Press statement for immediate release from Senior Chief Mukuni
(Kazungula, Livingstone and Zimba Districts)

7th March 2020

PF’S RALLY WELCOME IN LIVINGSTONE, PREACH PEACE AND UNITY.

I am pleased to note that in his State of the Nation address (SONA) at Parliament yesterday President Edgar Lungu condemned hate speech which in all intents and purposes has been practised by his own Party. The President’s words will give confidence and hope to the nation if he demonstrates his seriousness over the matter by dismissing government and party leaders that took part in the hate speech recently. Further he should encourage the Zambia Police to bring the culprits to book.

In view of the above and in the same vein, I wish to welcome the PF mobilization rally in Livingstone and urge them to preach peace and national unity, and for a change, let them be credited in avoiding ethnic hate speech against the people of Southern Province, which tragically characterized their political party, especially during the Chilubi by election in the Northern Province a few weeks ago. Let them attentively listen to President Edgar Lungu’s SONA address and change their behavior.

I sincerely believe that Zambian citizens of all tribes, races, religions and political persuasions, must feel safe and welcome anywhere in Zambia because these are the shared values with which President Kenneth David Kaunda, Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula and other founding fathers and mothers, founded Zambia upon.This is the Zambian spirit.

As a traditional leader, I rule over a multi faceted population of different tribes, races, national and regional backgrounds. In these communities are people that practice Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Bahai Faith, Traditional African ancestral religions, but all live in harmony with each other. This is who we are as Zambians, and going foward this is who, we should be.

And so when I hear a politician say this one is from this tribe and therefore isn’t fit for the Presidency, or these people from this or that tribe are like this or that animal, utterances that cast aspersions and dehumanize fellow citizens who have no prerogatives to choose which tribe or region to be born from, I will feel extremely troubled and alarmed, and will spare no effort in condemning such behavior, that has potential to cause citizen to rise against citizen. I strongly feel that all traditional leaders right across Zambia, must not be silent but vehemently disapprove such conduct.

God bless you and God bless the Republic of Zambia.

Senior Chief Mukuni,
Kazungula, Livingstone and Zimba Districts.

By Dr Nevers Mumba

MY COUNSEL TO CHELLAH TUKUTA:
==========================================
In the past few days, inappropriate content and pictures involving and depicting one, Cornelius Tukuta Chellah have been circulating on social media. My interest to make a comment arises from the fact that, Cornelius has been working on our media team as a photographer.

To say the least, the pictures have been gross and none of us in the team ever thought our greatly talented young man would take such an immoral detour from the values that we all consider critical to national building. As leader of the New Hope MMD, I wish to place it on record that I condemn this inappropriate behavior and distance the party from the character that Cornelius has depicted over the past few days.

Every leader faces moments when someone around them suffers a moral setback, becomes corrupt or just goes rogue. At this moment it’s the leader’s values and strength of leadership which are on trial. Since these assistants are usually very close and sometimes even humanly “indispensable” most leaders fail to provide leadership in such moments. It is such inaction to speak out against the wrongs of those close to us that shows our own failure to provide leadership.

Cornelius is a gifted young man. A prolific photographer of international acclaim. He is a CNN Africa Photographer Award Winner. He is one of Zambia’s best. It is therefore extremely painful for me to see him sink so low morally and pose a threat to the very standard of morals that have brought us together as a team.

The sanctity of family is the bedrock of any resilient society. Cornelius is a married man with two beautiful children. His responsibility is to love his wife and children and protect them from anything that could harm them including public ridicule. His conduct therefore is highly regrettable.

While some leaders may publicly disown one who falters as Cornelius has, we have decided to provide counseling and help for him to overcome this moral failure. We trust the Lord that in his mercy, our young man shall rise up and be the responsible husband, father and citizen he needs to be. We condemn his behavior but we reach out for his healing.

In working through this restitution we expect that Cornelius shall offer a full hearted apology to both his family and to the many friends that have held him in high esteem.

Until this is done he has been advised that He WILL NOT to carry out any role in the New Hope MMD media team. We consider character to be more useful than the gift he has. We remain hopeful that the counsel and measures taken shall assist in bringing restoration to Mr Chellah.

POLICE Spokesperson Esther Katongo says it was intentional to conceal the identity of the person who was allegedly killed by Kabaso Mulenga alias Spax in order to avoid jeopardise investigations.

And Katongo says people were paid to participate in mob justice against gassing suspects.

Meanwhile, Katongo says PF vice-chairperson for mobilization Geoffrey Bwalya Mwamba never availed any information to police despite claiming he knew the gassing master minders.

Speaking when she appeared on 5 FM’s the Burning Issue Radio programme, Thursday, Katongo said police were still investigating the murder case in which Spax was implicated.

“The fact that we have told you that we are investigating the case of murder, we have not given you information on who this person has killed, there could be a reason why we have not giving you that person. It could be there are other people that we want to apprehend in connection to that case. Even the witnesses can even be compromised and the like. When we give you information that is what is appropriate for us. When you look at the issue of Spax, the murder issue, this is an issue where officers still need to get statements from other witnesses. We have opened a docket and we have recorded statements from witnesses and we feel we need to get other witnesses who we have spotted so that we can get statements from them and put them together so that we can get ready to go to court. Meaning that investigations have not yet been concluded,” Katongo said.

She explained that issuing warn and caution statements to suspects was mandatory.

“I believe people mistook that for severely warning someone. There are instances where we severely warn someone, you tell them, ‘next time don’t do this’ and you let them go. But when you talk about a warn and caution, this is procedure for every person that has been picked by police, even when you are about to conclude the investigation or before charging someone, you have to warn and caution them to say as police this is the matter we have picked you for. You don’t get someone and just dump that person without explaining why that person has been picked. Whether it is assault, theft, a felony like murder, or aggravated robbery, a suspect has to be warned and cautioned. At times if you skip that in court, the defense party may even take that as an issue to their advantage. So you cannot just keep someone in detention without that person knowing why they are in detention. This person is in detention and waiting to be charged. Investigations are going on well and very soon we will be announcing our first step,” Katongo said.

And Katongo said some people were paid to participate in mob justice.

“Whenever there is trouble, whenever there is public disorder, stay away from such groupings. Whenever you are found, you are part and parcel of that group. So whenever you see people engaging themselves in mob justice, as a law abiding citizen move away from that place, inform authorities to say this is what is happening. And for those getting into mob justice, you should know that at the end of this all, you can be apprehended and charged accordingly. Some of those people who were initiating these issues, some of them were paid to do that and you helped the criminals to gas you, after they gas you, you helped them to kill innocent people that is what those who did that did,” Katongo said.

Meanwhile, when asked by a caller why police did not take seriously GBM’s claims that he knew the people that were behind the gassing activities, Katongo said it was the decision of the police to select where they felt they could take action.

“The problem that we have is that people like comparing when it comes to politics and I am not comfortable with that. Whatever happens, it is like in a home, this one does something, you beat that child, then the next time another person will do something, you don’t beat that child and those who are seeing will be saying ‘ah no, why uyu bamu menya uyu sibana mumenye’ (why didn’t they beat the other child as well) it goes with the elements that constitutes what someone says. How serious is what someone has said? And in what context was that thing said? So for us, we have said that so many times and we will continue saying that no matter how many names you are going to call us, we move where we feel we can move,” responded Katongo.

“We make our independent judgement depending on what someone has spoken and from what someone has spoken, we pick out elements to say what offence does this constitute. What implications may this have, and then when we see that there are these implications, then we move in and question this person and maybe warn and let that person go. But when you look at where he is saying ‘I have information’ we have heard a lot of accusations, from what political parties are saying and they want to drag the police in this, which we have said no. Even this investigation of the chemical spraying, we have been doing it ourselves without influence. If Mr GBM had information, he would have brought that information.”

PATRIOTS for Economic Progress leader Sean Tembo says he is disappointed by the failure of the Constitutional Court to impose appropriate sanctions against Speaker Patrick Matibini for his willful breach of the Constitution in the Roan parliamentary seat case.

Tembo, who welcomed the court’s judgment in the case in which it said among others that Dr Matibini exceeded his powers in declaring the Roan seat vacant, however noted that the Speaker either knew or should have known that his action constituted an interpretation of the Constitution which is an exclusive preserve of the Judiciary, and was therefore illegal.

“As Patriots for Economic Progress (PeP), we welcome the judgment of the Constitutional Court in the Roan parliamentary seat case in which the Court made a number of important determinations which include the fact that Speaker Patrick Matibini exceeded his powers in declaring the Roan parliamentary seat vacant, and also that the principle of exclusive cognizance is not absolute and applies only to internal procedural matters and could not be used by the Speaker as an excuse for breaching the Constitution or usurping the power to interpret the Constitution, which power is solely vested in the Judiciary,” Tembo said.

He said by failing to impose the necessary punishment on Dr Matibini for his gross transgressions in this matter, the Constitutional Court did not only reward the Speaker for his bad behaviour, but it also effectively reduced itself to an academic institution that issues academic judgments, long after the fact, instead of being a court that dispenses justice and prevents future bad behaviour.

Tembo said bad behaviour must be punished and not rewarded.

“As Patriots for Economic Progress, we are disappointed by the failure of the Constitutional Court to impose appropriate sanctions against Speaker Matibini for his willful breach of the Constitution. It is worth noting that before becoming Speaker of the National Assembly, Mr Patrick Matibini was a Judge of the High Court, of reasonable repute,” he said. “Therefore, he either knew or should have known that his action of declaring the Roan seat vacant constituted an interpretation of the Constitution, which act is an exclusive preserve of the Judiciary, and was therefore illegal. Therefore, the Constitutional Court should have imposed appropriate sanctions against Speaker Matibini’s glaring misconduct and illegality in this matter.”

Tembo said he was further disappointed by the failure of the Constitutional Court to award damages to Chishimba Kambwili for the undue loss of privilege and rewards as member of parliament for Roan Constituency.

He said there was surely no question about the fact that the petitioner suffered damages as a result of his tenure as Roan MP being curtailed because of the illegal actions of Speaker.

Tembo noted however that instead of addressing the petitioner’s case in its totality, the court unfortunately only cherry-picked that component that directly affected it, and in the process rendered a self-serving judgment that fell far from any characterisation of dispensing justice.

“Therefore, it remains a wonder as to the reasoning of the court in deciding not to award damages to the Petitioner. Overall, as Patriots for Economic Progress, it is our considered view that in rendering this judgment, the Constitutional Court was not motivated by the quest to dispense justice, but rather, the entire judgment was a self-serving act by the court,” Tembo said. “It is evident to all and sundry that in this case, the court only substantively addressed the issue of Speaker Matibini usurping the powers of the Judiciary to interpret the Constitution. As a part of the Judiciary itself, the court was clearly offended by this particular trespass on its territory by Speaker Matibini.”

Tembo beseeched the court to make satisfactory effort to issue well coherent judgments.

“As Patriots for Economic Progress, we are cognizant of the fact that the Constitutional Court is a reasonably new court, which is probably still trying to find its feet. However, we wish to implore the court to make adequate effort to issue well-reasoned judgments. A good court judgment is supposed to help to settle controversy and not be a source of controversy itself,” said Tembo.

Says no stone will be left unturned in getting to the bottom of the matter, including a commission of inquiry.

By Smart Eagles Reporter.

President of the Republic of Zambia, His Excellency Dr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu says the gassing incidents which also led to mob attacks in the nation not only inflicted physical harm but also applied phychological warfare on citizens, causing constant fear in the communities.

He said he will not rest until the culprits of the inhumane phenomenon which started in Chingola and spread to many parts of the nation and left over 50 people dead and several injured, are brought to book.

He bemoaned the death of the two school boys Frank Mugala(14) and Sydney Moonga (17) who where shot by police in the ensuing confusion.

“The deaths of the two boys and other citizens are incomprehensibly regrettable and my heart goes out to the bereaved families. This is what the enemy achieved in their effort to distablilise our peaceful nation,” he said.

And President Lungu has announced that 26 suspects have so far been arrested and that investigations are still on going.

He was glad to report that the security situation in the nation has generally improved and thanked the men and women in uniform for their gallant efforts to restore order and peace.

“Their work is however not over. As Commander in Chief of the Defence force and Head of State and Government, I want to promise Zambians that the enemies of our people will be crushed and buried,” he said.

“To this effect, am seriously considering constituting a commission of inquiry to get to the bottom of these gassing and mob attacks. Be rest assured that all culprits will be brought to book regardless of their standing in society. The enemy will surely be defeated without doubt and the situation will return to normal for our people sooner than later, “he added.

The President said it had been noted too that the culprits have shifted their focus to rural areas where false information is being given to the public with a view to inciting citizens to rise and cause public disorder .

He thanked the traditional leaders, religious and community leaders, Civil servants and individual citizens who have played a major role in rescuing victims that have almost been lynched by mobs.

He also took time to warn strongly the traditional leaders, church and civic leaders encouraging mob justice stating that the law would soon catch up with them.

President Lungu said this in his address to the nation on the progress made in the application of National Values and Principles which he delivered in Parliament this morning.

LAW Association of Zambia (LAZ) president Eddie Mwitwa says the Constitutional Court did not declare President Edgar Lungu eligible to stand in the 2021 general election, contrary to assertions that they did.

In an interview, Mwitwa said the controversial question relating to President Lungu’s eligibility was not yet over, and that Constitutional lawyer John Sangwa, State Counsel, was right to say that the matter could still be appealed in the Constitutional Court.

“You do recall that when that matter that touched on the eligibility of the President was in the Constitutional Court and we were represented by John Sangwa, State Counsel (S.C.), and the views that he took to court were the views of the Association. We, unfortunately, did not succeed with the matter, but I think from what he has been saying, that is an issue that can still go back to court at the appropriate time and the PF top leadership had also invited Mr Sangwa to go back in the Constitutional Court if he was unhappy with that decision,” Mwitwa said.

“When the elections are nearing and nominations are filed, there will still be an opportunity to ask the Constitutional Court to determine the eligibility of the candidates that will be floated by the various political parties. It is not a dead end; it is a matter that can still be revived. Remember that the President himself, President Edgar Lungu, was not a party to that particular action. So, there is an opportunity to take that to the Constitutional Court on the question of his eligibility when he files in his nomination to stand for President in 2021.”

He guided that the December 7, 2018, ConCourt ruling did not interpret specifically President Lungu’s eligibility to stand for a third-successive time at next year’s crucial election.

“…I don’t think that they (ConCourt) were asked to interpret, specifically, on the eligibility of President Edgar Lungu in 2021. Sangwa, S.C., who was representing LAZ, our argument then was that it was immature to start determining that question because there was no election that was being conducted at that time. It is the same thing with Bill 10; you remember when we went to court, we were told that, ‘no, we have come too early, this is just a Bill.’ Our understanding is that the Court said when it becomes law, you can come back and challenge. So, it is quite similar,” said Mwitwa.

As the debate over President Lungu’s eligibility rages on, PF secretary general Davies Mwila insisted in Lusaka, Monday, that the Head of State remained eligible to stand at next year’s general election.

Mwila also told journalists that the ConCourt had declared the Head of State eligible to stand despite having already been elected into office twice in 2015 and 2016.

SPEAKER of the National Assembly Patrick Matibini on Tuesday told Choma Central UPND member of parliament Cornelius Mweetwa that he should be the last person to complain about the deteriorating decorum of the House because he does not act any better.

Rising on a point of order, Mweetwa lamented that some PF officials like Community Development Minister Kampamba Mulenga, her labour counterpart Joyce Simukoko and Lusaka Province Minister Bowman Lusambo were damaging the National Assembly’s image with their derogatory running commentaries.

“Mr Speaker, I am rising on a point of order bordering on the decorum and the decency, respectability of this August House. Mr Speaker, my point of order is on the following members of this House and I am naming them in line with what honorable Tutwa Ngulube did to name those who had attended NDF here to preclude the perception that we can’t debate ourselves. Mr Speaker, my point of order is on honorable Joyce Nonde, honorable Mulenga Kampamba, honorable Tutwa Ngulube, honorable [Bowman] Lusambo, for purposes of this point of order but not exclusive to other members. You will agree with me that before 2016 elections, this House was a House of decency. When members stood to debate other members would listen and would go into a discourse of contestation of ideas. Ever since 2016 elections, Mr Speaker, you agree with me that it is very hard for anybody to project a decent debate because members, especially on your right led by these aforesaid would be running defamatory, demeaning, derogatory, unpalatable statements as if to turn this House like a political playground to such an extent that sometimes members are sometimes unable to deliver what they are here to do,” Mweetwa lamented.

“If you did a random perusal of your Hansard, you will find out that you have done more guidance in the last three years than you did between 2011 and 2016 trying to calm PF to be responsible. They have given you too much headache sir and me too! And I am concerned as a member of this House that the decorum of this House is deteriorating and my point of order sir is are these members that I have named, who just joined this House in 2016 in order to come and undermine the decorum of this House? ministers behaving not just like back benchers but like children!”

Speaker Matibini, however, guided him to withdraw the word children and he obliged, replacing it with “young people”.

“I withdraw, behave like young people, maybe at a school playground or drama club when we are in this important House. Are they in order to demean the decorum of this House to these levels where now members of the public when we go out there, they look at this House with low esteem all because of their misconduct. Are they in order Mr Speaker? I need your serious ruling behave the decorum of this House is what keeps this House going,” said Mweetwa.

But Speaker Matibini said Mweetwa’s point of order was shocking.

“I am perturbed by this point of order. Firstly, I think it is unfair and inappropriate to single out those three or four members of parliament, very unfair. The problem of running commentaries is a perennial problem. And ideally, the whips should be in the forefront in checking this particular problem. Secondly, you have raised a point about decorum and dignity, just on Friday, it was, it was on Friday, as recent as Friday. There was some disorder, admittedly and I was trying to manage that disorder for your benefit honorable member of parliament for Choma, for avoidance of doubt. I requested you to sit down and you refused, and by the time I restored order, you had walked out, I don’t know what dignity you added to the House. I don’t know what decorum you added. So honorable member of parliament for Choma, you should be the last person to complain and for the information of the House, there was a point of order raised in connection with your conduct, I reserved my ruling. And this is my ruling now, the matter is being referred to the Privileges Committee,” said Speaker Matibini. -ND

By Sishuwa Sishuwa

On 23 February 2020, Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) chief electoral officer Patrick Nshindano appeared on Sunday Interview, a Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation television programme hosted by Grevazio Zulu every Sunday evening that typically consists of an in-depth, one-on-one 60-minute interview with a prominent guest.

Zambians who had hoped that Nshindano would use the platform to explain how the Commission plans to conduct next year’s general election in a transparent and credible manner were left disappointed. He predicted that the 2021 general election will be ‘a tight race’ and highly contested, just like the 2016 one which saw a minimal margin of results between President Edgar Lungu and opposition United Party for National Development (UPND) leader Hakainde Hichilema.”

“We are coming from a very contested 2016 general election”, Nshindano told his host, “where the margins between the incumbent and the opposition were quite minimal. And now we are getting again to a very highly contested election in 2021”.

To be sure, there is nothing wrong with predicting election results when qualified individuals or institutions undertake the task. It is normal and absolutely harmless for academics working on, say, political parties and elections to forecast the possible outcome of an electoral contest. When the researcher undertakes this task, the important point to note is not the prediction per se, but the reasons or explanations that the person making the prediction advances in support of their prediction. This ‘evidentiary base’ of their position enables other interested researchers or students of electoral politics to either contest the prediction made or even build upon it. So, when one makes a prediction, it is critical to ask them to explain what exactly they mean and why they think that way, in instances where the source of their prediction has not been made available. This would lend credibility to the prediction.

The problem arises when the person or institution making the prediction is an official of a national electoral body, as it creates room for misunderstanding. In this regard, Nshindano’s comments that Zambia’s 2021 elections would be highly contested and a tight race were inappropriate for two main reasons. The first is that they fall outside the established function of the institution that he officially represents – ECZ. The core function of the Electoral Commission of Zambia is to organise, supervise and administer elections in a fair and impartial manner.

It is beyond the constitutional and legal mandate of the Commission to make predictions or to pronounce itself on possible closeness, outcomes or contestation of future electoral contests. The task of making such predictions is a responsibility of researchers working on elections, political analysts, election pollsters, or even the competing political actors who may simply want to embellish their chances of victory. The Commission’s job is to facilitate and promote conditions that are conducive to the holding of free and fair elections.

The second reason that makes Nshindano’s comments inappropriate is that there are too many variables that can change between now and August 2021 in a manner that is likely to undermine the accuracy of any election forecast. We do not, for instance, know the names of candidates yet and total number of those who will seek election, say, to the position of President of Zambia in 2021. Would the governing Patriotic Front (PF) field President Lungu or would the ruling party choose another candidate at its forthcoming convention slated for 10-12 July 2020?

Would the main opposition UPND field Hichilema or another political leader? Would the National Democratic Congress leader Chishimba Kambwili be on the ballot or would he be a running mate to Hichilema or someone else? Would the two socialist parties led by Fred M’membe and Wynter Kabimba each float a presidential candidate? No one is in any position, at this stage, to provide definite answers to these key questions.

Even if we assumed that there will be only two presidential candidates, say, Lungu and Hichilema, in 2021, there is no guarantee that either of them would obtain the same or close to the same number of votes that they received in the 2016 election, or that the overall result would be as close as the previous one. This is because the loyalties of Zambians who previously voted for the two political leaders may have shifted since then or over the past few years. For instance, some of those who previously voted for Hichilema may this time opt to vote for M’membe or Kambwili. This is more likely to be the case in some constituencies of Western, Muchinga, Lusaka and Copperbelt provinces where a number of voters may be prone to ideological, ethnic and populist mobilisations.

Similarly, some among those who voted for President Lungu in 2016 may this time decide to take their votes elsewhere in protest against his record in office since then. For instance, Lungu has presided over the worst ever economic performance; highest levels of corruption; highest incidence of inequality; greatest assaults on democracy, civil liberties and the political opposition; highest levels of debt; and deepening ethnic divisions.

In any case, it is not enough for any of the individual political leaders to express interest in seeking election to the position of President of Zambia. One also has to be validly nominated, in line with the provisions of the Constitution of Zambia and other relevant electoral laws. For example, Article 52 of the current Constitution allows any citizen to legally challenge the nomination of a candidate who has filed their nomination for President within seven days of the close of nominations. It also obligates the court to hear the matter within 21 days of its lodgement and to make a conclusive determination of these processes at least 30 days before a general election.

So, it is not a foregone conclusion that once a candidate for elective public office has filed in their nomination papers, they would be on the ballot. To the contrary, a candidate can be disqualified either by the ECZ or the courts of law by relying on Article 52. This probably explains why Article 52 is among the clauses that the PF seeks to remove from the Constitution through the deplorable Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill Number 10.

Given all these unpredictable variables, how did the Electoral Commission of Zambia chief electoral officer reach or arrive at the conclusion that the 2021 election will be highly contested and end up as a tight race? Was there any scientific polling that was conducted that renders credibility to the Commission’s views? If yes, who conducted that poll and why is the ECZ playing the role of the pollster’s publicity? If Nshindano is unable to provide satisfactory responses to these questions, then he would do well to withdraw those inappropriate remarks and apologise to the public because his comments have the potential to be misunderstood and undermine the credibility of the electoral process, long before the first ballot is cast.

Already, public trust in the capacity of the Electoral Commission of Zambia to conduct a transparent, free and fair election is at its lowest ebb. Nshindano’s comments would only further erode the public’s confidence in the credibility of the institution. To regain public trust and confidence, the Electoral Commission needs to be consultative, transparent and build consensus with all the key stakeholders that are involved in the electoral process. This includes representatives of political parties, civil society, and international institutions or bodies that help finance Zambia’s elections like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Building consensus is important because it guarantees trust and credibility in the integrity of the electoral process.

If Nshindano’s prediction that the 2021 election will be a tight race comes to pass, then the integrity and credibility of the electoral process would crucially determine the willingness of the losers to accept the outcome. There are many Zambians who, on the one hand, believe that President Lungu and his crew in the PF may attempt to perpetuate their stay in power by manipulating the 2021 elections in their favour. Others, mainly the opposition and their supporters, think that the main opposition UPND and Hichilema will likely rebel against an election result that lacks credibility. The best way of avoiding either outcome is for the ECZ to build public trust in the institution, establish consensus, strike compromises where necessary, and promote transparency and openness in the electoral process – in short, establishing a truly independent electoral commission.

I have read, for instance, that the ECZ intends to choose the controversial Dubai-based firm, Al Ghurairi Printing and Publishing, to print ballots for the 2021 election. Without establishing consensus with key actors, this innocuous move can be a source of much tension and potentially undermine the integrity or credibility of the results. I also understand that prisoners and Zambians in the diaspora may be allowed to vote in 2021. Again, it is crucial that these matters are discussed and decided in a timely manner and in a way that fosters trust and promotes transparency. What, for instance, is the total population of prisoners in Zambia or of Zambians in the diaspora? How would political parties mobilise prisoners or voters in the diaspora? To leave the determination of these issues to the eleventh hour risks creating suspicion in the integrity of the electoral process.

Even more concerning is the announcement by the ECZ that the current voter’s’ roll will be entirely discarded to pave way for the creation of a brand new one. There is no sufficient justification for this move, given the limited time that is remaining before the next election. To create a totally new voters roll, about a year before the elections, would be a difficult undertaking, one that is likely to disenfranchise many eligible voters, especially in rural Zambia where many people have to cover great distances to the ‘Boma’, the main site of the issuance of National Registration Cards – a pre-requisite for obtaining a voter’s card. What all these considerations underscore is the need for broad consultation, dialogue, active listening, transparency, necessary compromises and co-operation on the part of the ECZ.

Much will be at stake in the 2021 election. For both President Lungu and UPND’s Hichilema, winning Zambia’s 2021 election is a matter of life and death, politically speaking.

Lungu and his crew will seek to win in order to escape possible prosecution. All of Zambia’s former presidents, aside those who died in office, have faced trials after leaving office and Lungu is already facing questions about the sources of his newfound wealth. Possible prosecution for corruption, embezzlement or criminal misuse of power cannot be far from his mind. The solution is to remain in power for as long as possible or until a pliant successor can be installed.

Another possible reason why Lungu may be so unwilling to leave office is that he is beholden to the business and political interests of certain individuals that contributed to his rise. According to well-placed PF insiders, this group is fearful of what might happen if Lungu steps down and that, in seeking another term, the president is not speaking for himself alone. Lungu has many political and business figures around him, many of whom were marginalised under the late President Michael Sata but have flourished under him. This group feels its time in the corridors of power has been too brief thus far and wants more time to accumulate through the state. They can see clearly how those they replaced are now languishing. Senior government and ruling party figures say that this circle has captured virtually all state institutions.

The term “state capture” is topical in South Africa, but applies fully to the situation in Zambia too. In fact, in Zambia, it is not only the executive that has been captured, but a whole range of public institutions including the police, security services, investigative agencies, the media, the electoral commission and National Prosecution Authority. One could arguably add the judiciary, parliament and various other bodies to this list too. Lungu’s administration successfully closed down the previously leading critical free press and has almost succeeded in muzzling civil society. Many believe the president’s allies are behind the frequent arrests of prominent opposition figures.

Meanwhile, this group has even extended its influence over the church thanks to the president’s new powers to appoint a Minister of Religion. Through misuse of the police, impunity and bogus prosecutions, Lungu and his associates have created a general climate of fear in Zambia and are therefore effectively in charge of everybody except for those seeking martyrdom. How far this group is willing to go to maintain this grip on power remains to be seen.

As for Hichilema, he has already indicated that he will step down from the leadership of the UPND if he loses the 2021 election. This means that next year’s poll will be his last. Hichilema, who has led the UPND since 2006 and lost five successive presidential elections, will seek to win in order to prevent the end of his political career on a very low note. The stakes could not be any higher, for both Lungu and Hichilema. What is needed is an impartial referee who will apply the rules of the game fairly and provide a level playing field for the political players who are competing for ‘Government’. Can the Electoral Commission of Zambia be that non-aligned referee? The Commission has no choice, in my view, if it is to produce a credible outcome that would be acceptable to all concerned and save the country from large-scale political violence.

INSPECTOR General of Police Kakoma Kanganja says police have arrested 566 suspects due to appear in court soon for various offences related to gassing and rioting from a total of 668 cases countrywide.

And Home Affairs Minister Stephen Kampyongo has directed that all the recent cases of indiscipline in the Service must be processed and disposed of in accordance with the disciplinary procedures within 30 days.

Meanwhile, Kampyongo has urged police to deal with social media criminals, including online publication, Koswe, who he accused of spreading hate and tribal speech.

Speaking during the commemoration of the Zambia Police Day at Heroes Stadium in Lusaka, Wednesday, Kanganja said of the 668 cases, 566 suspects had been apprehended and arrested on various offences.

“I wish to report that as at Tuesday, March 3, 2020, police recorded a total of 668 cases on spraying of chemicals (gassing) and out of which 577 cases are still under active investigations, 566 suspects have been apprehended and arrested countrywide for various offences out of which 24 suspects have been taken to court. The total number of people affected by spraying of chemicals is 1,946 and more than 50 people have lost their lives as a result of instant mob justice. Very soon, you will see many more suspects appearing before the courts of law for prosecution. I must say that we have made great strides in arresting and bringing to book some of the perpetrators of these crimes,” Kanganja said.

“For you, criminals, that are still in hiding, let me warn you that we are closing in on you! It is just a matter of time. Soon, you will be fished and smoked out so that you are made answerable for the heinous crime you have committed and my command will make sure that you are made accountable! I wish to sound a strong warning to all those perpetrating anarchy in the country by spraying chemicals substances on innocent members of the public, behaving in a riotous manner and instant mob justice, that their days are numbered as we are almost at your doorstep. It is through this teamwork that we have been able to make great strides and slowly bringing cases of chemical spraying, riotous incidents and instant mob justice to manageable levels.”

He bemoaned that the current era of conflict and confrontation where people reached the extent inflicting physical harm and injury to fellow human beings.

“The era of conflict and confrontation where people reach to an extent where they inflict physical harm and injury to fellow human beings is uncalled for and must be condemned in the strongest terms by all Zambians. It is heart-provoking to see brothers and sisters attacking and brutally killing each other and, worse still, on passers-by based on mere suspicion that they are the ones behind spraying of chemical gassing. It is sad that some unscrupulous members of the public could resort to burning and destroying police stations, posts, including police vehicles acquired by government at very high cost, to better their lives and to ensure that their properties are protected and safeguarded,” Kanganja said.

And Kampyongo directed that all the recent cases of indiscipline in the Police Service must be processed and disposed off in accordance with the disciplinary procedures within 30 days.

“Inspector General of Police, my dear officers in the rank and file of the Zambia Police Service, to face the future with confidence, you must win back the confidence of the public. To achieve that, all the bad eggs must be rooted out of the Zambia Police Service. In that regard, I, hereby, direct that all the recent cases of indiscipline in the Service must be processed and disposed off in accordance with the disciplinary procedures within 30 days. No case of indiscipline should ever be swept under the carpet. Secondly, the Community Services Department must scale-up its operations in all our communities, and especially in those ravaged by high rates of crime, disorderly conduct and insecurity. I must also call upon members of the public to work with the police by providing information on any suspicious persons,” said Kanganja.

Meanwhile, Kampyongo said police should deal with social media criminals, who were fond of spreading hate and tribal speech online.

“The hate speech that we are seeing on social media is just as harmful to society as other hate speech. IG, the same way you have been so aggressive on issues of gassing is the same way you should be on bringing to book those issuing hate speech on social media. I would like to urge you, IG, to follow the motion, which was presented in Parliament last week through a private members motion, which was urging government to enforce the laws that deal with hate speech. I want to urge you to go for them wherever they are hiding and smoke them out just like you have warned those who are committing other crimes, be it Koswe or whatever they call themselves! Go for them and make them account for their hate speech. Make sure that you crack a whip! And to those who think we are joking, they must just count their days because no one is above the law,” warned Kampyongo

President Edgar Lungu is this morning expected in Parliament to address the House and the nation at large on national values and principles.

This is in line with Article 9 (2) of the Constitution of Zambia.

As the President Addresses the House, expectations are high among stakeholders who feel the President has a mammoth task to assure the nation on various issues that have affected Zambians over the last few months.

The Center for Trade Policy and Development Executive Director Isaac Mwaipopo says as President Lungu addresses Parliament on the application of National values his Organisation has a number of expectations on what the President should address.

Mr Mwaipopo said the current state of the Zambian economy which has seen the kwacha depreciating against other major currencies to trade against the US -dollar at $1 per K 15.45 raises a lot of concerns.

He said the current economic state has adversely affected many sectors of the economy negatively especially business environment and entrepreneurs and CTPD urges the President to tell the people what government is doing to stabilize the Kwacha in light of these developments.

Mr Mwaipopo said there is also need for Government to offer public assurance on the implementation of prudent fiscal management strategies that will ensure stability and growth of the economy.

And Patriots for Economic Progress Leader Sean Tembo says his Party’s expectations are that the President will conclusively highlight the key events in the past year when national values and principles sank to their lowest, as well as measures which his Government will put in place to ensure that going forward.

Mr Tembo also expects President Lungu to explain to the nation the challenges that he is facing in rooting out political violence perpetrated by his own party members.

He said specifically, PEP expect President Lungu to tell the nation where on the spectrum of national values and principles, the aggravated robbery attack on PeP members along Cairo Road by his Lusaka Province PF Chairman, Mr Paul Moonga etal falls.

Meanwhile, the Southern African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes says today’s national address by President Edgar Lungu on Values and Principals has come at an opportune time.

SACCORD Executive Director Boniface Cheembe, says the address offers the Head of State an opportunity to address the nation on the recent happenings as regards the instant mob injustice and the gassing phenomenon .

Principal resident magistrate David Simusamba has threatened to issue a warrant of arrest against Chishimba Kambwili if the NDC leader does not avail himself before court on March 10.

Mr Kambwili failed to go to court to open his defence in the forgery because he is admitted to the University Teaching Hospital where he is being treated for multiple comorbidities.

In simple terms, comorbidity refers to the presence of more than one disorder in the same person.

Kambwili, who is National Democratic Congress party leader and former Roan PF member of parliament, failed to appear before magistrate Simusamba and was represented by his two sureties.

Kambwili’s lawyer David Banda informed the court that his client is admitted to University Teaching Hospital ( UTH ) diagnosed with multiple comorbidities.

But Deputy chief State advocate Margaret Chitundu told the court that the matter was coming up for commencement of defence and the State was ready to proceed.

At this point, magistrate Simusamba asked the whereabouts of Kambwili to which Banda explained that Kambwili was indisposed and admitted.

Banda, who said Kambwili’s sureties were before court, had a sick note from UTH to show that he was sick.

However, Chitundu, in response, said the State was at pains as to why the sick record was given in the morning when it should have been given to them earlier.

She said the State did not even understand what comorbidities is about and wondered how the letter was issued this morning, March 5, 2020.

Magistrate Simusamba asked when Kambwili was admitted but Banda explained that he had not been feeling well since yesterday but in the early hours of today, he was moved to UTH under emergency when condition got worse.

And according to the medical record obtained signed by
Dr Alinani Silwamba, a registrar at Unit 5 department of internal medicine, it stated that Kambwili was a known patient to the UTH being managed for multiple Comorbidities.

The record stated that Kambwili was admitted on March 5 , 2020 with acute complications of the condition requiring stabilisation in the hospital.

Dr Silwamba stated that Kambwili remains under observation at UTH.

But magistrate Simusamba informed Banda that his client had a history of such
conduct, however, “I will give him the last benefit of doubt and adjourn the matter to March 10, 2020”.

Magistrate Simusamba warned that if Kambwili would not be available for whatever reason, he would put him on warrant.

Last month, three lawyers who were representing Kambwili in the matter, Keith Mweemba, Gilbert Phiri and Christopher Mundia officially excused themselves from representing Kambwili for reasons they did not disclose.

By Isaac Mwanza

Introduction
On 9th August, 2016, this author ignited the debate on whether President Lungu qualifies to contest the 2021 elections. Just like Canadian-based lawyer, this author was a view that President Lungu did not qualify for President until when the Constitutional Court of Zambia passed the landmark Judgment in Dr. Daniel Pule and 3 Others [Selected Judgment No. 60 of 2018]. While the Court did not plainly declare that President Lungu is eligible to contest 2021 elections, the Court addressed key issues that paved way for the President to contest. Let’s discuss these two issues.

1. President Lungu never served a “term” between 2015 and 2016
What appears not to be contentious at this point is the clear declaration by the Constitutional Court that the period commencing 25th January, 2015 to 13th September, 2016 which President Lungu was elected and occupied the office of President was not a term. This is clear from the pronouncement of the Court on page J83 where the Court stated:

“It therefore, follows that in the current case, the term served [by President Lungu] that ran from 25th January, 2015 to 13th September, 2016 and straddled two constitutional regimes, cannot be considered as a full term.”

There is no dispute now around this pronouncement as its clear for all to see.

2. That holding office refers to a term
The debate has now shifted to provisions of Article 106(3) which reads as follows:

“Article 106 (3)
A person who has twice held office as President is not eligible for election as President.”

First this provision is different from the repealed provision of 1996. In the 1996 Constitution, the provision was very clear and left no room for further interpretation. The repealed provision read:

“Article 35. (2) [Now repealed]
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Constitution or any other law no person who has twice been elected as President shall be eligible for re-election to that office.”

No doubt, if the repealed article 35(2) had remained in the Constitution, President Lungu was going to have been out of the race as he has twice been elected into office. But this provision is no longer part of our law. It has been replaced, and for good reasons. Those reasons are beyond the current discussion here.

So the question the question we are dealing with now is about article 106(3) as it exists in the Constitution. What did the Court say about the meaning of the phrase, “twice held office”?

On page J75, the Court said:

“It is imperative to first determine what would be considered as ‘holding office’ under Article 106. In particular, Article 106 (2), which we have already quoted above states that a President shall hold office from the date the President-elect is sworn into office and ending oh the date the next president-elect is sworn into office.”

However, the Court did not stop there but, on page 59, asked a very important question: “For how long can a president hold office?” In effect, the Court was asking whether a person who is sworn into office for 1 day, 1 year and eight months as did President Lungu or 5 years can qualify to be said as holding office.

The firm answer by the Court to settle this question is found on page J82 where the Court stated:

“The sub-articles (clauses) in Article 106 cannot be isolated from each other in interpreting the article. An interpretation of a constitutional provision that isolates the provisions touching on the same subject is faulty. Therefore, to state that Article 106 (3) applies to the term that straddled two constitutional regimes but that Article 106 (6) does not, is to isolate Article 106 (3) from the rest of the provisions in Article 106 which is untenable at law, and is at variance with the tenets of constitutional interpretation, as all the provisions on the tenure of office of the President must be read together. The provision regarding the full term must be applied to defining what is meant by twice held office under Article 106 (3) in interpreting the provisions of that Article.”

As everyone can see from the last sentence in quoted part, the provision regarding the full term must be applied to defining what is meant by twice held office under Article 106 (3).

There is no dispute, at this point, what “the provision regarding the full term” which the Court was referring to are. Anybody who has served for more than 3 years has held office of the President and anybody who has served for less than 3 years has not held office of the President. This is what the Court was saying to be holding office.

To add clarity to the Court said, one can only check its pronouncement on page J78 where the full bench stated:

“Under Article 106 (6) (b) it is now possible for one to occupy the office of President for a period which is less than a full term in addition to two full terms of office. Meaning that a President can be in the office for a total of almost 13 years.”

In the quote above, the Court was even more careful in the selection of words. Instead of saying, it is now possible for one to “hold the office” of President the court preferred to use the word “occupy the office of President.” When you occupy the office of the President after being elected and sworn into office of President, or in case of a Vice President who automatically assume that office, say for less than 1,068 days or 89 months (which is less than 3 months), you would not have held office, despite fact that you were sworn into that office.

In a nutshell, the Court was conclusive in pronouncing itself on the current provisions of the Constitution. (1) the term President Lungu served from 25th January, 2015 to 13th September, 2016 (which was 20 months or 1 year six months) is not a term under this Constitution and (2) a person can only be said to have held office under Article 106(3) if they occupied that office for a minimum of 3 years and maximum of 5 years.

Did the Court pronounce that President Lungu is eligible to stand? No, the Court would not do that unless the President, like any other candidate filed the nomination and someone challenged the nomination. Before one files the nomination, the Court has always taken the matter is premature. So what is the significance of the Eligibility Judgment then?

The importance of the Court having pronounced itself that the term President Lungu served from 25th January, 2015 to 13th September, 2016 is not a term under this Constitution and (2) a person can only be said to have held office under Article 106(3) if they occupied that office for a minimum of 3 years, is that it gives an indication on even to those who will have questions when the President files the nomination.

In 2021, the nomination will be filed under the Constitution as amended in 2016 and not under the 1996 Constitution which had stated that no person who has twice been elected as President shall be eligible for re-election to that office. The current law is that anybody who has occupied the office of President for a minimum of 3 years will have held office once. When they serve for another 3 years, they would have held office twice.

.
Conclusion
From the above, holding office twice means that one has not only been elected twice or sworn into office of the President twice but that the combined terms for which we occupied office was a minimum of years but one can occupy office for 13 years and still be deemed to have held office twice under the current law, provided the other time was elected and sworn into that office is less than 3 years and thus disqualified from being referred to as holding office. Of course, Hakainde Hichilema, Chishimba Kambwili, Chilufya Tayali and President Lungu who want to contest 2021 elections, none of them can be said to have an outright ticket to contest until they file in their nominations and ECZ accepts the nomination or rejects the same. Once the matter is challenged in Court, the Court can then pronounce itself on it. For President Lungu, he is serving the first term of office which is ending in 2021; the inference of the eligibility judgment also is that the 20 months he occupied office do not qualify for having held office under the current Constitution.

PRESS STATEMENT

5TH February 2020

LEADERS WHO DISRESPECT THEIR CONSTITUTIONS END UP AT THE ICC.

We all agree that a Constitution is and remains the supreme law of the land. Besides, they are some Constitutional office holders that take oath to protect the constitution. When one takes oath he/she is swearing before God that he/she will not do anything that will undermine the constitution and therefore that oath is a promise to the people as well as the Lord. Any promise to the Lord must be fully honored.

Now, you start wondering if people are really serious when taking oath or its one of those things we just do? One must not say things that he doesn’t believe in or else you end up being cursed by the same Lord you promised when taking oath. It’s a sin to mention the name of the Lord in vain.
So why should we have two versions on the issue of the third term? Clearly, there is a group of dishonest people on this issue. God usually expose and punish such people for others to see.

What happens is that, since that promise is made in the interest of God’s children. These children get agitated and vote otherwise. On the other hand people who are forcing their way illegally do not accept the will of people. From what has happened in other Counties where people have refused to step down peacefully they use maximum force on the ordinary citizenry, slaughtering them to remain in power. Meanwhile, the big brother is watching and documenting all the happenings, the end result is that the person at the helm of such killings is indicted by the same big brother called the ICC for crimes against humanity.

It’s at this point now that one individual is isolated and suffers consequences alone. Even those who were shouting the loudest disappear in thin air. So, the issue of the third term requires a very honest approach. Those who have mutilated their Country’s constitutions because of being power hungry are still languishing at The Hague. We have said before that people are fed up with PF and anyone forcing himself on people will spill blood in the end. Already your record Ba PF on human rights is extremely bad. TACHIBULA PALI NALIKWEBELE. Don’t say you were not told.

Percy Chanda

UPND – Chairman for Mines and Freedom Fighte

CONSTITUTIONAL Lawyer John Sangwa State Counsel says the Patriotic Front has chosen President Lungu to stand as the party’s Presidential candidate in 2021 at their own peril because the Head of State is ineligible.

And Sangwa says he respects the opinion of PF secretary general Davies Mwila who defined him as a “dull lawyer” saying, the message is actually an attack on the distinguished lawyers and legal practitioners serving the judiciary whom he has taught in the last 20 years.

In an interview, Sangwa said it was nonsensical to ask him to withdraw his legal opinion.

“Firstly, I take great exception to anyone asking me to withdraw my legal opinion on Lungu’s eligibility. There is no way I can do that. It’s not a crime to tell the President that ‘you don’t qualify’, so what will I withdraw? I am a citizen of this country and I am also a voter. It is within my right to tell a political contender that you don’t qualify to rule over me. So, all those people in PF who are just talking from without like that Sunday guy, I don’t know why they can’t read. They don’t know the history of this country and how we suffered under the one-party rule. That’s the problems when you have a country full of Juveniles. People are lazy to read, don’t just argue, read the law. And Mwila can call me dull, it’s laughable but it’s fine. The only problem is that his attack is on the integrity of the many lawyers I have taught for the past 20 years. If I am dull, then all those lawyers must resit their law school and exams,” he said.

“I have been a lawyer for many years. By 1991 when Kaunda was losing power, I was already admitted to the bar. You can’t tell me today that I want to join politics, I have a job, I have a wonderful career and I have no reason to join politics towards my old age. That’s nonsense! But again, it doesn’t mean that political issues are a preserve of politicians, no! I don’t need to be a politician in order to comment on political issues. As long as I have the right to vote, I have the right to express my views, and every citizen has that right. Your right to vote is your consent to say ‘I agree, you can rule over me’. So, I respect those who disagree with my legal opinion, but they should also respect mine!

And Sangwa said the PF could nominate President Lungu at their own peril.

“You take chances at your own peril because the law is there. Even if you look at the Constitution, it doesn’t allow for a sole candidate in a political party. The Constitution allows you to have competitive elections within your own political party. If you make the mistake of choosing someone who is not eligible as your party candidate, whose fault is that? The law is very clear, and we always say ‘ignorance of the law is no defense’. The beauty with this thing is that we cannot speculate, we cannot assume that Lungu is going to stand in 2021. Let us wait for him to file papers, that’s when now we will go to court. Don’t forget, this is a country of laws, we don’t bend laws to suit an individual, no!” Sangwa exclaimed.

“Individuals must conform to the law. We cannot begin to twist the law in order to avoid chaos in some political party, no! So whether you are a political party or otherwise, we are all bound by the law. Even if it was the issue of HH, even if you take out Edgar and you put HH, the result is the same. HH would still not be eligible to stand in 2021. Irrespective of who you are, there is no law for HH and there is no law for Lungu, there is law for everybody.”

Sangwa insisted that allowing President Lungu to contest elections in 2021 would be the worst thing that would happen to Zambia’s democracy.

“In fact, in the general extreme of things, Bill 10 is not even important, it’s not even a danger to Zambia’s democracy. The biggest danger to Zambia’s democracy is Lungu standing for a third time. That’s the biggest danger because no President since 1991 has ever gone for three elections. So you don’t want to set a bad precedence because once you set a bad precedence, you cannot undo it. That is why we need to fight this, he shouldn’t go for third term, he has already been elected twice and this has nothing to do with the number of years he served. The point is, as long as you have been elected twice, then that’s it, you are done. That clause in the Constitution has never changed since 1991, once you’ve served twice then that’s it, you cannot go for a third term,” said Sangwa.

GOVERNANCE activist Brebner Changala says PF will be thrown into disarray if they don’t find a qualified candidate by 2021.

And Changala says as a lawyer, President Edgar Lungu knows that he does not qualify to stand in the 2021 elections.

In an interview, Tuesday, Changala said PF’s endorsement of President Lungu as sole candidate was ill conceived as it injured the general membership of the party.

“I was talking about PF. Mainly, they are the only people who see that President Edgar Chagwa Lungu qualifies to stand in 2021 and they base their argument on the Constitutional Court judgment in Danny Pule and others. Now, if you have read the Constitutional Court judgment as defective as it is, it does not anywhere and clearly and categorically state that President Lungu does qualify to stand in 2021 or indeed any other elections thereafter. One of the things the Court did not touch on is what is in the statute that whoever has been President or sworn in twice cannot seek the office of the President again. Now, it’s beyond debate and they are playing with the jargons on other articles which concern the term of office. The term of office does not constitute the eligibility for someone to break the law and be sworn in for the third time and this must be made very, very clear to PF. It’s time they start looking for a candidate or else they will scatter in disarray,” Changala said.

Changala challenged the PF to show Zambians the ConCourt ruling which categorically stated that President Lungu was eligible to stand in 2021.

“Any law abiding judge and any law abiding chairman of ECZ cannot accept any paper from President Edgar Lungu. He can’t because the law says so. And I would challenge my colleagues in PF starting from the President to the last man in PF to show the people of Zambia the Constitutional Court ruling in Danny Pule and others, where it categorically and clearly states that President Edgar Lungu is eligible to stand. And the other angle is, President Lungu has never approached the bench to clarify his condition or state as regard to the 2021 elections. It was others and so there has never been any ruling or judgment concerning President Edgar Lungu and this sole candidate endorsement from the PF is ill conceived and it injures the general
membership of the party,” he said.

And Changala said as a lawyer, President Lungu knew that he was ineligible.

“President Edgar Chagwa Lungu says he is a qualified lawyer and lawyer par excellence. He must know by now that he does not qualify if he has read the law. He must know by now that he has been sworn in twice. These are facts and these are in the law. So President Edgar Lungu must stop going on podium and telling the people of Zambia that we are stuck with him. 2021 we are stuck with him, 2026 we are stuck with him. This country belongs to the collective sovereignty of the people of Zambia. It’s not his own territory which he can convince and kick around as and when he feels. He must obey the law. He must be custodian of the constitution and he must uphold the law at all times. Let him not get excited because this will land him in serious challenges.
He must start preparing for a successor within the PF. There are a lot of capable men and women who can take over from him. He must not impose himself against the law and against the Constitution,” said Changala.

“So my take on this is President Lungu does not qualify to stand. Two, the Constitution never made a declaration that he does qualify to stand and if my reading is incorrect, let them show us in the many pages of that judgment where it clearly states that he qualifies to stand because he didn’t serve more than three years as per the law. And where it says that being sworn in twice has been abolished by 2016 amended constitution. He must clearly state. So they are even in an illusion and they will get a rude shock because they are wasting time and they will lose time towards the elections. There will be a crisis when they will walk towards the judge, a reasonable judge for that matter who will not accept the nomination…I don’t think Judge Esau Chulu would entertain the papers that will come from President Lungu. No normal judge can do that.” -ND

NATIONAL Democratic Congress (NDC) president Chishimba Kambwili says his remarks on being ready to be Hakainde Hichilema’s running mate were taken out of context because what he actually said was “he who wants to lead must be ready to be led”.

And Kambwili says he has engaged his lawyers on the possibly of taking action against Speaker of the National Assembly Patrick Matibini following the Constitutional Court ruling which declared that he breached the constitution.

Meanwhile, Kambwili has asked Zambians to start speaking out about injustice being perpetrated by those in government, saying doing so gives hope to the opposition to continue fighting.

Speaking when featured on the Monday edition of Prime TV’s Oxygen of Democracy, Kambwili said he was ready to be led just as much as he was ready to lead.

“There are certain things where you are quoted out of context. What I said on that programme (a radio interview) was that at the moment, NDC and UPND are in an alliance. In this alliance, we agreed on 10 principles that we wanted to fight on the front as a united front. But should the people of Zambia say that ‘we want UPND and NDC to form a pact’ or should the members of the two political parties say ‘the way to go is to form a pact’ and a system is put in place where to decide who leads this pact, if I am chosen to deputise my brother Hakainde Hichilema, who am I to refuse? Similarly, if I am chosen to lead this alliance and HH deputises me, who is he to refuse? That’s what I said. [What I said simply is] ‘he who wants to lead must be prepared to be led’ in short. There is absolutely nothing wrong with me deputising HH if the Zambian people so wish,” Kambwili said

“Who am I to refuse? Ultimately, the ones who are going to vote are the people of Zambia, it’s not us. You can’t say I am going to stand on my own when the people of Zambia are asking you to partner. How can you even win? Niba noko bakalavota (is it your mother that will be voting)? If it’s your mother, yes she can vote for you whether you are a one-man party or not. But if it’s not your mother alone who is going to vote, you must listen to the voice of the people.”

Meanwhile, Kambwili said he had engaged his lawyers on possible action against the Speaker.

“I was not surprised because I knew that the Speaker had breached the Constitution, and what annoyed me very much over the Speaker’s decision was that the Speaker is a former judge. He was a judge of high standing, with a very good reputation. But he went and made an open mistake without recourse to the law. You remember when he declared my seat, I had a press briefing and I said ‘what he has done is illegal’. But then the problem that we have in this country is that we will end up with one judgment where the Constitutional Court says ‘yes we agree with the fact that the Speaker overshot his boundaries, he breached the Constitution but we cannot make his decision null and void because if we do, then Kambwili will have to back to Parliament and we are going to have two members of parliament and the number of members of parliament is regulated. So we are going to create a Constitutional crisis’. But is that my problem? Or is that the problem of the people of Zambia that a Constitutional crisis will be created?” he asked.

“What is wrong is wrong, we must believe in calling a spade a spade and not a pick for the sake of impressions. The Constitutional Court did very well in this judgment but they only spoiled the judgment when they said ‘we cannot grant the remedies because we are going to create a Constitutional crisis’. In the meantime, I have been affected by the wrong decision of the Speaker. From here onwards, we are sitting with my team of lawyers to find the way forward. But certainly, an action will be taken. You can’t say ‘you are wrong here you are driving a vehicle without a license’. Then again you say ‘anyway it’s okay because you are taking a patient to the hospital’, come on! Can we be consistent?”

Meanwhile, Kambwili called on Zambians to start speaking out against the wrongs in government if they wanted real change to come.

“This whole issue is left to the people of Zambia to decide the way forward because elections are held for the people of Zambia so that a group of people can be elected to go and superintend over their national affairs. So it’s up to them to want to remain docile or to take action and in taking action, there are many ways, they can wait for the elections of speak out and say ‘if you are not going to level the playing field, we are not going to vote as Zambians, the Zambians have got the right. If the people boycott the elections, people will be moved to make sure that the right thing is done. But what happens in Zambia is that people are quiet, they want to wait for Chishimba Kambwili, HH, Edith Nawakwi, Nevers Mumba to speak for themselves. We must move as a team. Look at what happened in Malawi; when the election was stolen in Malawi, the people went on the streets and demonstrated. If it were in Zambia people could have just gone quiet but our friends in Malawi said ‘no’ and because the people rose in Malawi, they forced the courts to do the right thing and nullified those elections,” he said.

When asked what NDC’s position on whether or not President Lungu was eligible to contest elections next year, Kambwili said his party believed that any person who had twice been elected and sworn in did not qualify to run for a third term of office.

“NDC’s position is as provision of the Constitution. We must act within the Constitution. The Constitution says ‘anybody who has been elected twice and sworn in twice cannot stand for elections the third time’. The question we should ask is: has President Edgar Lungu been elected twice in this country? Has President Edgar Lungu been sworn in twice in this country? If the answer is no, he qualifies to stand in 2021 but if the answer is yes, then he does not qualify. So my own understanding and the position of NDC is that anybody who has been elected twice and sworn in twice does not qualify to stand. The final authority are the courts, I don’t want to usurp the powers of the court. That is why once President Edgar Lungu files his nomination, those who will feel that he doesn’t qualify must go to court and let the courts pronounce on that matter. I am not a court and I don’t want to make a mistake that my elder brother Patrick Matibini made by usurping the powers of the court,” said Kambwili.-ND

Former Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Services permanent secretary Chanda Kasolo says he does not regret anything he did while serving in the government.

President Edgar Lungu last year dropped Kasolo for saying that the salary cuts the Head of State had announced were voluntary.

He was quoted by Diamond TV saying: “The salary reduction announced by President Lungu ranging from 15 to 20 per cent is not a mandatory measure, but voluntary scheme, which can be joined by his appointees and other Zambians.”
Reflecting on his time in government in an interview, Kasolo said he did not regret anything he did while he served in the government.

“I have never regretted anything I have done in my life. When you are realistic, you know that a job can end, nothing is permanent. I am realistic, I enjoyed what I did in government. I do not regret anything. If anything, I did my best at my job,” Kasolo said.

When asked if he would agree to get back into government if an opportunity availed itself, he said he would as long as it was in the interest of the nation.

“My father used to say ‘never say never’. These things have a way of going round. For me, if it has to do with serving the nation, I will always do it. If I know I cannot do because, maybe, I am not capable or not sure, I will not. I can only accept things that I know I can serve and give my best,” Kasolo said.

He said he had now embarked on a venture to promote tourism in Eastern Province where he also served as permanent secretary.

“My business partner acquired this resort from a long time ago and being a good friend, he said ‘come and join me’. I have joined him. We are developing a hotel, we are developing a colosseum bar and restaurant. We have a large swimming pool that we are digging up now; that will be the largest in Eastern Province. We are bringing animals on to the site because we would like people, instead of going to national parks, they can come there. The main thing we are to do on tourism and arts in this province is through this facility,” said Kasolo.

-ND