty and/or sentenced by the FIFA Ethics Committee or any other sporting body with a sanction that would seriously put into question the discharge of the office concerned.

The FIFA sanctions on Kalusha was lifted and case concluded. It’s now a bygone much like one being convicted for three years and is still able to contest FAZ elections. Why should the rules be different for Kalusha?

Evidently, Kalusha is eligible to contest the FAZ presidency unless someone is scared of competition on the ballot.