RENOWNED constitutional lawyer Muna Ndulo says Bill 10 is a manipulative document seeking to establish a constitutional dictatorship.

In his critique titled: BILL 10, IF ENACTED, WILL INSTAL A CONSTITUTIONAL DICTATORSHIP AND UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY IN ZAMBIA, the Cornell University-based law professor praised everyone who has so far spoken against the document.

“The objects of Bill 10 would seem innocuous to an untrained eye. But this is a deeply manipulative document that seeks to establish a constitutional dictatorship in Zambia. This should startle anybody who deeply cares about constitutionalism and democratic governance. In this paper, I shall draw your attention to some salient and far-reaching issues inherent in the proposed amendments. I salute all Zambian men and women who, despite the uncalled for insults hurled at them, have spoken out against this insidiously immoral project. At times like this silence in the name of neutrality means betrayal of the nation,” he said. “There are numerous amendments – dealing with almost every aspect of state powers and public life in the country. It pertains not only to the principles and values of the Constitution of Zambia, but also deals with the National Assembly including its membership, dissolution, the period of hearing, determination of the hearing, determination of presidential election petitions, creation of office of deputy minister, functions of public protector and banking and the Auditor General. Moreover, there is an omnibus clause – ‘provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.’ See paragraph p of the AGs proposal. The proposed amendments are too broad and overreaching.”

He called on people to ask for a new Constitution instead of sweeping amendments as proposed in Bill 10.
Prof Ndulo argued that if passed, the Bill would among other things disenfranchise many voters.

“Zambians might as well look for a new Constitution instead of these broad sweeping amendments with no direct gains for democracy. To really have a meaningful deliberation on all these provisions is doubtful, thus it is fair to assume that the government wants to sneak in changes to the Constitution without the possibility of thorough examination. This may well explain the conflation of all manner of issues including banking and fiscal policy into this proposed amendment,” Prof Ndulo explained. “It is apparent that the time and timing of this amendment is rather suspect. Elections are just around the corner and the attempt to hurry through some fundamental amendments to the electoral process is suspicious to put it mildly. It would seem that the aim is rather parochial. Most importantly, the logistics to give the people a voice in the process of deliberations are not in place. Thus, with no time to prepare for the radical changes and requirements, Zambians may become disenfranchised. To avoid this possibility, issues that involve qualification and disqualification for participating at any level of the electoral process should not be hurriedly passed as a constitutional amendment.”

On removal of the President from office, Prof Ndulo questioned the relevance of stopping people from inquiring into the head of state’s physical and mental status as proposed in the Bill.

“The instant provision in Article 107 of the Constitution of Zambia provides that: ‘107 (1) A Member of Parliament, supported by at least one third of the Members of Parliament, may move a motion for the investigation of the physical or mental capacity of the President to perform executive functions’ (Emphasis supplied). The proposed amendment says “Article 107 of the Constitution is amended by the deletion of the words ‘physical or mental’ wherever the words appear.’ (SeeArticle 31, lines 5-9 of the proposed Amendment) [emphasis supplied] Zambians may well ask: what is the essence of stopping Parliament from inquiring into the physical or mental health of the president even if such a president can no longer perform the duties of the high office of the president of Zambia?” Prof Ndulo asked. “One thing is clear here, the present government and her coterie are envisaging a Zambia where even a vegetative president would not and cannot be removed from office since Parliament cannot inquire into the health status of such a president. This applies mutatis mutandis to the Vice-President as well. This is dangerous for democracy because nobody in the land and no organ of the state can investigate the health of the two principal officers of the state – the President and his Vice.”

On impeachment of a President, Prof Ndulo proposed that the current provision be maintained.

He said the proposed clause would give too much protection to both the President and the Vice-President even if they breached the Constitution.

“For the avoidance of doubt the proposed amendments states ‘Article 108 of the Constitution is amended by the deletion of— (a) clause (8)(a) and the substitution therefor of the following: (a) is not substantiated, the National Assembly shall not take further proceedings in respect of the allegation; or; and (b) by the deletion of clause (9) and the substitution therefor of the following: (9) The President shall, on the passing of the resolution in accordance with— (a) clause (8)(a), resume to perform the executive functions; or (b) clause (8)(b), cease to hold office and be amenable to prosecution without the need to lift the immunity under Article 98. (emphasis supplied) see Article 32 (paragraph 10-24) of proposed amendment)’,” he said. “What this provision does is to remove the capacity of Parliament to vote by secret ballot to resolve whether the findings of a tribunal brought before Parliament substantiates the allegations against the president or otherwise. The legislative intention in the existing law is that Parliament should have the final say via secret ballot as to whether the findings have made out the allegation or not. To remove this power is to make it possible for findings of a tribunal to have the air of finality. It removes the capacity of the peoples’ representative – the Parliament to ratify or vary the outcome of such tribunals. I need not say how much this consolidates powers in the hand of the President and also puts pressure on any committee or tribunal that might be asked to investigate allegations of misconduct. Indeed, the President can manipulate, or intimidate both the constitution and findings of such a tribunal.”

On elections, Prof Ndulo said the proposed mixed member proportional representation in the National Assembly would bring confusion.

The mixed-member proportional representation is an electoral system in which voters get two votes: one to decide the representative for their single-seat constituency, and the other for a political party.
In this case, seats in the legislature are filled firstly by the successful constituency candidates, and secondly, by party candidates based on the percentage of nationwide or region-wide votes that each party received.

“Article 81 (3) provides that the President may dissolve Parliament if the Executive cannot effectively govern the Republic of Zambia due to the failure of the National Assembly to objectively and reasonably carry out its legislative function. This is a most unusual provision and clearly sends the message that the Executive is superior to Parliament. The only control on the President is that he or she shall inform the public and refer the matter to the Constitutional Court,” noted Prof Ndulo. “In Article 9, Bill 10 provides that the constitution is amended to repeal Article 51 and the substitution thereof of the following: (2) Elections to the National Assembly shall be conducted under a mixed member electoral system as prescribed. This is an attempt to introduce proportional representation. No details are given as to how this complicated system of elections is going to be implemented. Countries that have proportional representation have detailed provisions in the constitution as to how lists of candidates are to be made and the threshold for getting a seat. This gives the impression of an inadequately thought out provision.”

By Dr. Munyonzwe Hamalengwa

Courtesy: The Mast

My thesis is that it is the Constitutional Court that illegitimately made President Lungu eligible for the third term and not the constitution. This was how the ConCourt did it. First they answered the question that was not posed by the Applicants/Petitioners Danny Pule et al by rephrasing the legitimate question posed by the same, who in fact should not have been accorded standing because the person most directly affected was present, able and capable of launching the suit himself. If the President was shy about it, his party was there to do it for him. Resources would not have been a problem.

The Petitioners claimed that they are members of the opposition but sought a result that favoured the incumbent thus disclosing the oblique motive and intrigue behind this momentous legal suit which showed the Constitutional Court in its worst colours todate. I claim that the Petitioners should not have been accorded standing and the application should have been thrown out immediately upon its being filed. That the Court entertained the suit is not conclusive of its legitimacy. But the standing issue is for another day.

Since the Court embarked on rephrasing the Petitioners’s question and came to the conclusion that on their rephrasing of an unasked question, the President was eligible, pretty much supplies circumstantial evidence or inference that the court came to the conclusion that it came to, because that is the decision the court had wanted to gift President Lungu in the first place. In their private deliberations on rephrasing the question and to come to the result that they came to, much thought was given on these subjects.

As they discussed the rephrasing of the question, the answer to the rephrased question was palpably clear and obvious. That is why they rephrased the question. To come to a decision expected of and definitely desired by the bogus opposition parties and certainly by President Lungu and the PF. It helps if readers can actually read the judgment itself to discern critically what I am theorizing here. The Court did not answer the questions posed to it. It answered the question the court on its own motion, posed for itself.

The clincher is this: why didn’t the court rephrase the question in the following manner: Does being sworn in in January 2015 and being President constitute “holding/held office” and does being sworn in in September 2016 also constitute “holding/held office making it two times a person would be “holding/held office? If the rephrased question was like this, the answer would have been “Yes” and therefore making President Lungu ineligible to stand for office a third time.

Why didn’t the Court rephrase the question this way? Instead the Court chose to interpret or rephrase the question to state that it is a “term of office” of five years which is in issue. There is no legitimate reason why the interpretation should not have revolved around the term “holding/held office” instead of the meaning of the “term of office”. These issues generate two opposite answers, results and consequences.

In South Africa Mbeki and Zuma didn’t finish their entire terms of office but no one insisted that they must be allowed to finish their terms of Office. In the US, Lyndon Johnson couldn’t have insisted on running for a third term because the first term he inherited after John Kennedy was assassinated was not a full term. And the Supreme Court of the United States would not have allowed a third term.

The argument I am making here is that the choice of the rephrased question gives away the design in result that the ConCourt desired. If they rephrased it to concentrate on hold/held office as is my submission, they would have found that President Lungu had held office twice by being sworn in twice and actually occupying State House on two separate periods, and therefore ineligible to run for a third term.

Their choice that they should concentrate on the meaning of the term of office, led them to the desired result. The absurd result is that term of office is five years and when you multiply that by 2, it becomes ten years, but now if President Lungu is reelected in 2021, he would have served office for eleven years and six months whereas if he was barred from running again in 2021 because he had held office twice, he would only be in office for six years and six moths.

The latter is because he would have held office twice and prohibited from running a third time. Which is absurd, eleven years and six months when the constitution only allows ten years, or six years and six months when the constitution only allows ten years, and in this case, with an explanation that the latter is like that because someone took over from a dead President but held office twice pursuant to constitutional restrictions?

The public must know that a judicial decision is not prefabricated. A judicial decision doesn’t write itself. A judicial decision is a justification of the result already reached before the judgment was written and issued. It is an attempt to persuade the public of the soundness of the decision. Further, especially in this case, the Court rephrased the questions asked by the Petitioners and the Court answered their own self constructed question that was not before them, they knew as already stated above what question they wanted to ask and answer, and therefore the answer they wanted to give was known before the decision was written, a decision which was mere justification through persuasion of what had already been decided.

The public must also know that there are many tools of statutory interpretation and constitutional interpretation. The choice of the tool determines the result. That is why judges who seemingly went to the University of Zambia together or Harvard Law School, sitting together can come to different interpretations. This is backgrounded by the choice of the interpretative tool or tools and other predilections. The judges can choose to read up or read down the legislation, the judges can fill in gaps or refuse to do this, the judges can answer or refuse to answer a question as phrased, the judges can engage in constitutional exemptions, the judges can use purposive or rigid analysis, the judges can be technical or generous and more.

There is vast literature on this and the interpretative tools have many different names. Professor Justice Margaret Munalula of the impugned court has a leading book on the subject, entitled, “Legal Process”. I was trained abroad and my favourite leading book on the subject is, “Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes”, by Ruth Sullivan. I also like the book which I used in my Legal Research course in first year of law school by Louis-Philippe Pigeon, “Drafting and Interpreting Legislation”. I read Justice Richard A. Posner’s book, “How Judges Think” a lot as well as Andrew Goodman’s book, “How Judges Decide Cases: Reading, Writing, and Analysing Judgments”; Bakan, “Constitutional Arguments in Canada” and many other works.

It has been stated that the law is what the judges, especially those from the Apex Court, say it is. Indeed law is what the judges say it is until their interpretation is overturned by legislative changes or overturned by the Apex Court in another case. What the judges say the law is, in my submission is never final. This thought process is for another day. I picked up this phrase in Canada which I use all the time: “In Canada, a judge is placed in a position where he has nothing to lose by doing what is right, and nothing to gain by doing what is wrong”. This should be the spirit everywhere, I submit. I hope it becomes the spirit in Zambia.

President Lungu is eligible for a third term because the ConCourt designed a question not asked by the Petitioners but the Court which gifted him with the eligibility but had the ConCourt rephrased the question to interpret whether being sworn in twice and holding office twice precluded President Lungu from running for a third term as the Constitution clearly provides and precludes, we would not be debating this issue now. President Lungu has held office twice. He will be eligible because of the ConCourt and not because of the constitution.

Dr Munyonzwe Hamalengwa is the author of “The Politics of Judicial Diversity and Transformation: Canada, USA, UK, Australia, South Africa, Israel, Colonial and Post-Colonial Countries and International Tribunals” (2012).

NDC leader Chishimba Kambwili has engaged former Attorney General Musa Mwenye of Messers Mwenye and Mwitwa advocates as his new lawyer in a matter where he is facing charges of forgery, uttering a false document and giving false information to a public officer.

Last January Kambwili was ditched by a team of lawyers consisting Keith Mweemba, Christopher Mundia and Gilbert Phiri.

After Mweemba and his colleagues withdrew representation as advocates for Kambwili, the latter has been engaging different lawyers at every sitting.

Some of the lawyers that Kambwili engaged are Cheelo Mwiinga, David Banda of Messrs MAK partners and now Musa Mwenye.

At the last sitting, magistrate Simusamba threatened to have Kambwili locked up in cells if he defaulted to avail himself before court yesterday.

This was after Banda sought an adjournment on grounds that the accused was unwell as he suffered from an additional medical condition in the wee hours of Thursday March 5.

And when the matter came up for opening of defence, Emmanuel Kaluba of Mwenye and Mwitwa advocates said he was standing in for State Counsel Mwenye to seek an adjournment as Kambwili engaged him on March 9 to represent him in the matter.

“Counsel in conduct of this matter is Musa Mwenye State Counsel and Mr Mwenye is attending to a trial before the High Court and is unable to attend to this matter on that basis. We are applying for a short adjournment to enable counsel in conduct of this matter to obtain further instructions and to attend to the matter in person,” said Kaluba.

In response, deputy chief State advocate Margaret Chitundu said the State’s hands were tied seeing that counsel in conduct of the matter was not before court.

“We wish to express our sentiment as a further adjournment to this matter is unfortunate. The accused was placed on his defence last year and it has not commenced to date, it is unfortunate. We understand the accused’s rights to be defended by counsel of his choice, it is in that line that we don’t object to this adjournment,” said Chitundu.

In his ruling, magistrate Simusamba said the adjournment was unfortunate as the State advocate had put it as it was a continuation of what had been a trend (seeking adjournments) by the accused since the matter commenced.

“It is unfortunate that the accused chose to engage counsel yesterday when he was aware of today’s date. I had given him a month to engage counsel after the previous ones withdrew. I will reluctantly grant the adjournment to March 20 and I warn that on that date defence should commence otherwise I will take appropriate action. It is on record that the accused has been given enough time to engage counsel,” said magistrate Simusamba.

During the court session, the NDC leader gave magistrate Simusamba a black look.

Kambwili has reported magistrate Simusamba to the Anti-Corruption Commission for attempts at extortion and commenced a legal suit for defamation against him in the Lusaka High Court for alleging that he (Kambwili) attempted to bribe him (magistrate Simusamba).

My thesis is that it is the Constitutional Court that illegitimately made President Lungu eligible for the third term and not the constitution. This was how the ConCourt did it. First they answered the question that was not posed by the Applicants/Petitioners Danny Pule et al by rephrasing the legitimate question posed by the same, who in fact should not have been accorded standing because the person most directly affected was present, able and capable of launching the suit himself. If the President was shy about it, his party was there to do it for him. Resources would not have been a problem. The Petitioners claimed that they are members of the opposition but sought a result that favoured the incumbent thus disclosing the oblique motive and intrigue behind this momentous legal suit which showed the Constitutional Court in its worst colours todate. I claim that the Petitioners should not have been accorded standing and the application should have been thrown out immediately upon its being filed. That the Court entertained the suit is not conclusive of its legitimacy. But the standing issue is for another day.

Since the Court embarked on rephrasing the Petitioners’s question and came to the conclusion that on their rephrasing of an unasked question, the President was eligible, pretty much supplies circumstantial evidence or inference that the court came to the conclusion that it came to, because that is the decision the court had wanted to gift President Lungu in the first place. In their private deliberations on rephrasing the question and to come to the result that they came to, much thought was given on these subjects. As they discussed the rephrasing of the question, the answer to the rephrased question was palpably clear and obvious. That is why they rephrased the question. To come to a decision expected of and definitely desired by the bogus opposition parties and certainly by President Lungu and the PF. It helps if readers can actually read the judgment itself to discern critically what I am theorizing here. The Court did not answer the questions posed to it. It answered the question the court on its own motion, posed for itself.

The clincher is this: why didn’t the court rephrase the question in the following manner: Does being sworn in in January 2015 and being President constitute “holding/held office” and does being sworn in in September 2016 also constitute “holding/held office making it two times a person would be “holding/held office? If the rephrased question was like this, the answer would have been “Yes” and therefore making President Lungu ineligible to stand for office a third time. Why didn’t the Court rephrase the question this way? Instead the Court chose to interpret or rephrase the question to state that it is a “term of office” of five years which is in issue. There is no legitimate reason why the interpretation should not have revolved around the term “holding/held office” instead of the meaning of the “term of office”. These issues generate two opposite answers, results and consequences.

In South Africa Mbeki and Zuma didn’t finish their entire terms of office but no one insisted that they must be allowed to finish their terms of Office. In the US, Lyndon Johnson couldn’t have insisted on running for a third term because the first term he inherited after John Kennedy was assassinated was not a full term. And the Supreme Court of the United States would not have allowed a third term.

The argument I am making here is that the choice of the rephrased question gives away the design in result that the ConCourt desired. If they rephrased it to concentrate on hold/held office as is my submission, they would have found that President Lungu had held office twice by being sworn in twice and actually occupying State House on two separate periods, and therefore ineligible to run for a third term. Their choice that they should concentrate on the meaning of the term of office, led them to the desired result. The absurd result is that term of office is five years and when you multiply that by 2, it becomes ten years, but now if President Lungu is reelected in 2021, he would have served office for eleven years and six months whereas if he was barred from running again in 2021 because he had held office twice, he would only be in office for six years and six moths. The later is because he would have held office twice and prohibited from running a third time. Which is absurd, eleven years and six months when the constitution only allows ten years, or six years and six months when the constitution only allows ten years, and in this case, with an explanation that the latter is like that because someone took over from a dead President but held office twice pursuant to constitutional restrictions?

The public must know that a judicial decision is not prefabricated. A judicial decision doesn’t write itself. A judicial decision is a justification of the result already reached before the judgment was written and issued. It is an attempt to persuade the public of the soundness of the decision. Further, especially in this case, the Court rephrased the questions asked by the Petitioners and the Court answered their own self constructed question that was not before them, they knew as already stated above what question they wanted to ask and answer, and therefore the answer they wanted to give was known before the decision was written, a decision which was mere justification through persuasion of what had already been decided.

The public must also know that there are many tools of statutory interpretation and constitutional interpretation. The choice of the tool determines the result. That is why judges who seemingly went to the University of Zambia together or Harvard Law School, sitting together can come to different interpretations. This is backgrounded by the choice of the interpretative tool or tools and other predilections. The judges can choose to read up or read down the legislation, the judges can fill in gaps or refuse to do this, the judges can answer or refuse to answer a question as phrased, the judges can engage in constitutional exemptions, the judges can use purposive or rigid analysis, the judges can be technical or generous and more. There is vast literature on this and the interpretative tools have many different names. Professor Justice Margaret Munalula of the impugned court has a leading book on the subject, entitled, “Legal Process”. I was trained abroad and my favourite leading book on the subject is, “Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes”, by Ruth Sullivan. I also like the book which I used in my Legal Research course in first year of law school by Louis-Philippe Pigeon, “Drafting and Interpreting Legislation”. I read Justice Richard A. Posner’s book, “How Judges Think” a lot as well as Andrew Goodman’s book, “How Judges Decide Cases: Reading, Writing, and Analysing Judgments”; Bakan, “Constitutional Arguments in Canada” and many other works.

It has been stated that the law is what the judges, especially those from the Apex Court, say it is. Indeed law is what the judges say it is until their interpretation is overturned by legislative changes or overturned by the Apex Court in another case. What the judges say the law is, in my submission is never final. This thought process is for another day. I picked up this phrase in Canada which I use all the time: “In Canada, a judge is placed in a position where he has nothing to lose by doing what is right, and nothing to gain by doing what is wrong”. This should be the spirit everywhere, I submit. I hope it becomes the spirit in Zambia.

President Lungu is eligible for a third term because the ConCourt designed a question not asked by the Petitioners but the Court which gifted him with the eligibility but had the ConCourt rephrased the question to interpret whether being sworn in twice and holding office twice precluded President Lungu from running for a third term as the Constitution clearly provides and precludes, we would not be debating this issue now. President Lungu has held office twice. He will be eligible because of the ConCourt and not because of the constitution.

Dr Munyonzwe Hamalengwa is the author of “The Politics of Judicial Diversity and Transformation: Canada, USA, UK, Australia, South Africa, Israel, Colonial and Post-Colonial Countries and International Tribunals” (2012).

SIKAILE Sikaile says the devil has captured Zambia, going by the high number of questionable characters found with President Edgar Lungu.

And Sikaile asked where the so-called ‘Christians for Lungu’ are in the midst of injustices sponsored the PF.

In his write-up titled: EDGAR LUNGU HAS UNDRESSED STATE HOUSE BY ASSOCIATING IT WITH CRIMINALS AND THE CORRUPT, Sikaile, a good governance and human rights activist, asked Zambians to reclaim their country.

“The devil has captured Zambia and we need to stand strong for us to reclaim our nation back from the devil’s kingdom. We are now a nation where untrained citizens and political cadres can be in possession of commercial military weapons and uniforms and Lungu is not bothered at all,” he said.
“After all, they are all doing his job. But I have one question for President Lungu. Don’t you think these thugs you have empowered with guns and military uniforms one day they can turn against you? Are you really sure of what you are doing? Respect Zambians; you can mess up with everything but don’t touch citizens’ lives through arming PF thugs.”

Sikaile wondered if State House could be respected when it accommodated people with criminal inclinations.
He said although there had been calls by President Lungu’s supporters to respect State House, it was in fact he who disrespected the institution.

“They (bootlickers) cry that opposition leaders should respect the office they tend to occupy one day. But I have been wondering whether there is any sensible citizen that can respect a place where criminal activities are taking place,” Sikaile said.
“Today, the office of the President in Zambia is associated with law breakers and ‘terrorists’. Few months ago, we saw one of Lungu’s right hand men who terrorised fellow citizens simply because he is political advisor to him (Lungu). There is absolute nothing bad about any Zambian associating oneself with State House but it is dangerous for criminals to get so close to State House because there are sensitive issues and documents there that need protection.”

Sikaile asked how President Lungu expected people to respect State House if he was the one tolerating ‘criminals’ to come near him.
“Mr Lungu is ok every time to be found with people who have no regard for the law and respect for fellow citizens. How does he expect us to respect State House when it has been turned into a meeting place for criminal activities such as gassing, terror, corruption, violence and tribalism?” he asked. 
“There is a lot that has befallen our once respected nation. I have laughed reading [home affairs minister Stephen] Kampyongo’s statement calling for the general public to hand over guns during the amnesty period of voluntary handing over of guns. Mr Kampyongo, please come back to your senses and stop fooling yourself. How do you expect citizens to take you seriously when you are on the other hand arming PF cadres with guns? Tell the nation about the security uniforms that went missing few days ago. Who has them and who gave them?”

Sikaile implored people to ‘gas’ PF through the ballot in next year’s general election.

“Zambians, you have been gassed by PF, but I want to urged you to also gas them through the ballot in 2021. Use this chance to bring sanity in Zambia. We just can’t afford this mediocrity by desperate minions who can opt to see lives being lost in a terror attack just to secure their illegal stay in power,” Sikaile said. “God, see how much Zambians are crying. May you open the eyes of those who are still blind to see and do the right thing in 2021. If they are not planning on how to gas and terrorise citizens, then they are planning how to lobby the nation and if not, then they are planning how to incite violence and tribalism.  And the unfortunate part is that all these criminal activities take place at State House and you want Zambians to respect that office? Maybe in future when Zambians put in leaders who also respect State House.”

And Sikaile said ‘Christians for Lungu’ had deserted the presidency after noticing a lot of wrong things in that office.

“They have deserted their pay master, causing him mental anguish after the scheme of gassing and terror attacks did not go well. After this incident, Mr Lungu looks so stressed and no longer has a single idea of how to go about addressing a national crisis which I believe was engineered by the PF government and sanctioned by him to prolong his stay in office,’’ alleged Sikaile. “…Your bad-mouthed cadres masquerading to be ministers and PF officials including yourself, have failed to unite Zambians and preserving our peace. To foster national development, you need the contribution of all citizens whether educated or not and irrespective of one’s tribe or region. Every citizen plays a vital role in developing a country.”

CHIEF Mukuni has praised President Edgar Lungu for condemning hate speech perpetrated by his own party, the Patriotic Front.

But Mukuni whose chiefdom cuts across Kazungula, Livingstone and Zimba districts is saddened that the PF rally addressed by deputy secretary general Mumbi Phiri, PF national mobilisation deputy chairperson Geoffrey Bwalya Mwamba and member of the central committee Kebby Mbewe only encouraged youths to hate.

In a statement, Mukuni urged President Lungu to encourage the police to arrest those spreading hate speech.

“I am pleased to note that in his State of the Nation Address (SONA) to Parliament, President Edgar Lungu has condemned hate speech which for all intents and purposes has been practiced by his own party,” Mukuni said. “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.”

He encouraged the PF leadership to preach peace and national unity.

Mukuni said for a change the PF needs to avoid ethnic hate speech against the people of Southern Province, which tragically has characterised the ruling party, especially during the Chilubi Constituency by-election in the Northern Province a few weeks ago.

“Let them attentively listen to President Edgar Lungu’s SONA address and change their behaviour. I sincerely believe that Zambian citizens of all tribes, race, 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,” he said. “As a traditional leader, I rule over a multifaceted 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.”

Mukuni added that he does not like hearing politicians 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 dehumanise 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 behaviour, that has potential to cause citizens to rise against fellow citizens. I strongly feel that all traditional leaders right across Zambia must not be silent but vehemently disapprove such conduct,” he said.

And in an interview, Mukuni said the PF leaders at a youth rally held in Livingstone on Saturday failed to show that President Lungu hates tribal talk as the speakers especially Mbewe and Mwamba resorted to hate speech against the Tonga speaking people.

“I detested the notion by Mr Kebby Mbewe that this country is not looking for a Tonga President and GBM analysis of the 2016 elections and asking who was tribal between the Bemba and the Tonga. This is inciting hatred among Zambians,” said Mukuni.

ZAMBIANS are not interested in being fooled and taken for jolly rides by the government on matters that affect them, says Fr Richard Luonde.

Fr Luonde in an interview said the suggested commission of inquiry into the gassing incidents would be a waste of the already scarce resources.

“Setting up a commission of inquiry to inquire into the gassing that has taken place in some parts of our land will be a shear waste of money and a way of running away from telling the Zambians what truly transpired. People were being gassed and taken to hospital where they were examined and later discharged but we were not told the type of chemicals that were being used in that gassing. Is this commission of inquiry going to go back to the people who were being gassed and find out how that happened? That will not work,” Fr Luonde said.

“How many commissions of inquiries have we had as Zambians and what has come out of them? Zero. We are no longer interested in being fooled as Zambians. We have had enough of being taken as docile people and being taken for granted as people who cannot learn and come to know the truth.”

He called on the security wings to enhance investigations into the gassing incidences.

“These people who are doing these criminal and unChristian acts of gassing people, some of them have been arrested. Let the security wings concentrate on those who have been arrested so that at the end of it they can be able to reveal what exactly happened. They will reveal who their senders, their funders are, that will be inquiry enough. Let the money go to the security wings,” Fr Luonde said. “The commissioners who are going to be appointed are simply going there to make money. Some of them are even celebrating saying ‘here comes money again’. We are tired, the Zambian economy is limping. People are starving, all they need is the growth of the economy, not setting up of commissions of inquiry which have yielded nothing in our land. What has happened to Zambia in terms of criminality has never happened before since independence.”

He charged that something was wrong in the country which was making people abuse each other.

“Today, fellow Zambians are trying to mistreat, ill-treat their own citizens, then something must be wrong and this thing that is wrong must be addressed head on. We don’t need any commission of inquiry,” Fr Luonde said.

“I’m appealing to the Head of State [Edgar Lungu] not to go ahead with appointing the commission of inquiry into gassing, it will be a shear waste of time. Let the investigative wings get to the ground. Most of the people are already in detention, why appoint a commission of inquiry?”

He said Zambians could not easily forget the gassing incidents because: “it has happened for the first time in the history of Zambia and we must be serious on how we handle this. If people have been arrested, let those people give information to the investigative wings then Zambia will come to know the truth.”

Fr Luonde said the economy was collapsing.

“Let us be restrictive in the usage of the little money that we are remaining with after paying huge loans. Let us use it on the good of our nation and to the development of our nation, not appointing commissions,” said Fr Luonde.

After months of hush, except his Facebook and off-the-cuff airport runway remarks on gassing, President Lungu used Parliament on Friday to tell perpetrators of the vice that they will be “crushed and buried.”

The occasion was the President’s address to the National Assembly on progress made in the application of national values and principles, as per Article 9 (2) of the 2016 amended Republican Constitution.

“As Commander-In-Chief of the defence forces and Head of State and government, I want to promise Zambians that the enemies of our people will be crushed and buried. To this effect, I’m seriously considering constituting a Commission of Inquiry to get to the bottom of these gassing attacks,” President Lungu said, with his voice drowned with applause from his think-alike in the House. “Be rest assured that all the culprits will be brought to book, regardless of their standing in society. The enemy will surely be defeated and life will return to normal for our people, sooner rather than later.”

[By Mast Correspondents]

THE government’s decision to engage Ethiopian Airline to relaunch the national airline will cost Zambia a whopping US$700,000 (10.3 million kwacha) a month in plane charges, a well-placed government source has revealed.

The government is facing intense criticism over the decision. Opposition is focused on the business plan, while there are dark mutterings in political circles that corruption is driving the deal.

A senior member of the ruling Patriotic Front’s (PF) central committee questioned how the project was pushed through without consulting the party’s top structures.

There are also allegations that the Civil Aviation Authority is coming under pressure from the government to issue an operator’s certificate before legally required processes have been completed.

It is understood that an initial investment of US$30 million is required to launch the airline under a joint venture agreement that will see Zambia holding 55 per cent through the country’s Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) and Ethiopian Airways holding the balance of the shares.

Opposition Democratic Party (DP) leader, Harry Kalaba accused government of getting money from the state mining investment company, the Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines Investment Holdings (ZCCM – IH) to set up the airline.
He made the claims when he featured on Radio Phoenix in January this year.

Kalaba, who served as foreign affairs minister and resigned his position due to alleged corruption in government, claimed that the deal with Ethiopia cannot be reversed because kickbacks have already exchanged hands.

Ethiopian Airline has not responded to an emailed query asking them to answer to accusations of selling a deal to government that is not in Zambia’s interest.

Former employees of Zambia Airways who formed a company called Zambian AirWorks believe that the best approach is a Public Private Partnership anchored on funding from private sources, either local or foreign.

“During the past 30 years, most of the world, including Zambia, has learnt the folly of government-owned airlines,” said Captain Alick Sakala, one of the founders of Zambian AirWorks.

Addressing the parliamentary committee on transport in 2018, Sakala said: “We propose a private sector and market-driven airline. The IDC could play a part in sourcing investment either locally or [abroad].”

In 2016, at his first press conference as president, Edgar Lungu “deferred” the formation of the airline “until such a time as the economy is able to afford the high establishment costs”.

Economic indicators show that the country is in a worse state now.

According to the African Development Bank, public debt has rapidly increased to 80 per cent of GDP at the end of last year from 35 per cent at the end of 2014. Rising inflation is expected to reach 9 per cent in 2020-21, pushed by large exchange rate depreciations and food price increases.

Zambia’s rolling electricity blackouts, lasting up to 18 hours a day are a further challenge to this huge project. The country is unable to import power to cushion the economy.

Another sign of the faltering economy is the government’s failure to honour a contract with the Russian government for the supply of a Sukhoi Superjet 100 aircraft in the VIP version. The two countries also discussed the supply of four more SSJ 100s.

Russia’s industry and trade minister, Denis Manturov, said at the Russia-Africa Forum that the decision to cancel the deal “was because Zambia does not have enough funds to finance the contract”.

The Centre for Trade Policy and Development (CTPD), an economic think-tank, argues that using state funds to launch the airline will increase government’s financial burdens.

Research by the centre contends that the agreement should be harmonised with Ethiopian Airlines Vision 2025 agenda, which would mean operating the airline as a regional carrier, at least in its early stages.

A senior member of the PF’s central committee, who asked not to be named, complained that the relaunch of the national carrier on the current terms “stinks of corruption”.

“The matter has never been discussed in the committee’s meetings,” he added. “It was on the agenda of one of our meetings in 2018 but the president (Lungu) merely informed us about the decision to partner with Ethiopia.”

Asked another ruling party source: “Why is government insisting on spending taxpayers’ money on the airline when there are private people who are willing to invest in it?”

An insider familiar with the agreement revealed that Zambia will be paying Ethiopian Airline more than US$700,000 per month for the lease of planes. That figure does not include expenses such as insurance and maintenance fees.

A source at the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) complained that officials looking into certification were coming under pressure from top government figures and the airline’s CEO, who seemed to have a direct line to State House.

“It is our legal mandate to ensure that we do our professional work,” said a source. “But there is pressure from some top government officials who want us to ignore certain procedures and hand out the certificate quickly.”

Speaking recently on a local radio station, Mutotwe Kafwaya, the Minister of Transport and Communication, insisted that “no money will come from the treasury”.

“The IDC looks after parastatals, it’s a quasi [quasi-government institution] so I don’t know why that’s not a good enough model,” said Kafwaya. “It’s not drawing money from the treasury, so keep the treasury away from the conversation ….”

Despite continuing uncertainties, the groundwork has mostly been done.
The board, led by senior lawyer Bonaventure Mutale, Zambia’s former Attorney General, is in place.

The chief executive officer, Bruk Endeshaw Abebe, was appointed early last year. Abebe was Ethiopian Airline’s sales and services director for the southern region.

Endershaw was recently quoted in one of the local dailies saying Zambia Airways would operate eight aircraft – three Bombardier Q-400, two Boeing 737-800, and three Boeing 787-800.

However, former transport minister Brian Mushimba said in Parliament in 2018 that the airline “will start with three planes that are going to service a few regional and domestic routes”.

Mushimba did not specify the type of planes but added that at full capacity, the airline will employ about 500 people.

Sakala favours planes that have been operated in Zambia before as “it will reduce the cost significantly”.

He said Zambia Airways once operated Boeing and ATR aircraft, and the country still has expertise in maintaining and flying these planes.

“This makes it possible for the airline to put together a maintenance organisation,” he said. “In addition, both pilots and maintenance engineers could be sourced from the diaspora where they relocated after the closure of the airline.”

The IDC did not respond to an emailed query asking about the airline’s startup capital and who is paying Endeshaw’s salary.

One source claimed Endeshaw is on a gigantic monthly salary, despite the airline not yet being operational. He was contacted for comment and but did not answer repeated calls and a text message.

The airline is not yet listed in the portfolio of state-owned companies on the IDC website. When the board appointed Endeshaw in February last year, it directed him to target the launch of the airline for the third quarter of 2019.

The national airline has been a flagship project for the ruling Patriotic Front since it first formed government in 2011.

The first technical committee appointed in 2013 to oversee the project worked with experts from ZA to draw up a business plan and make recommendations on which aircraft to purchase.

The first committee recommended buying an ATR 42- 600 for domestic routes which would then feed into the Boeing 737 – 700 or 800 for regional routes.
The idea then was to open the intercontinental route after two years of domestic and regional operation. The Boeing 777 Dreamliner was earmarked for intercontinental routes.

The government ignored the plan.

The project was plagued with challenges from the outset, ranging from where to source the planes to interference from government officials.

There have also been loud calls for the government to make public the findings of the liquidator’s report on the defunct Zambia Airways before another airline is launched. There are major questions over how Zambia Airways’ assets were managed after it closed in 1994.

“ZA had assets in New York, London and many other places around the world,” said one former employee. “We want to know what happened to them, because we are told that some senior government officials benefited.”

Zambia has joined Malawi by buying into Ethiopian Airlines’ strategy of expanding its Bole base to include important geographical hubs.

In 2013, the airline acquired a 49 per cent stake in newly founded Malawi Airlines, based in Lilongwe.

However, in 2017 Malawian MPs questioned the partnership between the airline and its Ethiopian counterpart, saying it was not beneficial to the country.

They demanded a report from President Peter Mutharika’s government on how much Malawi had benefited from the partnership.

In 2010, Ethiopian Airlines helped to establish Asky Airlines in Lomé, Togo. Further investments were made in Ethiopian Mozambique Airlines and Tchadia Airlines in Chad.

Ethiopian Airlines drew up a 15-year strategic plan called “Vision 2025“ to make the airline the leading aviation group in Africa in eight areas: regional, international, freight, maintenance and repair operations, an aviation academy, board catering, ground operations and airport enterprise.

The targets are ambitious: by the year 2025 the airline plans to have an annual turnover of US$10-billion, a fleet of 120 aircraft and 90 international destinations.

A FORMER aide of late president Levy Mwanawasa says Zambians should not imagine the PF winning the 2021 election because it will be a disaster and the end of this country.

Jack Kalala said Zambia would get worse because the PF had failed to run the country since taking power in 2011.

“There is no capacity in PF. They have been there for nine years and failed to transform this country. It is the same people who are going to sit there and stealing with the notion of, uubomba mwibala alya mwibala and their violent behaviour. That is what they will continue doing,” Kalala said in an interview.

He observed that already there was a lot of discontent and that if PF wins in 2021, the same discontent would continue increasing.

“In 2022, the bonds will come up and the nation will be coming out of an election in 2021 which will consume a lot of money. Where is the money going to come from to facilitate for these bonds? The nation is going to default if Zambia continues under the current regime,” Kalala said. “[former Bank of Zambia governor] Caleb Fundanga predicted in 2011 and once Zambia defaults, everything will be due now and everyone will start saying ‘pay us’. Currently, citizens are struggling. What will happen to them if Zambia becomes bankrupt?”

He recalled that the PF created the Industrial Development Corporation whose purpose was to create new industries in the country.

“What are they doing now? They are putting existing companies and eating money from them instead of creating new industries for Zambians. To them, what matters most is their belly. KCM, they have taken it over. Is there anything good coming out of KCM since they took over? It is being run down,” Kalala said. “By the time we reach 2021, KCM will be a shell. And yet Zambians were told after two to three months they are going to find an investor for this company. The Vedanta guys are smiling because they know that they are going to get money out of that mistake.”

Kalala urged Zambians to wake up because time was running out and that if not careful, the country would go into an abyss under the current regime.

“My advice to Zambians is that for the interest of this country and prosperity we should get a capable leader who should take over in 2021 and sort out the mess that the PF has created in the country,” he said.
Kalala said voting out the PF would be good for the country.

“PF has run out of ideas and they have now resorted to dividing the nation, full of lies saying that Zambians cannot vote for a particular tribe,” said Kalala. “That is not leadership and Zambians should not tolerate and accept that. Even the educated who are in PF are behaving like they are not educated. There is no hope for PF to transform this nation. I love this country and Zambians who love this country too should think about changing the current leadership that has continued abusing the poor Zambians.”

A CONCERNED citizen has challenged people of Eastern Province not to vote on tribal lines in the 2021 general election.

Kapoche PF member of parliament and local government minister Charles Banda recently asked people of Eastern Province to re-elect President Edgar Lungu next year and not lose him like they did Rupiah Banda.

Kingfrey Musaka said the province could not develop because of such mentality.

“Eastern is the least developed province in Zambia because they have been voting for their tribesmen who, after coming to power, took things for granted,” he said. “My fellow Zambians in Eastern Province, stop doing business with family, you will always be broke. I challenge you to exercise patriotism and show Mr Banda that we are One Zambia, One Nation by voting for a Zambian, not restricting candidates to family.”

Musaka appealed to Easterners to try voting for other tribes and see if they would not deliver to them compared to their kinsmen.

“Try visitors and see if they will fail you like your kinsmen. Come 2021 our voting will be based on merit and not tribal relations. If you want to be re-elected then deliver your promises,” Musaka said.

Musaka asked Dr Banda why people should be patient with PF amidst continued hardships.

“Dr Banda, you want people to be patient, seriously? How are they going to be patient when even a simple illness can be interpreted as fatal due to lack of drugs in clinics? How can they be patient when they chase dogs from eating from their plates but still end up drinking with dogs?” he asked. “How can they be patient when they trusted you to help them, instead you neglect them only to come back because you have now checked your time and it’s showing 04:30 AM; soon it will be dawn on your election calendar?”

He said Dr Banda’s statement was divisive to the country.

Munsaka said Dr Banda should instead help unite the country as a leader.

“Dr Banda, in your attempt to sell yourself for re-election in 2021, remember to tell people the truth as in chichewa they say ‘ukanama boza sikucedwa kuca’. During your campaigns you promised a lot of things that are not being delivered and now that the day is almost breaking on you, you are now turning into an opportunistic vulture who is waiting to use all available disorder to paint the opposition black,” said Musaka. “You are promoting tribalism, Dr Banda. Your statement has no trace of national unity in it at all. Our freedom fighters spent sleepless nights trying to build this nation by promoting One Zambia, One Nation, whose effects are still felt now.”

ANDREW Banda says when a Head of State does not stamp his authority on his political party, cadres takeover.
And Andrew wonders why ‘small boys’ can hold the country hostage.

In an interview, Andrew said PF cadres had been conducting themselves in a violent manner for a very wrong time.

“When a Head of State does not stamp his authority on his country or his political party, cadres takeover, cadres take advantage and in this case they seem to have taken advantage. You know what happened in

Shiwang’andu where PF cadres under a command of senior government official almost brought down a chopper carrying UPND officials? You know what happened in Ndola where a group of heavily armed cadres besieged Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe airport when Miles Sampa went to launch his party? Nobody did anything about that,” he said.

“In Sesheke, PF cadres were stationed there for a month to intimidate voters. In Kaoma, a UPND member was killed, nothing has happened up to now. Recently, at Inter-continental Hotel, with CCTV cameras, well known people who were visible went and besieged and held hostage eminent lawyers, all the best legal brains in this country for over 30 minutes, which is a very serious crime; up to date there has been no arrest at all. I can cite another example among many others where Harry Kalaba was in Petauke when known PF cadres chased him out of there and fired gunshots but no arrests were made. The police can’t do anything because they are scared of losing their jobs as was the case in Sesheke,” he said.

Andrew said the PF cadres have been conducting themselves in a violent manner for the past eight years and they now feel untouchable.

“The biggest problem is that the powers that be have allowed this and it is now getting out of control. Now my appeal before it gets late, my appeal to President Edgar Lungu is, let him stamp his constitutional powers to ensure that these people are arrested, prosecuted and face the consequences of what they are doing,” he said.
Andrew said people were still waiting for President Lungu to address the nation, not Parliament, on what had been happening in the last two months.

“I think it is only fair that an independent investigations team, after all we are members of the commonwealth, like Scotland Yard, where possible even FBI, can be brought in to investigate this gassing issue since the police have failed. Let independent investigation bodies investigate and let us know who was behind this. It won’t help if we just let it die like that. If we let it die like that, there is every chance that it will re-occur, there is every possibility that it will come back again if those that are involved are not exposed. This issue must not be taken lightly, many lives have been lost something that we have never experienced before in this country,” he said.

Andrew commended the Zambia Army for bringing a volatile situation to almost normalcy.

“Off course, for the police, I know at low level they have also tried their best under very difficult circumstances but I have a problem with the police command; how have they failed to come up with
who was behind this gassing, whose resultant effects were mob justice in some cases on innocent people because the citizenry just lost confidence in the police. In a normal situation, the command should have stepped down because people have simply lost confidence in them,” he said.

On Spax, Andrew said the young man seem to be very close to the powers that be as shown by a couple of pictures.

“Now coming to this young man whom they say has been arrested, warned and cautioned for murder and other charges leveled against him. And this same young man seems to be very close to the powers that be as
pictures show he is at State function, sometimes wearing military fatigue, which is actually illegal. In some pictures, he is seen carrying powerful guns that look like M16 which is an American assault rifle, where did he get that weapon?” he asked.

Andrew wondered why young people like Spax could hold Zambia to ransom.

“How is it possible for the whole Zambia to be held to ransom by young men? How is it possible? Holding the country to hostage with impunity, somebody is condoning that! They were condoning tribalism, corruption and now look at where the country has ended up because of not listening! Exactly like in the economy, they were advised that if you borrow too much, this will happen. Where Zambia has found itself is a mess and it is irreversible. If we are not careful we’ll be ruled by these boys but I believe that the Almighty God will prevail,” said Andrew.

GUY Scott says it does not make sense that there is so much corruption without anyone being convicted for the vice.

And Dr Scott revealed that government has refused to pay him for the 90 days he acted as Republican President following the death of incumbent Michael Sata.

He also says conditions were suitable for civil unrest if he hadn’t managed the situation properly in the December 2014 PF convention in Kabwe that ushered in Lungu as the party’s presidential candidate.

In an interview when he visited The Mast, the former vice-president wondered what the role of government control systems was and that of investigative wings.

“Somebody spends a million dollars on a fire engine, he’s not given any case. And things are not even put in front of the court. Have you heard somebody being asked about that? No. There’s so much that has to be gotten to the bottom. It’s a complicated area,” he said on Tuesday.

“…We hear stories of corruption, that somebody has stolen the money; and yet there’re controls. But where are they? I’m asking because if somebody says we run a government in transparency, how much do we know? How many people follow that? I see in newspapers, a story headline on corruption and another on gassing. You’ve caught people, who have you caught? It’s just worth getting the figures, that’s all.”

Dr Scott questioned frequent acquittals of corruption suspects amidst overwhelming evidence.

“There was a story in your paper recently about three days ago. And it said that there was somebody who had stolen. And then there were three who were acquitted,” Dr Scott said. “But that’s bad if nobody is there to stand at the door or state that this is bad. I don’t know, I don’t know how government administration works because I’m a politician. But, presumably, these guys who run around in the Ministry of Finance putting controls and all such things, why don’t they find out?”

And Dr Scott disclosed that President Edgar Lungu’s administration refused to recognize the period he acted as President and pay him for it.

“And we’ve got an interesting situation in Parliament. They refused to pay me for [the period] when I was Acting President. For 90 days I was answering questions on the floor,” he said. “I went to get my extra malipilo (wages) and some smart guy in the Ministry [of Finance] sent me a letter saying, but you weren’t acting as the President, and definitely you don’t get that increment. And I said, excuse me! I mean, nobody asked him for his opinion.”

Meanwhile, Dr Scott reflected on the December 2014 PF convention in Kabwe that ushered in Lungu as the party’s presidential candidate.

He said the conditions were suitable for civil unrest if there was no proper management of the situation.

“When I had 6,000 people in Kabwe after facing some people who wanted to vote for PF and everything else, we had had 6,000 people. Now if I hadn’t allowed any guns at all, if I’d said no guns, you’ll have had the conditions for civil unrest. We saw what they did, without the guns it would have been very difficult. But no one says is that a truthful account,” said Dr Scott. “And every morning I’m eager to look and see what I’d stolen, where I put it and so forth. But I can’t find anything, so I can’t even get an ice cream. But that doesn’t mean anything if you are not saying to me that I’ve stolen some money. What good is it to me or to the people? Very strange.”

Dr Scott also said he is glad that old politicians like Dr Boniface Kawimbe and Ernest Mwansa found time to visit him.

A GROUP of ruling PF supporters has vowed not to move out of a piece of land which has a title registered in the names of Lands and Natural Resources minister Jean Kapata claiming it is their share.

The group led by Joseph Lungo has accused Kapata of being selfish and using her position to grab the land from them using officials who they say they will expose if pushed too far.

In an interview, Lungo, backed by others who are equally vowing to be killed if all goes to the worst, asked President Edgar Lungu to intervene in the matter before it gets out of hand.

“I stand here and complain about what has happened in the Forest 27. We are the ones that initiated the degazettion of Forest 27, we wrote an appointment letter to honourable Jean Kapata and on 23rd February 2017, she wrote to the commissioner of lands to look into the matter,” Lungo said.

“The commissioner quickly guided us. We even have the letters we wrote. Mr George Sindila is the one who responded to us for the commissioner. We went and saw the surveyor general before going to the council and he wrote a recommendation for cancellation of lot 6497/M situated in Forest 27 Lusaka East.”

“After this letter which we took to the council, and the procedure was followed until we took the document back to the ministry, we reached the extent degazettion of Forest 27. 64 hectors which is just part of it was degazzeted and they divided the land into 110 plots and we were asked to submit names of the people we were working with which we did but they shared all the plots.”

Lungo said his group was then advised to have a concise list.

“Honourable Jean Kapata had a list of 30 people who she shared the plots with. We went back to Mr. Sindila. We were told our list was too long and we adjusted it and waited for the way forward but we discovered all the plots were all gone. When we asked, we were told it’s national interest. But what is surprising about this national interest is that while these national interest guys did not apply for this land. They only came in after he had secured the land,” he says.

“The President is the one who asked us to look for land and follow procedure in acquiring it but that wasn’t the case. We went back to the lands commissioner who advised us that we should look for alternative means to resolve the matter which we failed to find. We wrote another complaint letter to the commissioner and copied it to the President so that maybe we could be heard and the minister Jean Kapata can have mercy on us but we suspect that letter was blocked and the President never saw it.”

Lungo said his team applied to the commissioner to be allocated the market space but they were duped.
“When we saw that there was no way out, we decided that since there is land left for a market, maybe they could allocate us part of the land but to our surprise, even the same land, they allocated to themselves and when we checked, the land had been put under the name Jean Kapata and a title deed had been issued,” he adds.

“We wondered what kind of a parent we had been complaining to because instead of helping us, she got the land herself. The whole three hectors she got. This is selfishness and she used her position to get the land which we found and fought for.”

The group accused Kapata of harming the party and trying to make it tough for them to win elections next year.

“We vow that we will not give up on this land. If she wants, let her come and kill us. We have since come onto the land and started developing it. We have no other properties like her, she is just being selfish,” Lungo charged.

“We have seen that she is in that office to help herself, she is not there to help the people, she is only aiming at destroying the reputation of the PF party and the President because this party is ours, we are the ones who vote people into and out of positions and time is coming. She has been sending police officers o harass us for the past five days. We want the President to hear us because this woman is not helping in any way because she is decampaigning the party with her actions ahead of 2021.”

Lungo said: “we know the people they used to do all these deals. They should not force us to disclose a lot of things. Even those who want to come and bring down our structures, please follow the procedure, the thief who has stolen land from us is the one crying foul and going to the police.”

But when contacted for a comment, Kapata cut the line when this reporter introduced himself as a Mast Newspapers journalist.

After being phoned again, Kapata asked what the problem was before saying she did not have any comment after this reporter introduced himself.

Reporter: Afternoon madam minister, my name is Tobias…
Kapata: Tobias from where?

Reporter: Tobias from The Mast Newspaper
Kapata: Tobias, what is your problem?

Reporter: I have a story which I need your comment on.
Kapata: What is the story?

Reporter: the story is about some people who claim you have duped them in Forest 27.
Kapata: I have no comment to make. I have no comment to make. No. I have no comment to make because I don’t give land myself. I have no comment to make.

Reporter: They say you used your position to get that land and dupe them.
Kapata: I have told you, I have no comment. Thank you very much.