By Miles B. Sampa, MP Patriotic Front (PF) President & APNAC Chairman
January 31st, 2024
The other day social media was awash with the Faith Musonda cash gate story wherein the former Bank of Zambia (BOZ) Governor Chris Mvunga’s name was mentioned as did authorize the cash withdrawal out of the BOZ. Being a corruption scandal cash story that I have never been satisfied on its conclusion, I reposted the story on my page with a note that ” full investigation should be carried out” as in my APNAC mind, I have no sacred cows in the fight against corruption.
I however overlooked a vital aspect on the viral story in that it had no name of who the author was. In hindsight I should have neither reposted the story nor commented on it. Any story written and posted without author’s name and making negative accusation on any citizen need not attract attention as it is the first indication that the writer knows he’s telling lies or simply fabricating. It’s the common modern social media mercenary defamation of rivals by cowards.
It’s the modus operandi of cowards like Emmanuel Mwamba who in the Mvunga story reposted it and with a heading ” Miles Sampa Says Chris Mvunga ….”. Not sure why he does not change his tactics as such has never paid him politically. Sata fired him as PS of Northern Province in 2013 because of constant gossip and defamation of then Ministers and peer PSs. Umulomo kwati mwanakashi. It’s the same legacy he has left at the AU in Addis Ababa when he represented Zambia there before President HH fired him.
As for Chris Mvunga he is actually a very close colleague of mine for years. Anything to do with him, I would actually declare interest not to be involved directly. He is that close. We are both amongst the best former commercial bankers in the country. He worked for Stanbic while I worked for Barclays Bank now ABSA. Our class of then bankers includes astute names like Noel Nkoma, Ngenda Nyambe, Jeff Tembo, Davies Pwele, Clyde Musonda etc etc
Amongst current CEOs of commercial banks in Zambia, only Mizinga Melu (Absa) and Mukwandi Chisebakunda (Zanaco) are in that class of then best bankers mentioned above that includes Chris Mvunga. The other CEOs where actually in one way or another hired or our students during our time in profession of holding and managing money that is not yours but for other people, companies, institutions, government or public.
I would later become a deputy Minister of Finance and then hand over to Keith Mukata who would years later pass on the button to Chris Mvunga. Each time I meet one of them, we always have a big laugh on our experiences at the Ministry of Finance (MOH) and our Ministers then.
I would later become the Mayor of the greater city of Lusaka while Chris Mvunga would be the Bank of Zambia Governor during the same period. Against all odds and usual negative talk upon his appointment, he ended up out performing all expectations. The Kwacha was stable and he also commenced the securing local Gold as part of our Country reserves.
Incidentally it was only over the weekend that on one of my fellow former bankers closed blog (where Chris is not), we were discussing the constant Kwacha depreciations and possible solutions. My first comment to the debate was ” I miss Chris Mvunga as Governor at BOZ. He was the out of the box type of Governor and that’s what our country needs. Of all his theatrics, his performance on fiscal and monetary front was exceptional. “
I stand by this statement now publicly that President HH should consider retiring the current BOZ Governor Dr Danny Kalyalya and replace him with Chris Mvunga. Dr Kalyalya actually taught all of us the art of discipline and compliance in banking careers. He has however played his part and now living beyond ‘sell by date’. He is actually a very good, honest and blameless son of the soil. Meritocracy however demands that anyone not performing or producing results must be asked to excuse themselves. It’s not a secret that the Kwacha has performed its worst last 2 years and remains the biggest dark spot for for the UPND government since took office in 2021.
Numbers don’t lie and they are there for anyone to check what they were in the reign of Chris Mvunga as the BOZ Governor. If not for BOZ, Chris Mvunga can also make a very good Finance Minister. Our beloved senior citizen Dr Situmbeko Musokotwane has also served the nation beyond his ‘ sell by date ‘.
Lusambo earned slightly above K3.8 million during ministerial period – Witness
THE Economic and Financial Crimes Court has heard that Bowman Lusambo’s earnings between the period 2016 and 2021 were slightly above K3.8 million.
It was also established that three out of his four companies were not tax compliant.
This is in a matter where Lusambo is facing two counts of possessing property suspected to be proceeds of crime.
It is alleged in count one and two that Lusambo between May 1, 2015, and December 31, 2021 possessed property number F/609/E/44/B/9, where his fancy Chamba valley house is erected and an incomplete block of six (6) flats, constructed on property number F/609/E/50 in Chamba Valley Lusaka, which are suspected to be products of grand corruption.
Morgan Mwanza who handles ministers’ payroll and emoluments narrated that in January 2022 the Ministry of Finance received a warrant of access from officers of the Anti- Corruption Commission inquiring about Lusambo’s personal emoluments when he served as minister .
He said the warrant was restricted to personal emoluments and not other allowances he received when he served as provincial minister.
“I logged into the Payment Management and Establishment Control (PEMC) system. The payments from September 2016 to May 2021 were available on the system. I compiled a summary of the payslips and earnings that I identified and submitted to the internal audit department for verification,” said Mwanza.
“When the report was audited it was submitted to the Anti- Corruption Commission. The payments were; net salary K2, 546, 359.64 , travel benefits K109, 069.71, Household loan K1, 020 000, settling in allowance K170, 931.19. The total received is slightly over K3.8 million.”
During cross examination by Lusambo’s lawyer Nkhula Botha, Mwanza confirmed that some of the travel allowances were not counted.
He said he doesn’t knowhow much Lusambo earned as allowances when he served as Copperbelt minister.
Lawrence Mukoye an accountant at Lusaka Provincial Administration said according to records on the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) Lusambo was paid K115,645.95.
And James Mwansa a Tax Inspector at the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) under Direct Taxes Division Returns and Payments Unit said records at the Revenue Authority show that Lusambo’s companies were not tax compliant except one.
He said according to the tax payer compliance status reports prepared by the taxing authority as requested by the ACC for Lusambo’s companies Mpongwe General Dealers Limited, Nuclear Sounds and General Dealers, Chichele FM Limited and Chichele Investments Limited, Lusambo never filed tax returns.
Mwansa said Mpongwe General Dealers was not registered for any tax type and as a result, the tax payer is not compliant with tax registration.
“Nuclear Sounds and General Dealers, the tax payer name is Bowman Lusambo and it’s trading name is Nuclear Sounds and General Dealers. He is a sole trader. The tax payer registered for income tax on March 31, 2006 and the records on the Tax Online system indicated that the taxpayer never filed any return and never made any payment,” he said.
Mwansa indicated that the taxpayer is no longer trading as Nuclear Sounds and General Dealers but only as a TPIN meaning Lusambo is no longer a sole trader.
He said Chichele FM Limited was not registered for any taxes and as a result it is not tax compliant regards to tax registration as the law requires that any person carrying on business activities or intending to trade is supposed to register for taxes.
“For Chichele Investments limited the tax payer registered for turn over tax only on September 30, 2020 and the taxpayer has filed all the returns. The taxpayers never made any payment to this account as all returns filed were nil returns. The taxpayer is tax compliant as he has no outstanding payments,” said Mwansa.
“A nil return means there was no business during that period. It epends with the source of income. If the income he is receiving is from business, then he is trading so he has to pay taxes.”
In cross examination the witness confirmed that a company can be registered with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) and be put on shelf.
He confirmed that Shelf companies are registered companies that have never traded nor have assets and liabilities.
Asked if a company being entity and a person at law ought to be differentiated and separated from Lusambo, Mwansa responded in the affirmative.
Asked if Lusaka was supposed to pay tax for the donations he received, the tax inspector denied.
Mwansa said he did not report Lusambo for defaulting on tax payment.
He further confirmed that the charges before Court did not border on tax crimes allegedly committed by Lusambo’s companies but on the acquisition of his house and an unfinished construction project.
Mwansa said that she does not know what Lusambo paid in taxes when he served as minister as the focus was on his companies.
The Court is today expected to conduct a site visit at Lusambo’s home. https://kalemba.news/…/lusambo-earned-slightly-above…/
My Success Is Not Built Around My S3x Appeal’ – Nollywood Actress, Kiitan Bukola Yoruba Nollywood actress, Oloruntimilehin Bukola, better known as Kiitan Bukola, has said her success in the movie industry was not built on her sex appeal. the thespian, in an interview with PUNCH, said she had always been succeeding before she joined Nollywood and has a business outside movie production.
She said, “Away from the screen, I look good; so surely, I will have admirers. It is either I accept their proposals or not. I am very hard-working, and I had been succeeding before I came into Nollywood. I have a business outside the industry. My success is not built around my sex appeal.”
The actress also noted that she cannot continue a relationship with a cheating partner, unlike some women who have said that cheating is not a deal-breaker for them in relationships.
She said, “I will surely walk away silently (from the relationship), and life goes on.” Asked if she is under any pressure to maintain a particular image on social media regarding fashion, she said, “I wear whatever I am comfortable in. I am not in competition with anyone, and I am not under pressure. Whenever I have money to buy designer outfits, I will go for them. And if I don’t, I will wear whatever I can afford.”
Why Cheating Is No Longer A Deal Breaker For Me In Relationship Meanwhile, Nigerian media personality cum actress, Toke Makinwa, has revealed why she no longer considers cheating as a deal breaker in a relationship.
thespian, in an interview with PUNCH, said she had always been succeeding before she joined Nollywood and has a business outside movie production.
She said, “Away from the screen, I look good; so surely, I will have admirers. It is either I accept their proposals or not. I am very hard-working, and I had been succeeding before I came into Nollywood. I have a business outside the industry. My success is not built around my sex appeal.”
The actress also noted that she cannot continue a relationship with a cheating partner, unlike some women who have said that cheating is not a deal-breaker for them in relationships.
She said, “I will surely walk away silently (from the relationship), and life goes on
Owning a private jet in Nigeria isn’t just for convenience, but also a display of wealth and affluence as many Nigerians ranging from politicians, to artists and also pastors have been known to acquire private jets.
AMB Reports that on an average, the maintenance of a private jet costs about $500,000 to $1 million (approx. N290 million – N580 million) per year yet people still pay this huge sum.
There are also general checks that should be done on a private jet which include ‘C’ checks, software checks, fuel level, preflight, post-flight and weekly inspections etc. All of which are extremely important.
The types of private jets include Very Light Jets, Light Jets, Mid-Size Jets, Super Mid-Size Jets, Heavy Business Jets, Ultra-Long Range Jets, and Executive Airliners.
Here are Nigerians who own private jets along with their net worth:
1. Aliko Dangote – Founder of Dangote group – $19.6 billion
2. Mike Adenuga – CEO of Globacom Ltd – $7 billion
3. Allen Onyema – CEO of Airpeace – $3.1 billion
4. Arthur Eze – CEO of Atlas Oranto Petroleum – $5.8 billion
5. Igho Sanomi – Business man – $1 billion
6. Adedeji Adeleke -President of Adeleke University – $700 million
7. Cletus Madubugwu Ibeto – CEO of The Ibeto Group – $3.8 billion
8. Apostle Johnson Suleman – General overseer of Omega Fire Ministries – $10.5 million
9. Dr. Bryant (ABC) Orjiako – Chairman and co-founder of SEPLAT – $1.2 billion
10. Femi Otedola – Businessman and Philantropist – $1.2 billion
The US and its allies are applying both pressure and soft power to Kenya to support the war on Houthis in Yemen – and by extension Israel’s war in Gaza – targeting to end a disruptive series of strikes on ships ferrying goods through the Red Sea.
Nairobi has in the past fortnight hosted senior US intelligence and defence chiefs, including Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director William Burns and head of the Africa Command (Africom) General Michael Langley. Their visits, about whose outcomes the government kept mum, yielded pledges of security and intelligence cooperation. Gen Langley also visited Somalia and Djibouti, while the CIA boss toured Somalia and DR Congo.
This week, Kenya was the only Horn of Africa country to publicly endorse airstrikes on the Iran-backed Houthi, whose acts of targeting ships in the Red Sea are now categorised by the West as terrorism.
“These strikes were designed to disrupt and degrade the capability of the Houthis to continue their attacks on global trade and innocent mariners from around the world, while avoiding escalation,” said a statement by the White House on Wednesday.
“We condemn these attacks, and demand an end to them. We also underscore that those who supply the Houthis with the weapons to conduct these attacks are violating UN Security Council Resolution 2216 and international law. The January 22 international response to the continuing Houthi attacks demonstrated shared resolve to uphold navigational rights and freedoms, and to defend the lives of mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks.”
The statement was endorsed by the governments of Kenya, Guinea-Bissau, Albania, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Poland, Korea, Romania, UK, and US.
The Houthis were not initially considered a threat beyond their country. But since December, they have launched at least 30 attacks on commercial and naval ships passing through the Red Sea, ostensibly to retaliate for Israel’s war in Gaza against the Hamas militant group. Houthis have argued theirs is revenge for Israel’s atrocities on Palestinians.
While the Red Sea shipping route is crucial to Eastern African countries, shortening the importation times from Europe, the Horn of Africa states have steered clear of backing the counter-strikes. Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea and Tanzania – all of whom may be affected by any maritime insecurity there — have chosen a neutral stance.
Kenya’s cooperation on the Houthi matter is meant to be an insurance policy against local piracy, a diplomatic source told The EastAfrican. But there are fears that it could attract the wrath of terror groups keen to raise their profile by appearing to side with the Palestinians.
Last week, the International Chamber of Commerce’s International Maritime Bureau advised shippers to remain vigilant as they transit waters off Somalia and the Gulf of Aden, as piracy remains a threat.
Attacks in the Red Sea mean ships reroute via the Gulf of Guinea to the southern tip of Africa, adding some 6,000km on their voyages, which brings in the importance of Guinea Bissau in securing that route.
The US considers Kenya an important and influential ally as “East Africa’s most dynamic economy”, which is “a growing regional business and financial hub”.
In 2018, Washington and Nairobi formally elevated their relations to a strategic partnership, prioritising five pillars of engagement: economic prosperity, trade, and investment; defence cooperation; democracy, governance, and civilian security; multilateral and regional issues; and public health cooperation.
In 2022, the two countries started negotiating the Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership (Stip), which Kenya hopes will help foster growth and improve its business environment.
Nairobi, meanwhile, is availing itself of Washington’s power of oversight and management of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to ease pressure on debt repayment and rescue the economy.
It has not been lost on observers that, around the period it was hosting the senior US officials, the IMF approved $684.7 million disbursement to Kenya to shore up its ability to repay its first Eurobond, which matures in June.
The new funds are part of the $941.2 million from the augmentation/expansion of resources under the fund’s multiyear arrangement with Kenya.
Kenya has lobbied for additional resources from the IMF since last year, citing heightened balance of payment needs from the upcoming outsized maturity amid difficulties in accessing alternative funding from the international capital markets.
Besides leveraging IMF funding, Kenya has been seeking additional concessional funding from other sources, including the World Bank, alongside syndicated loans.
Sources told The EastAfrican that Kenya has agreed to support the anti-Houthi operation for American support for its own maritime and local security apparatus. The US has been campaigning against any direct or indirect support for the Houthis, including through Iran. But Washington has also been subtle about first seeking to dissuade Houthis off the terror cause.
On January 17, 2024, the US Department of State announced the designation of Ansarallah (Houthis) as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), effective February 16, 2024. It said the delayed implementation was to help “change behaviour” of Houthis, rather than punish them.
US former president Donald Trump’s administration had previously designated Houthis as a SDGT and as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO), but this labelling was reversed by President Joe Biden soon after he took power in February 2021, due to concerns that the measures could be an obstacle to humanitarian assistance reaching the Yemeni people.
On Thursday, the US and UK designated four Houthi military chiefs, Mohamed al-Atifi, Muhammad Fadl Abd al-Nabi, Muhammad Ali al-Qadiri and Muhammad Ahmad al-Talibi for targeting ships.
Americans have used influence, too, imposing a soft power of pledges, military support and financial backing for allies.
In Africa, only Kenya and Guinea-Bissau have publicly voiced support for aerial raids on Houthis. They have coincidentally suffered the pain of sea piracy in the past.
In Nairobi, officials publicly spoke of that military support from the US. Kenya’s Defence Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale, while not discussing the specific content of their meeting with Gen Langley said: “The US has been a critical partner in supporting Kenya’s quest in enhancing peace, security, and stability in the Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes Region.”
“The US government has been playing a key role in the support of the construction of the Kenya Defence Forces’ (KDF’s) Counter Insurgency, Terrorism and Stability Operations (Citso) Centre and offering the KDF personnel training opportunities.”
On Tuesday this week, the US, UK and more than 20 of their allies launched strikes against Houthis, warning the strikes will go on until Houthis call off the attacks. In a statement, UK said 24 countries, including the US, Germany and Australia, conducted strikes on Monday against eight targets in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen in their bid to end the ongoing attacks in Red Sea.
For Kenya, the Houthis are not as a direct threat as the resurgence of piracy off the coast of Somalia with the threat of a rise in insurance premiums for shipping and hence the cost of importing goods via the Port of Mombasa.
A global naval coalition led by the US and the European Union almost wiped out piracy in the past decade. But four vessels have been attacked by pirates off Somalia since November 2023. Two of them were released while the other two are yet to be freed.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has vowed to keep hampering the ability of the Houthis to attack ships.
“We are not seeking a confrontation,” he told parliament Monday.
“We urge the Houthis and those who enable them to stop these illegal and unacceptable attacks.”
Meanwhile, the United Nations on Wednesday asked Houthi authorities to reconsider their decision to expel US and British nationals working for the world body in Yemen.
Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, confirmed that the UN had received communication from the Houthi, giving all US and British nationals a month to leave the areas under their control.
“Any request or requirement for UN staff to leave based solely on the nationality of that staff is inconsistent with the legal framework applicable to the UN,” said Dujarric. “It also impedes our ability to deliver on the mandate to support all of the people in Yemen. And we call on all the authorities in Yemen to ensure that our staff can continue to perform their functions on behalf of the UN.”
He said UN staff serve impartially and serve the flag of the United Nations and none other.
The spokesman refused to say how many US and British nationals are working for the United Nations in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.
The UK government has sanctioned members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including a Commander for involvement in “hostile activity” by the Iranian government.
According to UK’s Foreign Office, the sanctions, imposed in coordination with the U.S, target seven individuals and one organisation.
The sanctioned IRGC members are part of Unit 840, which an ITV investigation in the UK said was involved in plots to assassinate two television presenters from the news channel Iran International in the UK.
They are Naji Ibrahim Sharifi-Zindashti: Head of international drug and trafficking cartel, Mohammed Ansari: IRGC-QF official named in ITV News report for coordinating threat to Iran International, Muhammed Abd al-Razek Kanafani: Named in ITV News report for co-ordinating threat to Iran International, Abdulvahap Kocak: Turkish national linked to the killing of an Iranian dissident in Istanbul, Ali Kocak: Turkish national linked to the killing of an Iranian dissident in Istanbul, Ali Esfanjani and Muhammad Reza Naserzadeh; both Iranian nationals linked to the killing of an Iranian dissident in Istanbul.
This plot was just the latest credible reporting of the regime’s attempt to intimidate or kill British nationals or UK-linked individuals, with at least 15 such threats taking place since January 2022.
“The Iranian regime and the criminal gangs who operate on its behalf pose an unacceptable threat to the UK’s security,” British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said.
“Today’s package exposes the roles of the Iranian officials and gangs involved in activity aimed to undermine, silence and disrupt the democratic freedoms we value in the UK.”
The UK and US have sent a clear message – we will not tolerate this threat.
The Foreign Secretary summoned the Iranian Charge d’Affaires on 22 December, to make clear that threats from the Iranian Regime will not be tolerated.
To date, the UK has more than 400 sanctions designations in place on Iranian individuals and entities in response to the regime’s human rights violations, nuclear weapons programme and malign influence internationally.
Home Secretary James Cleverly said, The Iranian regime has tried to undermine our democracy through repression – we will continue to take action when necessary to protect our country, values and freedom of speech.
We cannot allow foreign regimes to collaborate with criminals to threaten us. Sanctioning these criminal networks working for the Iranian regime will remind them that we will fight back.
My priority is to protect our people and to defend our way of life, and the UK will not tolerate threats from the Iranian regime.
UK Leader Urges Iran To De-escalate Tensions After Jordan Drone Strike Earlier, British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak said that he was concerned about tensions in the Middle East and urged Iran to de-escalate after an attack that killed three U.S. service members in northeastern Jordan near Syria’s border.
Sunak said the UK “absolutely condemned” the drone attacks, which U.S President Joe Biden said had been carried out by Iran-backed fighters.
“We are concerned and would urge Iran to continue to de-escalate tensions in the region,” Sunak told broadcasters.
“We stand resolutely with our allies to bring stability and peace to the region, and that’s what we continue to work towards,” he added.
Sunak’s spokesperson told reporters, “We believe that the attack was carried out by radical Iran-backed militant groups operating in Syria and Iraq in line with the U.S assessment.”
The European Union has disclosed its intention to consider the future of payments to the United Nations Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) “in light of the very serious allegations” made last week alleging involvement of staff in Hamas’ October 7 attacks.
“The Commission will review the matter in light of the outcome of the investigation announced by the UN and the actions it will take,” it said in a statement.
“The Commission welcomes the information provided by UNRWA as well as the launch of the investigation,” it added.
It also said it expects the UN agency for Palestinian refugees to undergo a European-led audit, which will focus on “control systems needed to prevent the possible involvement of its staff in terrorist activities.”
“Finally, a review of all UNRWA staff should be launched soonest to confirm that they did not participate in the attacks,” it stated.
Nonetheless, the bloc stated that the decision did not impact humanitarian aid.
“Humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank will continue unabated through partner organisations,” it said.
No money is due to UNRWA under current programmes until February, a spokesperson for the Commission said on Monday.
“We have extremely serious allegations against staff working for UN. It is absolutely obvious that these investigations these allegations need to be investigated seriously, and without delay,” the Spokesperson disclosed.
“Secondly, UNWRA is a partner with which the Commission works intensively on the ground, both for humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and also more generally for development aid. And as such, it is absolutely normal, that we would request that these allegations are investigated and clarified since we are one of the major donors,” said the spokesperson.
The statement came as Romania became the latest country to announce that it is suspending payments to the UN’s Palestinian refugee agency, UNRWA.
A string of countries including the U.S, UK and Germany have paused their funding to the aid agency in the wake of allegations that 12 UNRWA staff were involved in the 7 October attacks by Hamas in southern Israel.
An estimated 2 million people are dependent on UNWRA services.
About 3,000 of the agency’s 13,000 staff continue to work in Gaza despite the continual Israeli bombardment.
A German Foreign Ministry spokesperson said that the UN agency is not the only source of humanitarian aid for Palestinians.
“We continue to advocate for more humanitarian aid to be provided,” the spokesperson told a news conference in Berlin.
ActionAid Decries Withdrawal Of UNRWA Funding ActionAid, an international Non-governmental Organisation described the withdrawal of funding for UNRWA by some donor nations as a “death sentence” for the population of Gaza.
In a statement, it welcomed UNRWA’s investigation related to the allegations involving a small group of UNRWA staff members in the 7 October attacks.
However, the charity vehemently denounced the “callous choice to punish an entire population by some of the very nations that previously called for increased aid and protection for humanitarians in Gaza.”
It insisted that the withdrawal of funding by these donor countries is nothing short of a death sentence for approximately two million civilians, with over half of them being children who depend on UNRWA aid in Gaza to survive.
Also on Monday, the United Nations Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) that it would not be able to continue operations in Gaza and across the region beyond the end of February if funding were not resumed.
“If the funding is not resumed, UNRWA will not be able to continue its services and operations across the region, including in Gaza, beyond the end of February,” a spokesperson for the agency said.
President Joe Biden has said that he knows how the US will react to a drone attack that killed three American soldiers in Jordan last weekend.
As he was leaving the White House to go to fundraisers in Florida, Mr. Biden said, “I don’t think we should have a bigger war in the Middle East. ”
A group supported by Iran has said they did the attack at a US military base.
Many more people got hurt in the attack on Sunday near the border of Syria.
Mr Biden didn’t say exactly what the United States will do, but the White House promised a strong reaction on Monday.
This was the first time US soldiers were killed by the enemy in that area since the Israel Gaza war started on October 7th.
Iran said they did not do the attack.
But on Tuesday morning, Mr. Biden said, “I do blame Iran because they are giving weapons to the people who did it. ”
The attack happened at night on a US military base called Tower 22 in northeastern Jordan.
Around 350 US soldiers are located at the base. Their main goal is to help the coalition in fighting against the Islamic State. This information comes from US Central Command.
The enemy’s drone attacked when an American drone was coming back to base after a mission.
Officials say the base’s automatic air defense system was turned off to avoid shooting down the US drone.
However, because of that, the troops who were still in their beds were not given a warning.
Lately, some groups from Iran have been attacking US bases in the Middle East.
President Biden can choose to respond to the attack by making strikes on bases and commanders in Iran that are allied with the attackers.
The US might also go after top leaders of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard in Iraq or Syria. But this could make the conflict worse.
Head of Hamas’ political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh has condemned Israel’s allies for cutting funding to UNRWA.
In a statement, he noted that the decision to cut aid to besieged and displaced Palestinians at a time when they needed it most due to Israel’s war on Gaza goes against the ICJ interim ruling last week to increase humanitarian assistance significantly.
“This indicates the existence of a systematic policy by these countries to support the occupation through starvation and siege of our people instead of responding to the court’s historic decision,” Haniyeh said.
The Hamas politburo Chief added that Israel is going after the UN agency for Palestinian refugees because the ICJ ruling was largely based on damning figures and testimonies provided by UNRWA.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) urged countries to continue funding the UN Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA), calling Israeli allegations against the UN body a “distraction” from the war in Gaza.
“The discussion right now is much of a distraction of what is going on every day, every hour in Gaza,” WHO Spokesperson Christian Lindmeier told a UN news briefing in Geneva.
Lindmeier said this in reference to recent allegations by Tel Aviv that some UNRWA staff were involved in the cross-border attack on Israel by Hamas on October 7, 2023.
Arguing that while these claims should be investigated, he said that they currently serve as a “distraction”, from measures preventing an entire nation’s access to food, water and electricity.
He added that they also distract from the “continuous shelling” of Palestinians in Gaza, even in designated safe areas, as well as from attacks on “shelters, schools, hospitals.”
At least 12 countries — Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Canada, Finland, Australia, UK, Netherlands, US, France, Austria, and Japan — have suspended funding for UNRWA, which was established in 1949 to help Palestinian refugees across the Middle East.
UNRWA reported that the Israeli army has attacked its premises in Gaza at least 260 times, leading to at least 360 Palestinians being killed since October 7.
A video published by the UN’s agency for Palestinian refugees showed the level of destruction at a UNRWA school-turned-shelter that has been hit by the Israeli army.
UNRWA has also lost 152 of its workers in Israeli attacks since the start of the war.
Minister Warns Of Epidemics In Gaza Also on Tuesday, Mai al-Kaila, the Health Minister for the Palestinian Authority, warned of the rapid spread of epidemics in Gaza.
The Minister described health conditions as “catastrophic” due to severe shortages of health personnel, equipment, medicine and shelters.
“There are 36 hospitals in the Gaza Strip, 14 of which are partially operating, nine in the south and five in the north,” al-Kaila said in an interview.
“More than 1,100 medical personnel in the Gaza Strip have been killed or wounded,” she said, adding, “There are 325 shelter centres, 150 of which have one health point, and the remaining 175 centres do not.”
The Ministry of Health in Gaza disclosed that Israeli forces have intensified their blockade on the Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Younis for the second week.
In a statement, the ministry said that the electrical generators at the hospital will stop within two days due to fuel shortages.
“The Israeli occupation places 150 medical personnel, 450 wounded, and 3,000 displaced people under targeting,” the ministry said, warning that the food for medical stand, patients and the displaced has run out.
The Palestinian Environment Quality Authority also stated that the ongoing Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip not only constitutes a humanitarian catastrophe but is also destroying all components of biological diversity, including plants and microorganisms.
In a statement, the environmental body said that components of wildlife, including plant and animal diversity on land and offshore the Gaza Strip, have been subjected to the strongest forms of destruction as a result of the use of explosives and weapons.
Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy has reiterated calls for an “air shield” to protect the country from missiles and drone attacks.
Zelenskyy revealed in a post on X that Russia has launched over 330 missiles of various types and approximately 600 combat drones at Ukrainian cities since the beginning of the year.
“To withstand such terrorist pressure, a sufficiently strong air shield is required. And this is the type of air shield we are building with our partners,” he stated.
“We must ensure Ukraine’s control over its skies, which is also critical to ensuring security on the ground — from frontline positions to hospitals and schools in the rear. Air defense and electronic warfare are our top priorities. Russian terror must be defeated – this is achievable.”
Volodymyr Zelenskyy In a video embedded in the post, it was noted that an “effective” air shield should contain many layers that extends from the frontline to areas where commercial and civilian infrastructure are based.
Earlier, Josep Borrell, Vice President of the European Commission and EU foreign policy Chief said that Europe’s safety is at stake if Vladimir Putin wins the war in Ukraine.
In a piece written in a French publication, Borell said, “We hear again that Ukraine cannot win and that western support will not hold. And once again, the temptations of conciliation resurface. These ideas were wrong in 2022, and they remain wrong today. We must not let them shape our policy towards Ukraine.
“Ukraine’s victory in the face of Russian aggression is the best guarantee of security for Europe,” he added.
Meanwhile, an EU official who spoke on condition of anonymity disclosed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will participate in an emergency online-format EU summit in February, where long-term financial support for Ukraine will be discussed.
It is said that EU leaders will reaffirm their commitment to providing “timely, predictable and sustainable military support” to Ukraine in the future at the summit.
The main topic of the Brussels summit is an attempt to reach an agreement on a package of four-year financial assistance to Ukraine in the amount of €50 billion, which Hungary blocked at the previous summit in December.
Russia Increases Production Of Air Defence Missiles Also on Tuesday, Russian Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu said in video footage that Russia is increasing production of air defence missiles.
He added that there were “key issues” that needed to be addressed.
The release of the footage by the defence ministry follows hits by drones launched from Ukraine on Russian cities and energy infrastructure while Moscow presses on with its military campaign against Kyiv.
Shoigu was shown inspecting defence industry facilities in the Urals industrial city of Ekaterinburg and touring factories producing sea- and ground-launched cruise missiles and air defence systems.
“There has been a significant increase in the volume of production. We have more than doubled production of the missiles we need for air defence,” he said at one factory.
“But there are some key issues we need to address. And we need to address them quite vigorously. There is the question of engines, and there is the question of the establishment of launcher production,” he added.
Russian officials have in recent months flagged rapid improvements in the country’s military industrial capacity, aimed at bolstering Russia’s military in its deadlocked campaign against Ukraine.
Over the recent weeks, attacks, some of which have been claimed by Ukrainian officials or blamed on Kyiv by the Kremlin, have hit Russian cities and oil and gas facilities.
U.S Defence Secretary, Lloyd Austin, has vowed that the U.S will take “all necessary actions” to defend its troops.
This was in response to a drone attack by Iran-backed militants on a U.S service base on the border of Jordan and Syria that killed three servicemen and injured dozens.
The attack on Sunday marks a major escalation in tensions that have engulfed the Middle East.
“Let me start with my outrage and sorrow (for) the deaths of three brave U.S troops in Jordan and for the other troops who were wounded,” Austin said at the start of a meeting with the NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, at the Pentagon.
“The President and I will not tolerate attacks on U.S forces and we will take all necessary actions to defend the U.S and our troops,” he said.
Austin’s comments came as the spectre of a direct US-Iranian military conflict drew closer following the drone attack, which marked the first time American military personnel have been killed by hostile fire in the Middle East since the start of the Israel-Hamas war on 7 October.
“Iran continues to destabilise the region, this includes backing terrorists who attack our ships in the Red Sea,” Stoltenberg said.
Prior to this, the White House’s national security council spokesperson, John Kirby, said that the U.S response to the drone strike on a US military outpost in Jordan will be “very consequential.”
“Joe Biden is considering his response options,” Kirby said.
Kirby did not speculate on the options being considered by the U.S President.
He said the drone attack was unacceptable, adding, “But we don’t seek a war with Iran. We’re not looking for a wider conflict in the Middle East.”
Meanwhile, Kirby described talks aimed at brokering a hostage deal between Israel and Hamas as constructive.
He said a new deal was not close but that there had been “very good discussions” with Qatar, Egypt and Israel.
Joe Biden is under pressure from Republicans to strike Iran directly, and even bomb Tehran, after three U.S troops were killed in a drone attack on a military outpost in Jordan.
US forces have faced a near-daily barrage of drone and missile strikes in Iraq and Syria since the 7 October attack on Israel by Hamas.
However, the attack on Tower 22 draws the U.S much closer to a direct conflict with Iran, an outcome both sides insist they wish to avoid, but may now be unable to prevent as the incidents proliferate and escalate in impact.
Iran has denied any involvement in the attacks but Islamic Resistance in Iraq have claimed responsibility as part of efforts, galvanised by the Israel-Hamas war, to try to drive US troops out of Iraq and Syria.
Biden Meets National Security Team Later, U.S President, Joe Biden met with members of his national security team to discuss the attack on U.S service members at a military outpost in Jordan.
According to the White House, among those present were the White House’s National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, U.S Defence Seccretary Lloyd Austin, the Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, the Homeland Security Adviser Liz Sherwood Randall, the National Security Council’s Coordinator for the Middle East, Brett McGurk.
Experts say that Biden’s response options could range anywhere from targeting Iranian forces outside to even inside Iran, or opting for a more cautious retaliatory attack solely against the Iran-backed militants responsible.
The US is warning that it will put sanctions back on Venezuela‘s oil industry. This is happening after Venezuela’s highest court decided to keep a ban on opposition candidate MarÃa Corina Machado.
Ms Machado won an important election to become the main candidate for the opposition party in the 2024 presidential election.
However, on Friday, Venezuela’s highest court decided that Ms Machado is not allowed to run for public office for 15 years.
The oil industry is very important for Venezuela’s economy.
The US put limits on Venezuela’s oil business after President Nicolás Maduro began his second term in 2019. Many people didn’t think the election was fair.
The US made the sanctions less strict in October after the Maduro government and the opposition agreed to work together. This agreement is a step towards having fair and free presidential elections in the second half of 2024.
Not long after the agreement was made in Barbados, the US Treasury gave permission for a short time to do business with Venezuela’s oil and gas industry.
But it said that Venezuela needed to keep its promises about the elections in order to renew the license. This included allowing MarÃa Corina Machado and other opposition candidates to participate.
The oil exception will end on April 18th. The US said it won’t renew it unless the government and the opposition in Venezuela make political progress, especially by allowing all candidates to run in the upcoming election.
The US said it would put sanctions back on Venezuela’s state-owned gold mining company, which helps the Maduro government get foreign money.
Ms Machado won the opposition’s primary in October by getting more than 90% of the votes. This has given hope to Venezuelans who want a new government that she could become president – if the election is fair.
As part of the Barbados agreement, the Maduro government agreed to let people from other countries watch the election.
The Supreme Court, controlled by Maduro supporters, decided to keep Ms Machado banned. This has led many people, including Ms Machado herself, to believe that the Barbados deal is no longer going to happen.
Ms Machado promised to stay strong and said she was given a job in the primary that she will do. She said “We will win and they will lose. ” They can’t have an election without me.
Jorge Rodríguez, a friend of Mr. Maduro, who spoke for the government in the Barbados discussions, said that the government did what it promised. He said, “Those who wanted to appeal appealed and also promised to accept the decision. “
Former New Zealand Prime Minister, Helen Clark has urged Australia and other western countries to reinstate funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to avoid “a very, very harsh, collective punishment of the Gazan people.”
Over the weekend, more than 10 donor countries – including Australia, the U.S and the UK suspended funding to the UN agency after Israel provided the agency with information alleging that as many as 12 of its staff were involved in Hamas’ October 7 attack on southern Israel.
Clark said that given the allegations related to 12 people out of a UNRWA workforce of 13,000, the decision to suspend aid funding was “completely disproportionate.”
She said that the UNRWA chief had “immediately dismissed the nine people of the 12 that he could find – one is dead and two others are untraced.”
Clark, who is also a former administrator of the UN development program, argued that the UN had “acted very, very quickly” to deal with the allegations.
“That’s why the suspension of aid by Australia, the US and others seems a very, very harsh, collective punishment of the Gazan people at this point and I think needs to be reconsidered.
Helen Clark Also, Clark said the suspension could have a “catastrophic” impact because UNRWA was the biggest deliverer of services, including emergency relief, in Gaza.
“If UNRWA is crippled financially it has devastating impacts for the families living in Gaza,” she said.
The UN Secretary-General, António Guterres appealed to the donor countries on Sunday.
He urged that the agency and Palestinians in desperate need should not be penalised due to the alleged acts of a dozen staff.
Guterres said the loss of funding meant the UN could not guarantee aid into Gaza for the whole of this month.
“Two million civilians in Gaza depend on critical assistance from UNRWA for their daily survival, but current UNRWA funding will not allow it to meet all needs in February,” he said.
UNRWA Commissioner-General, Philippe Lazzarini said, “Our humanitarian operation, on which 2 million people depend as a lifeline in Gaza, is collapsing. I am shocked such decisions are taken based on alleged behaviour of a few individuals and as the war continues, needs are deepening and famine looms. Palestinians in Gaza did not need this additional collective punishment. This stains all of us.”
UNRWA is an unusual agency in that it does not have large assets and runs a hand-to-mouth operation, even though it covers five countries and employs 40,000 staff, including 13,000 in Gaza.
Sadly, Israel’s foreign ministry has vowed that UNRWA will play no role in Gaza when the conflict ends.
‘Excessive delays’ at Israeli checkpoints preventing aid to northern Gaza Moreover, UN’s humanitarian agency in the occupied Palestinian Territories (OCHA oPt) said in its latest update that eight planned UN missions to northern Gaza have successfully gone ahead since the beginning of January.
OCHA said 29 aid convoys were denied permission by Israeli authorities this month, while other deliveries were impeded by “excessive delays” at Israeli checkpoints and threats to the safety of aid workers.
In particular, the UN said deliveries to hospitals and water and sanitation facilities north of the Wadi Gaza river were “largely denied.”
Republicans are getting closer to impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas because they don’t like how he’s dealing with the US-Mexico border.
Critics of the Biden administration say that Mr. Mayorkas didn’t do his job properly, which caused a lot of migrants to come into the country.
If the plan happens, Mr. Mayorkas will be the first cabinet secretary to be impeached since 1876.
Over 63 million people have come to the US without permission since 2021.
On Tuesday, the Republican-led House Committee on Homeland Security gathered to work on articles of impeachment against Mr. This is an important step before the whole House of Representatives can vote on the bill.
At the beginning of the meeting, Mark Green, who is in charge of the committee and is a Republican from Tennessee, said that Mr. Mayorkas did not do his job properly in securing the US-Mexico border.
“He didn’t follow the laws made by Congress on purpose, and broke their trust and the trust of the American people,” he said. The results have been really bad, and have put the lives and jobs of all Americans at risk.
Mr Mayorkas, who was not at the meeting, responded to the accusations.
In a seven-page letter published on the same day, he said that untrue accusations don’t scare him and explained the actions the Biden administration is taking to make sure US laws are followed at the border.
Bennie Thompson, a top Democrat on the committee, said that the Republicans are just trying things randomly and doing a fake impeachment for political reasons.
If the Republican-controlled House of Representatives accuses Mr Mayorkas, he would be the first high-ranking government official to go through the process since 1876. This was when Secretary of War William Balknap was accused for his involvement in a kickback scheme. He was found not guilty by the Senate.
Even if the House says he did something wrong, Mr. Mayorkas probably won’t be found guilty by the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats.
The decision to impeach Mr. Mayorkas is causing a lot of talk because many people are worried about the way the US is dealing with immigration and the southern border.
In January, a survey by CBS found that almost half of Americans see the border situation as a big problem, and 63% think the government should make stricter rules.
Why haven’t we called for resignation of HH, things aren’t going right – Musenge
By Fanny Kalonda(The Mast)
WE are worser than we were in the previous administration, says Mwenya Musenge.
He cited the prices of essential commodities and the shortage of mealie meal in the country.
Featuring on KBN TV’s State of the Nation programme on Thursday, Musenge said poverty levels have continued to escalate and that more people are dying from hunger.
“Our democracy hasn’t matured because in true essence if a leader fails to perform he must be taken to task. If you have to terminate, it’s a performance contract, it should be terminated. It should be terminated. Even in this regard, I don’t know why we are even wasting time, why we haven’t called for the resignation of HH because things are not going right. Now when we speak like that, tomorrow Musenge will be arrested, that no he’s alarming the nation and you are charged for treason. That’s not the way things are supposed to happen. The democracy in our country is being suppressed, crushed…The people have been going out in numbers to change governments, to bring in new leaders, with the hope that their living standards will improve but the poverty of our people have continued to escalate. Where we are today, there are more people that are dying from hunger and disease,” he said. “Change of government, where are we? We are worser than we were in the previous administration. Look at the cost of mealie meal, apart from being so expensive, in certain areas mealie meal is scarce. I was just reading today where people are queuing up. They (ZNS) will take the truck at a field, at a school, football pitch there and then people will be lining up from morning to buy mealie meal from a truck. Where are we taking ourselves? And yet people are supposed to walk into a shop and buy mealie meal and go back home and eat.”
Musenge said even in the previous administration, mealie meal was being smuggled to DR Congo but there was enough for the country.
“In the previous administration, mealie meal was not as expensive as it is. There were times like during the rainy season, December, farming season, you would have some shortages but not the shortages within the country. There was smuggling of mealie meal to the neighbouring country which was Congo but you would find mealie meal in all the shops at the reasonable price,” he said. “Now if you promised the people to say when I come into office a bag of mealie meal will be K50, when I come into office fuel will be single digit… I want to believe that when you are making such pronouncements as a political party, you had already made your home work and you knew how it was going to be implemented and more especially that my dear President is an economist who understands economy, like the back of his hand, not like some of us who have not even done economics. Now you come into government and then everything goes wayward. The bag of mealie meal [is selling at] K350, 200 in certain places. In rural areas where people do not even work the mealie meal is going around K450. We are only talking about those along the line of rail, what about our brothers, our parents, our uncles in the remote areas, how are they surviving?”
Musenge said the problem is with the current government’s agricultural policy.
“It is simple, it is their agricultural policy. We were told that all the maize reserves that they found they sold hoping that they were going to have a bumper harvest next year and it never happened. And secondly, I don’t know whoever told them about the FISP programme, they went into it and interfered with it. Today farmers are sharing farming inputs in medas, buckets. We thought the last farming season it was a mistake and our colleagues were going to correct it in this year’s farming season but it’s the same. It is the same and I can assure you come next year, I don’t think there will be something to smile about in terms of maize production. There’s also another serious issue, the quality of fertiliser is also questionable. The quality, you know I had interacted with some farmers the last farming season. One farmer said ‘look I thought maybe it was only me who had a problem with my field because you see I’ve always been ploughing the same size of field, applying the same amount of fertiliser, but the quality of the maize was so poor. The cobs were so thin’. Then he learned from his fellow farmer that he experienced the same,” narrated Musenge. “Another farmer it was later realised that it was the quality of fertiliser. If the government does not take serious control on how you procure the fertiliser from whom you are procuring the fertiliser, the quality of the fertiliser it has to be tested, then we will have big problems…
No, I don’t have hope because you see I have been in a political party that won elections and ruled this country under Michael Chilufya Sata and immediately Michael Chilufya Sata took over as president, he is a great man, in less than 90 days all the civil servants received 300 per cent salary hikes. There’s never been anyone else who has ever done that much.”
I FEAR FOR MINISTERS…HH has a superiority complex, wants to be prominent person in the room – Tembo
By Ernest Chanda(The Mast)
PATRIOTS for Economic Progress president Sean Tembo believes that President Hakainde Hichilema has a superiority complex which makes him close up to other people’s views.
“So I fear for current cabinet members. I really fear for them because I can only imagine the nature of Cabinet meetings that they hold,” he says. “His personality and his leadership style has seriously contributed to the underperformance of the UPND government…So if Mr Hichilema had a different personality, if he had humility and if he was able to tap into the wisdom of his government officials and his ministers, my submission is that the performance of the UPND government would have been far much better than it currently is in all aspects.”
In an interview, Tembo explained his personal experiences with President Hichilema then as an opposition leader.
“Based on my personal experience, I think the challenge that the President has is largely that he has a superiority complex, yes. He wants to be the most prominent person in the room. He wants to be the most knowledgeable person in the room. He wants to be the wisest person in the room,” Tembo said. “And when you talk about leadership, I think that plays out to be a big disadvantage because inasmuch as you might be in a position of authority you will not know everything in every area that needs to be known.”
He cited a meeting they had as an opposition alliance where President Hichilema would interject whenever other leaders were speaking. Tembo said President Hichilema consumed more time talking than all his colleagues combined.
“I remember the days of the alliance when we would have meetings with party presidents of other political parties. So you would be seated, you know. There would be president HH – UPND, there would be president [Elias] Chipimo – NAREP, there would be president [Charles] Milupi – ADD, there would be president Andyford Banda, there would be myself and other leaders. And then you’re discussing, you’ve convened a meeting and then you’re discussing certain issues. Maybe you’ve got an agenda,” he said. “And then he would start, maybe he would make a submission, and he would go on and on and he would speak for one hour, you know. And then you’re all listening, and then when it goes to the next person to make a submission on the issue, maybe president Chipimo, he would only speak for two, three minutes then HH cuts in and says ‘let me just add on that’. And then he starts talking for another 30, 40 minutes.”
Tembo explained how President Hichilema would cut out other leaders from completing their submissions.
“Then another leader comes in, may be myself or Andyford Banda wants to make a submission, he speaks for a minute or two again HH cuts in and speaks for another 30, 40 minutes. So at the end of the day you have met, maybe from around 13:00 hours to 18:00 hours, which is about five hours. But out of that five hours, four hours 30 minutes it was HH talking. And the rest of six presidents only spoke for a total of 30 minutes,” he said. “To me that speaks volumes. It basically made me understand who he really is and what his weaknesses are in terms of being a person in a position of leadership because he believes that he’s the wisest person. He believes that he’s the most knowledgeable person. He believes that he’s the one who should inform everybody, who should educate everybody.”
Tembo however acknowledged President Hichilema’s strengths.
“I’m not saying that he’s completely blank. He does have some ideas; progressive ideas here and there. But like all of us when you have an idea it’s very important to throw it to other people so that they can help to refine it, to make it an even sharper idea. If you have an idea even if it’s a good idea and you believe that no one should add or subtract from it then you’ll be stagnant,” he said. “So I fear for current cabinet members. I really fear for them because I can only imagine the nature of cabinet meetings that they hold. I’m very sure that those cabinet meetings are not really about deliberations. They’re not about debating issues. They’re basically about the President teaching his ministers on specific issues where they just sit in there and listen. And then as soon as he is done the meeting is over.”
Tembo attributed the UPND’s underperformance to President Hichilema’s style of leadership and personality.
“And from my standpoint I think that has probably contributed significantly. His personality and his leadership style has seriously contributed to the underperformance of the UPND government because when you look at the UPND, really in terms of their ministers and so on and so forth, to me the ministers have the calibre. The ministers we have can be comparable to the ministers we had in the MMD government. They’re reasonably educated people,” he said. “I’m not saying everyone is educated but they are reasonably educated. And they are reasonably youthful. They are very alive to current world trends and how things are done in other countries and all that. It’s not a crop of old, old people and all that. So if Mr Hichilema had a different personality, if he had humility and if he was able to tap into the wisdom of his government officials and his ministers, my submission is that the performance of the UPND government would have been far much better than it currently is in all aspects. So the tragedy that is there in my view is that the President has continued to engage with other people around him in the same manner and fashion that he used to engage with people around him during the times of the alliance, whereby he’s the centre of attention and nobody knows anything apart from him.”
Asked if there is hope that the President will realise that he is the one sinking the ship, Tembo doubted strongly.
“I doubt that. I doubt that he will ever come to that realisation. I doubt that unless some miracle happens. But it’s extremely unlikely, it’s extremely unlikely. You know, it comes down to the personality of a person. It comes down to the humility that a person has,” explained Tembo.
HICHILEMA SLAMMED FOR HIS INTOLERANCE TO CRITICISM AND DIVERGENT VIEWS
…who did you praise when you were in opposition, Dr M’membe asks the Head of State
Lusaka, Tuesday, January 30, 2024 ( Smart Eagles)
Leader of the opposition Socialist Party (SP) Fred M’membe has scorned President Hakainde Hichilema for despising those that hold divergent views regarding the handling national affairs.
The opposition leader has stated that he has consistently been denounced for telling the truth and saying what others do not want to hear.
He added that the UPND and its Government seem to have a misconception that it is all about agreement and harmony.
“They want everyone to sing praise songs even when there is no praise to sing about,” he said.
“Was Mr Hakainde Hichilema and UPND praise singers for the previous governments? Did Mr Hichilema praise any government for anything. Mr Hichilema was the opposition leader under the governments of Mwanawasa. When did Mr Hichilema while in opposition praise Mwanawasa? Was Mwanawasa bad not to be praised at all by Mr Hichilema?”
“Mr Hichilema was an opposition leader under president Rupiah Banda. Did Mr Hichilema in opposition ever praise Mr Rupiah Banda and his government? Mr Hichilema was in opposition for three years under Mr Sata. Did Mr Hichilema ever praise Mr Sata for anything?”
He recalled that President Hichilema was in opposition under president Edgar Lungu’s reign for seven years and he asked if the incumbent had at any point praised his predecessor for anything.
“Did Mr Hichilema ever praise Mr Lungu for anything for seven years? Why do they want to change the rules of the game when its them in opposition? Why do they want to change the rules of the opposition now that they are in power?” he said.
“Zambia is not a dictatorship in which everyone should think, dream and view the world in the same way. Our politics are about plurality and diversity. Even our Christianity is not about united voicing bible verses like John 3:15 or speaking the Lord’s prayer in unison.”
He schooled the UPND what even Christianity is about.
“Division, not unity is the significant theme in the bible. Prophet Jeremiah from the old testament was persecuted for saying what God told him to speak to the people. As a prophet of God, Jeremiah was opposed for saying what people did not want to hear from God,” he said.
“Lies and gossip may be more popular than the truth. Should we shut up or speak up about what is harmful to society?”
I have just completed reading the 2023 report on corruption published by Transparency International.
I had hoped that the Zambian office would be bold enough and help include in the CPI report to reflect;
● That nearly all major public procurements have been done through direct bidding or single sourcing. This is a major source of concern by stakeholders as public funds are not being spent prudently, transparently and fairly.
● Amendemnts were recently done to the Public Procurement Act that seem to promote quick procurement at the expense of accountable and performance based procurement.
●That significant public business has been awarded to entities that belong or are friendly to the powers that be in the oil, fertiliser, maize and other sub-sectors.
● the face of public corruption; roadblocks, public service like passports office and others are back with a vengeance and had hoped that this will be reflected.
● large scale corruption as reported by all stakeholders including cooperating partners in the energy and agriculture sectors would be included. We had a case of a firm associated with the President awarded to manage the $40million environmental fund that has been under the Ministry of Mines since 2000.
● Failure by the President to disclose his assets, interests and liabilities.
● Instead the report has relied on old cases such as those involving past officials and were extensively reported in previous TI Reports as basis to show improvement.
This is rehashing old cases which previously drove the index to negative effect.
And the purported action now claims to show improvement of the CPI.
This is a clear case of using old cases to mask the current high occurrence of corruption.
● The report appears to exclude the rise in executive impunity and the sustained assault on democracy and the rule of law witnessed in 2022 and 2023.
Anyway….
The CPI annual report measures how corrupt each country’s public sector is perceived to be, according to experts and business people.
Seychelles (CPI score: 71) remains the top scorer in the region, followed by Cabo Verde (64) and Botswana (59).
Equatorial Guinea (17), South Sudan (13) and Somalia (11) perform the lowest with no sign of improvement.
Ninety per cent of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa scored under 50.
This year’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) shows mixed results in Africa, with significant improvements in a few countries.
However, most African countries experienced stagnation, maintaining the region’s consistently poor performance, with an unaltered regional average score of 33 out of 100.
Ninety per cent of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa scored under 50.
RATIFICATION OF THE LOBITO CORRIDOR BIRTH OF A NEW ERA IN THE TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS SECTOR, TAYALI
LUSAKA, Tuesday, January 30, 2024
MINISTER of Transport and Logistics Hon. MUSEBA FRANK TAYALI, MP says the ratification of the Lobito Corridor Transit Transport Facilitation Agency (LCTTFA) brings to the table a new lease of life for Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia.
He said the ratification of the Lobito Corridor Agreement is a clear sign changing the narrative of a land-locked country to that of a land-linked country.
In this Corridor the countries involved are Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia.
The three countries met in Lobito in January 2023 and signed the agreement that facilitated the establishment of the Corridor for the purpose of promoting efficient transport and logistics system of goods and services.
The Corridor will also promote the development of transport infrastructure and economic activities within the area.
The area has great economic potential owing to the existence of the rich agricultural, fish, minerals, tourism and energy resources.
Hon. TAYALI is optimistic that the Corridor will ensure an open and competitive trade environment for member countries and beyond their boundaries.
The Minister says what Government has done is in line with the New Dawn Government’s aspiration of turning the country into an export-led growth and middle-income country by 2030.
As Zambia has had no proper connectivity with Angola, the ratification of the Lobito Corridor Agreement will entail the expansion and mordenisation of the Port of Lobito, construction of a new railway line from Luacano in Angola to Chingola in Zambia, and the main roads within the Corridor.
The telecommunication system would have to be developed and modernised in order to enhance communication and connectivity.
And for the road network, the works shall involve construction of the bridges, drainage systems and pavements.
The road projects in the Corridor will be: the Joao Chaves-Jimbe (260km), Kolwezi – Kipushi (180km), Solwezi – Kipushi (140km) and Manyinga – Jimbe (374km). Under the railway sector are: Luacano – Jimbe (259km) and Jimbe – Chingola (574km).
Various One Stop Border Posts will also be developed at Jimbe Border (between Angola-Zambia), Kipushi Border (between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia) and Kambimba Border (between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia).
The outlined Corridor project priority list is key to the envisaged development of the Infrastructure Master Plan identified by the Committee of Ministers’ Meeting from the three countries held in December 2023 in Lobito, Angola.
Issued by: Original Copy Signed NDUBI R. MVULA PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER
_ Inside Munir Zulu’s journey to Parliament_ by Jeff Mbewe
At one point, Munir Zulu became broke, bankrupt. Very broke. His friends who had been parasitic on his fortunes became hostile towards him, running away and avoiding him at all cost. But in no time, he was back. All those who ran away from him came back. He never chased them. He never despised them. And he took them in unconditionally.
He paid for their rentals. He continued to help them with their problems.
The first day I met Munir Zulu was towards the end of 2020. My close, reliable, and trusted associate Richard M. Phiri introduced me to him.I was given a media assignment , and, together with a colleague Enock Mwanza (Mossad), we executed in hours. Before the day ended, results began to show, and that marked the beginning of my relationship with Munir Zulu.
A few weeks later, Munir told me he was going to stand as a member of Parliament in Lumezi Constituency.By this time, the MP was Philila Jere. She was independent but had worked closely with PF . She built networks and connections, which would later guarantee her adoption.
For Munir, there was somewhat heavy media propaganda heaped on him by various people. Although he was on social media (Facebook specifically), he was mostly inactive and did not bother much about the things said and written about him. I was an unofficial media strategist of a man who was to become an MP against all odds.
We needed to get Munir active on Facebook.We needed him to use this available platform to determine his own narratives and be able to tell his own stories. This was largely premised on Chinua Achebe’s saying, “Until the lion learns how to write, every story will glorify the hunter.”
So, we set up a day, and we decided we would need to take pictures of him to use as his profile picture and for a cover page.
I spent a few days interviewing Munir, albeit through pre-typed questions and sent via WhatsApp. I needed to understand his personality in order for me to know how to shape his official Facebook page and content.
Munir is generous, with a revolutionary mindset, and he has lived for others, more than for himself.Other than depending on his own confessions, I depended on independent research, undertaken by Enock Terminal Gnu . We needed to understand the personality of the Honorable in the making.
Enock discovered very interesting things through OSINT (Open Source Intelligence). By the way, Enock is a genius computer scientist specializing in Intelligence gathering. I needed him to gather intelligence on Munir for me. I needed to know the persona of the Honorable to be.
During campaigns, Munir Zulu’s life was so in danger that, he disguised his movements and sleeping arrangements. He was never in his official vehicle whenever we traveled. He was in the ‘advance party’ vehicle and most of the times, I traveled in the same vehicle as him as his Digital Media Strategist. Again, he slept in the cheapest room at any lodge or hotel, but paid for the most expensive ones so his wouldbe attackers or assassins would always never find him. We did all this because we picked up reliable information from multiple credible intelligence persons that suggested Munir’s life was at stake because there were people who wanted to ensure he wasn’t on the ballot in 2021. We did not rule out poisoning. We didn’t know the best way to protect Munir. We lived each day as it came. Most terrifying moments.
In order for Zambia to develop, we need to encourage a mixed economy. The private sector has to do its part but the state has to take a huge role and lead economic transformation! There is no country in the world that has ever developed by chance. No country has ever developed by guessing which areas FDI will come to.
When you look at Zambia’s history, most of the infrastructure was built under a command economy. Kaunda did much better than those that came after him because he had control over Zambia’s major forex inflows, control over Zambia’s main industries etc! Kaunda failed not because he failed but such an economic system was fought by the west! Kaunda was trying to build communism which he termed humanism. All such forms of economic systems were fought by the west using the IMF and World bank! If Cuba was not under sanctions, it would have been the most developed country in the world today!!! Citizens were not kind enough to help Kaunda overcome such troubles, citizens rioted and he panicked and allowed economic reforms that weakened his standing. Gorbachev in USSR made the same perestroika mistake! Chiluba came in and completely sold off the little industries that we had that could sustain job creation, value addition among others! what trade kings is doing today, kaunda was doing with grade 5s as General Managers!!!! we could have just improved on efficiency, cut corruption and we would have been second only to china!
China learnt all the mistakes made by countries like Zambia and the then soviet union and modified their economy into a modern day socialist state! very few people know that France, Germany, Austria, Norway, Finland and even the UK are socialist states! These countries have government control over much of housing, transportation, mining and drilling among others. The same way we had ZCCM and UBZ including mulungushi travellers! I have never healed after the destruction of ZCCM! I hope one day, it will be revived!!!
Back to Zambia, the Bank of Zambia and Ministry of finance have no instruments to sustain this economy! Trust me on this one! Their hands are really tied even on the kwacha because they cant dictate to anyone how much copper and cobalt to mine so that we get the forex to support the kwacha!
Look at Russia, Putin is able to dictate how much oil and to whom to sell so as to sustain their budget. Under sanctions, Russia is booming! Why? They control their economy! Even private oil companies follow suit because they are russian citizen owned and see it as their patriotic calling to help the state. But in Zambia, everything is foreign owned! The mistake we are making is to give access to foreign companies to our road infrastructure, energy sector among others! We dont own the major mines and therefore we have no control over the kwacha and therefore can’t diversify the economy!
We are in such a sad situation that the only jobs we are creating are for teachers! A healthy economy is the one that creates blue collar jobs in manufacturing, mining, agriculture and other sectors! We need products for export! We might end up like Nigeria where phd holders just say books on the streets! We need to create value addition jobs!
Unfortunately for Zambia we are losing time because, the young population is growing and we are not creating jobs to come and keep them busy! We need to come up with a Zambian economic plan away from those unproductive textbooks that people learnt from! Unfortunately it’s impossible to come to a consensus because the enemy has divided you into political groupings!
Despite the fact that you all jumped from unip to MMD, then some moved to PF and others into UPND, and then again moved from one party to the other, you have the myth that you are different and should fight each other to death instead of coming together to develop the country! This is not an Arsenal vs Man United argument! This is a country we are talking about whose currency is fast moving to early retirement age!
History will judge you harshly! Just last week some guys said I could not speak at a forum because they were not going to like what I was going to say! what kind of reasoning is that? Such people are the reason we are in trouble! Hiding the truth!!!
Our debt is not big! its a small issue if we put our heads together! I used to say that in the past and I say it now!!!!
The amount of weapons that the US sold to other countries went up a lot last year. It reached a record of $238 billion because Russia invaded Ukraine and caused more countries to want to buy weapons.
The US government made deals to sell $81 billion worth of stuff, which is 56% more than last year, according to the state department.
Other sales were made by US defense companies directly to other countries.
Poland, which is next to Ukraine, is buying a lot of new military equipment.
Poland spent $12 billion on Apache helicopters, $10 billion on High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, and $3. 75 billion on M1A1 Abrams tanks, according to a report for the US government’s fiscal year that ended in October.
It also used $4 billion on a system for controlling battles against air and missile attacks.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk promised to keep upgrading Poland’s military, as the previous government planned to make it the strongest in Europe.
Can Himars missiles help Ukraine win against Russia.
Meanwhile, Germany spent $8. 5 billion on Chinook helicopters. Bulgaria spent $1. 5bn on Stryker armored vehicles and Norway purchased $1bn worth of multi-purpose helicopters.
The Czech Republic spent $5. 6 billion to purchase F-35 jets and weapons.
The state department said that selling weapons and trading in defense equipment are important tools for US foreign policy. These actions could have big effects on security in different parts of the world for a long time.
Sales increased because countries are buying fewer weapons from Russia, which used to be the second biggest seller of weapons after the US for many years. This information was shared by the person in charge of the department’s arms transfers office.
Mira Resnick from Politico said that the Russian defense industry is not doing well and it is not getting the money it needs from selling weapons to other countries.
President Joe Biden’s team says that helping Ukraine can make money for America by selling weapons there. However, American politicians are becoming more likely to stop giving direct help to Ukraine. Many Republicans want to make aid to Ukraine depend on changing the US immigration laws.
On Wednesday, the Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg will go to a Lockheed Martin missile facility in Alabama to show how important the US defence industry is to the alliance.
Outside Europe, the report said that South Korea spent $5 billion on F-35 jets and Australia spent $6. 3 billion on C130J-30 Super Hercules planes. Japan made a deal to buy an E-2D Hawkeye surveillance plane for $1 billion.
The United States has put back some punishments on Venezuela. This happened a few days after the top court in the South American country said no to the main person running against the current leader, MarÃa Corina Machado.
She won the primary election by a lot and now she is the main candidate for the opposition to run for president in 2024.
However, on Friday, Venezuela’s highest court agreed to prevent Ms. Machado from running for public office for 15 years.
MsMachado said she will keep running for president even though she was banned.
In October, the US made its sanctions on Venezuela less strict after President Nicolás Maduro’s government and the opposition agreed to hold fair elections in 2024.
As agreed, the Maduro government, which was re-elected in 2018 in an election that many people didn’t think was fair, said it would let other countries watch the next election.
The “Barbados deal” allows opposition candidates who were not allowed to run for office to now appeal against the bans. This agreement was made in Barbados, where both sides met.
In return, the US, which supported the Barbados agreement, reduced some of its punishments on Venezuela.
However, on Friday, the Supreme Court rejected the appeals filed by Ms Machado and another well-known opposition leader, Henrique Capriles. The court allowed some unknown politicians to participate again.
The US government said they were very worried about the decision to not let MarÃa Corina Machado participate.
It said it went against what Maduro and his representatives agreed to in the Barbados electoral roadmap. They promised to let all parties choose their candidates for the presidential election.
On Monday, the sanctions on Venezuela’s mining sector started again.
The US government said to American companies that they need to stop doing business with a Venezuelan mining company called Minerven by February 13th.
Minerven has been punished by the US before. In 2019, Ofac said Maduro and his government were using a gold mining company called Minerven to make themselves rich and hurt the people of Venezuela.
The US government put sanctions back on the mining industry, but hasn’t put them back on Venezuela’s oil industry yet. This shows that they are taking their time and may put more sanctions on later if they don’t like what’s happening.
John Kirby, a spokesperson for national security at the White House, said on Monday that the Maduro government has until “spring” to keep their promises. “They have to make choices before we decide what choices we will make. ”
Ms Machado promised that she will stay strong and stick to her beliefs. She said she was chosen in the primary election and she will do what she promised. She also said that she is confident they will win and their opponents should be ready to lose. “They can’t have elections unless I’m there. ”
Jorge Rodríguez, a friend of Mr. Maduro who spoke for the government at the talks in Barbados, said that the government did what it promised. He said, “Those who wanted to appeal did, and promised to accept the decision. “
Ex-Pakistani leader Imran Khan got a 10-year jail term for sharing government secrets.
Khan, who was removed as the Prime Minister in 2022, is currently in jail for three years because he was found guilty of being corrupt.
He said that all the accusations against him were done to hurt him in politics.
He was found guilty under the secrets act just before the elections, and he is not allowed to run for office.
Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who used to be a foreign minister, and is now the vice-chairman of Imran Khan’s PTI party, was given a 10-year prison sentence by a special court in Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi, where both men are currently held.
The cipher case is about the suspected sharing of secret letters from Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington to the government in Islamabad while Khan was prime minister.
It’s about when he showed up at a big meeting in March 2022, just before he was kicked out of his job as leader in a vote by the parliament. Imran Khan came on stage and showed a paper, claiming it proved that there was a plan from another country to harm him.
He said very clearly that “everything will be forgiven if Imran Khan is no longer in charge”. He didn’t say which country it was, but he had a lot of bad things to say about the United States.
The prosecutor said that the ex-Prime Minister leaked a secret document and harmed relationships with other countries. The second accusation can result in life in prison or even being sentenced to death.
Imran Khan has been in Adiala jail most of the time since he was arrested in August. Foreign reporters were not allowed to go to the court hearings that have been happening for the past few months.
The news said that the judge was asked to speed up the trial. A PTI representative said they will fight the court decision and said it was a joke.
“We don’t agree with this bad choice,” said Naeem Panjutha, a lawyer for the ex-prime minister who has many legal cases. He posted this on X (formerly Twitter).
Another person who works for Khan told the Reuters news agency that his lawyers didn’t get to help him or question the people giving evidence.
The election on 8 February is late, and some people say the PTI party is not getting a fair chance to campaign.
The government says they didn’t attack the PTI, but lots of its leaders are in jail or have left the party. Its candidates have to run for election as independents and some are hiding.
The police arrested many of its supporters after there were protests, some of which were violent, last May when Imran Khan was first taken into custody.
The party cannot use the cricket bat symbol anymore. This symbol is important in a country where many people can’t read, so voters can use it to mark their ballots.
Many are doubting if next Thursday’s vote is fair, because Imran Khan, who is still one of Pakistan’s most popular politicians, and his party have been ignored.
The man expected to win is Nawaz Sharif, who has been Prime Minister three times before and came back from living outside the country. For a long time, he caused problems for the powerful military. He was put in jail for being dishonest before the 2018 election that Imran Khan won.
Now things are different. Nawaz Sharif’s legal problems have disappeared, which makes many people think that the government supports him now. At the same time, his opponent, who was once liked by the military, is not liked anymore
SPEAKER CANNOT BE FAULTED FOR RECEIVING INFORMATION ON LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION – STATE
THE State has submitted that the speaker of the national assembly is not legally mandated to question the internal election processes of a political party.
It said Nelly Mutti cannot be blamed for having been notified about the person selected to serve as leader of the opposition in parliament by the PF, or for consequently allowing the person selected to enjoy privileges of the said position.
This is in a matter where PF Moses Sakala has petitioned the party in the Constitutional Court over Mporokoso member of parliament Brian Mundubile’s illegal appointment as leader of the opposition.
The petitioner has cited party Secretary General Morgan Ng’ona and the Attorney General as respondents in the matter.
Sakala wants Mundubile to reimburse all the money and allowances he obtained as leader of opposition before he was dislodged from his position, since his appointment in 2021.
Sakala is seeking a declaration that the State through Mutti Contravened Article 74(2) of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, as well as Rule 43 of the National Assembly Standing Orders, by accepting the appointment of Mundubile, as leader of the opposition and allowing him to enjoy privileges attached to the said office.
He wants the Court to decree that the PF contravened the provisions of Article 60(2)(d) of the Constitution by failing to exercise internal democracy as provided for under the said Article.
Sakala is further seeking an order that all monies accrued by Mundubile, by virtue of his illegal tenure of office, be accounted for and recovered.
In its answer to the petition the State argued that Mutti never perpetuated unconstitutional Acts as the National Assembly has at all times complied with provisions of the Constitution.
It said the speaker of the National Assembly did not violate Article 74 (2) of the constitution and National Assembly standing order 43.
“The only requirement is for the speaker of the national assembly to be notified of the selection made by a political party in accordance with Article 74(2) of the constitution and Rule 43(2) of the National Assembly, standing orders of the National Assembly to Act upon the said notification,” the Attorney General argued.
“The practice in the appointment of previous leaders of opposition in the national assembly is that the opposition political party with the largest number of seats merely notifies the National Assembly of the person elected to that office.”
The State added that Sakala is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for and asked the Court to dismiss the petition with costs.
Some of us are consistently being denounced for telling the truth and saying what others do not want to hear. Our friends in the UPND and its government seem to have the misconception that it is all about agreement and harmony.
They want everyone to sing praise songs even when there is no praise to sing about. Was Mr Hakainde Hichilema and the UPND praise singers for the previous governments? Did Mr Hichilema ever praise any previous government for anything? Why do they want to change the rules of the game for opposition now thay they are in power?
Zambia is not a dictatorship in which everyone should think, dream and view the world in the same way.
Our politics are about plurality and diversity. Even our Christianity is not about united voicing Bible verses like John 3:16 or speaking the Lord’s Prayer in unison. Division, not unity, is a significant theme in the Bible. Prophet Jeremiah, from the Old Testament, was persecuted for saying what God told him to speak to the people. As a prophet of God, Jeremiah, was opposed for saying what people did not want to hear from God. Lies and gossip may be more popular than the truth. Should we shut up or speak up about what is harmful to society?
God called and appointed Jeremiah as His prophet to His people. God’s people and other religious leaders did not like what Jeremiah said from God. The temple’s chief official had Jeremiah beaten and put in stocks to pressure him to shut up. Many of the prophets of God in the Old Testament received reproach, ridicule, mocking, and even death for speaking up. Jesus was also persecuted for saying and doing what other religious leaders and people rejected.
As Christians, Jesus warns us that saying and living what Jesus said and did will result in our persecution. We will be persecuted because, “A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher and the servant like his master.” Jesus warned his disciples that if they have called him Beelzebub, or Satan, how much more will they malign them.
Jesus warned his disciples that they should not fear persecution for speaking His words. They will prove true even if those offended by them reject them. Jesus and his words are meant for the good of others, even if they sting. Persecution, beatings, being placed in jail, or fed to lions will harm or kill your body, but it is God who saves your souls for heaven, not other people. We fear others and things we cannot control, but God is to be feared above all else.
On 19 January 2024, I wrote a short article in which I asked why all the four cases involving the State-supported Miles Sampa versus the main opposition Patriotic Front (PF) were only allocated to judges who belong to one ethnic-language group, three of whom were appointed to their role only months ago by President Hakainde Hichilema. To give context to the piece, I provided in the same article a link to a longer opinion piece I wrote in December last year in which I demonstrated how Hichilema’s bid to either destroy or take control of the former ruling party has been largely facilitated by Sampa, a renegade PF MP who had earlier in October, and with the support of the State, organised a meeting that he claims was a convention that elected him as the party’s leader.
A curious development of all the court cases brought against Sampa’s actions by the party’s substantive leadership – alongside one that he had earlier initiated against them – is that the judges chosen to determine the matters have a few things in common: province of origin, ethnic-language identity, appointing authority, etc. I have previously written about how the country is split along ethnic-regional lines and how Hichilema has not helped matters by, as shown below, intensifying these divisions. Wondering if the case allocation was all purely coincidental or planned, I published my thoughts on Twitter, now known as X, in the stated article, reproduced unchanged below.
Are judges being cherry-picked to hear PF cases?
By Sishuwa Sishuwa
Why are all the court cases – three in the Lusaka High Court, one in the Constitutional Court – involving the State-supported Miles Sampa versus the main opposition Patriotic Front only given to Lozi-speaking judges?
The first case was allocated to Timothy Katanekwa – a Lozi speaker. The second case was allocated to Situmbeko Chocho – a Lozi speaker. The third one, which is before the Constitutional Court, was allocated to Kenneth Mulife – a Lozi speaker. The most recent case concerning 7 PF members (and presidential hopefuls) who have petitioned the legality of the convention that elected Sampa to the party leadership, has been allocated to Sililo Siloka – a Lozi. Is this a coincidence or it is all planned? What is it that Lozi-speaking judges have that judges from other ethnic groups do not have? What makes, say, Bemba-speaking judges or those hailing from Eastern Province unqualified to hear and determine matters involving the PF versus Miles Sampa?
In addition to a shared province of origin and ethnic-language identity, three of the four judges handling PF cases – that is Situmbeko, Mulife, and Sililo – were all appointed to their current roles by President Hakainde Hichilema in 2023. The only exception is justice Katanekwa who was appointed High Court judge by Frederick Chiluba in 1996 but was just recently suspended from his position by Hichilema. If the argument is that the trio has a rather limited case load, why is it that judges from the other ethnic groups who were appointed alongside them are being overlooked for these general cases? Is there a fear that judges hailing from the Eastern and Bemba-speaking provinces cannot be trusted to hear and determine PF matters in an impartial manner? If there is none, then how best should we understand the fact that it is only Lozi-speaking judges who are being asked to deliberate on PF matters?
And given the gravity of the outcome of the cases to the fate of Zambia’s democracy and party system, especially the case given to Sililo, what explains the failure by Lusaka High Court Judge-in-Charge for general allocations, Charles Zulu, to assign these cases to a diverse set of experienced judges (– and there are many justices available from different ethnic groups!)? Similarly, why did Mweetwa Shilimi – another Hichilema appointee who was simultaneously promoted as Deputy President of the Constitutional Court, the official responsible for case allocation – overlook all the experienced judges on the Concourt bench for the recently appointed justice Mulife?
Are judges from the ‘Zambezi region’ – where the President comes from – seen as more likely than those from a different region to make decisions that would favour President Hichilema, who, as I have previously shown in the article below, appears to be the driving force behind Miles Sampa and the PF leadership wrangles? If they are not seen this way, then how best should we understand the continued allocation of cases involving Sampa and the PF to relatively inexperienced judges who have only been in their positions a matter of months?
As well as the desire to seek clarity on case allocations in the judiciary, my questions arose from a much wider context: the continued erosion of Zambia’s democracy under the leadership of a man who had vowed to rescue it when he was in opposition. The key context in the present circumstances, since the election of Hichilema and his United Party for National Development (UPND) in August 2021, is that the executive arm of government has been surreptitiously using its powers to undermine the vestiges of autonomy in the other State institutions that are supposed to exercise their powers in enhancing checks and balances. This infiltration reduces the ability of these institutions to fulfil their constitutional duty of revealing and restraining unconstitutional extensions of power by the executive, and – by the same token – allows the building of an unconstitutional concentration of State power within the presidency. So far, Hichilema and the UPND have carried out this task with considerable ease, impunity, and skill (albeit of a criminal variety), employing a line of political rhetoric and well-concealed hypocrisy that has gone without much opposition. Notable examples of this unconstitutional extension of executive power may be found in several cases.
The first is the use of the police to prevent rallies and meetings of all opposition political parties using a wilful misreading and misapplication of the Public Order Act. Since 2021, the police have blocked all public rallies called by opposition parties outside of by-elections, always citing unspecified security concerns or inadequate manpower. Added to this is the pervasive arrest of many opposition leaders, often detained without charge or with charges which are self-evidently trumped-up, trivial, or even laughable. Such frequent and almost daily occurrences are widely presumed to be orchestrated from State House.
The second example is the use of the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Lozi-speaking Nellie Mutti, to undermine the constitution and frustrate the ruling party’s opponents. Ordinarily, the Speaker is supposed to be elected by all members of parliament, but the ruling party majority in parliament has instead allowed the president to go over their heads and effectively appoint a UPND-aligned activist who previously served as one of Hichilema’s personal lawyers, and who has no previous parliamentary experience. Mutti recently took it upon herself to appoint a new leader of the opposition over the heads of the actual majority opposition party in parliament, despite the constitutional requirement that the leader of the opposition must be elected by a vote of the main opposition party. This case is presently before the Constitutional Court. Protests against Mutti’s leadership from opposition MPs have resulted in her slapping lengthy suspensions from Parliament on the affected lawmakers.
The third example is the executive’s capture of key formal institutions using a twofold strategy. One involves packing them with leaders that hail from the Lozi-speaking Western Province, the Tonga-speaking Southern/Central provinces, and the multi-ethnic Northwestern Province. From the key ministries, most of the security services, and the justice system, to the National Assembly, civil services, and Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), the top leadership positions are held by individuals from a region that typically votes for Hichilema. This has fed general concerns of both ethnic marginalisation of regions that voted for the PF and the continued politicisation of these institutions. For example, the Lozi-speaking person appointed as ECZ chairperson is a former personal lawyer to the president and generally perceived as a ruling party supporter. There are currently many cases before the court of several opposition party by-election candidates who have had their nominations rejected by the Commission, apparently using powers not given to the body in law.
The other strategy involves filling prosecutorial and anti-corruption agencies with Hichilema’s allies. The individuals occupying the leadership positions of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), Director of Public Prosecutions, the Attorney General, the Solicitor General, and the Minister of Justice, and the judicial bodies that recommend the appointment or dismissals of judges are all either ex-UPND lawyers, or Lozi or Tonga speakers. The staffing of these key offices with the president’s allies has given rise to the present pattern where there is a high rate of investigation and prosecution for corruption of high-ranking officials under the previous regime, contrasted with the notorious lack of judicial attention to high-level corruption in Hichilema’s administration, notwithstanding a series of recent exposures in the media of grand corruption under his watch. This situation has raised many public questions about political bias in the Anti-Corruption Commission, the police, and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Here, we see a clear pattern of slippage from the rule of law, in the form of State capture by the executive arm of government which is capturing power from all other State institutions. With this erosion of the separation of power, there is a continuing slide into increasingly dictatorial behaviour by the government. Moreover, the above evidence of apparent unconstitutional extensions of State power are all being exercised in the area of trying to annihilate the existence of the largest opposition party. If Hichilema succeeds in his efforts to obliterate the PF, it will be a terrible development for Zambia’s multiparty democracy. This is because over the last decade, the country has evolved into a two-party system. Out of the 156 parliamentary seats directly elected under the first-past-the-post system, the UPND and PF share 142. If one of these parties disappears or is weakened, Zambia will effectively be a one-party state. The worrying thing is that this State-supported campaign to destroy the leading opposition party has already seen several institutions that are essential to liberal democracy – the police, parliament, the Registrar of Societies, much of civil society, and even Western interest groups – fall into line. Leading members of Zambia’s academic and intellectual community, mainly from the Tonga-speaking group and those from auxiliary ethnic groups like my own (Lozi), have chosen to be blind to these violations, while our political parties are paralysed because they are not allowed by the police to engage in normal political activities involving the masses.
These apparent moves towards establishing a de facto one-party state are self-evidently part of authoritarian ambition. In this situation, the judiciary is the last line of defence for two reasons. Firstly, the judiciary is firmly established under the constitution and forms part of a longstanding tradition of independence which is allied to, and partly incorporated within, an international system of adherence to standards of independently dispensed justice. Secondly, the judiciary provides the last line of defence against any executive transgressions against the constitution. If such transgressions are not declared invalid in court, then constitutional democracy is increasingly lost, and all that remains is an unhindered slide into dictatorship. It is therefore incumbent upon the people of Zambia to be ever vigilant about the integrity of the judiciary in holding the line against dictatorship.
Unfortunately, there have been a number of cases which have raised questions about the susceptibility of some judges to influence from both private individuals and State actors. Only two years ago, the newly appointed Chief Justice Mumba Malila addressed the entire judiciary and voiced his fears about the level of corruption within the institution. This detailed wider context explains why I got curious when I noted that all the four political cases involving the State-supported Miles Sampa versus the PF aimed at resolving the leadership wrangles in the main opposition party were being allocated to only judges from a specific region that supports Hichilema and those appointed by him. I quietly wondered if this was the earliest evidence that the judiciary is poised to deliver the interests of particular politicians, in the same way that other institutions such as parliament, the police, and Registrar of Societies have done. This is what led me to publish the short 19 January article on X, formerly Twitter, reproduced above. My interest was to know the objective criteria that governs case allocation in the judiciary.
The initial response to my article was the usual ad hominem attacks from supporters of the Tonga-speaking Hichilema and the UPND. They accused me of promoting tribalism, though they stopped short of explaining how exactly I, an ethnic Lozi, was promoting tribalism since the main subjects of my questions in the article are all Lozi speakers. Other detractors claimed that I am originally a Bemba speaker who was only adopted by Lozi-speaking parents. This would be laughable if it were not for the fact that government agents, relying on details on my national registration card, recently went to my village in Senanga district to investigate my ethnic roots. The 6-member team told my folks that they have been sent by the authorities in Lusaka to ascertain whether I was an ethnic Bemba masquerading as a Lozi because ‘some people in government’ could not understand how an ethnic Lozi could criticise the leadership of a man who comes from ‘our region’ – the first president from there.
I was not surprised when my village folks informed me about this disturbing development because I had several months earlier been tipped by prominent civil rights campaigner Brebner Changala that several senior UPND figures had complained on a WhatsApp group about my criticism of Hichilema’s administration and called for a probe into my ethnic roots. It is true that I am considered a traitor by those who think in narrow ethnic terms, including intellectual and professional elites from my region (lawyers, academics, economists, journalists, activists, etc.) who were critical of the governance pitfalls of former president Lungu but have maintained a deafening and incriminating silence on Hichilema’s transgressions. I worked with Tonga and Lozi colleagues at the height of the PF misgovernance. Their academic criticism of the regime was top notch. We were all doing it together and so happily because it was the right thing to do. I am now discovering that many of these were just staunch supporters of Hichilema who have now been accorded various privileges. Their mouths are now shut even to the very concerns they opposed under the PF. Under the UPND, it is harder to find a Tonga or Lozi who stands up to Hichilema’s leadership failures.
One or two may be disgruntled here and there, but many are fanatical supporters of the president, largely driven by ethnic-regional cleavages and loyalties. While those originating from my ethnic-region community had no issue with my criticism of Lungu’s rule, they now find fault in nearly any substantive criticism that I raise against Hichilema’s leadership. As well as weaponising intellectual and moral positions to advance personal and political considerations, members of this community treat me as a traitor whose criticism of Hichilema’s leadership actions risks undermining their cause for ethnic-regional supremacy. I normally tend to ignore these ad hominem attacks, which is precisely what I did with those who responded to my 19 January article with personal attacks or insults. I have sympathy and special understanding for those among us whose capacity for reason never extends beyond formulating ad hominem attacks. I suppose they cannot help it, even if they tried. Tolerating such undesirables is part of the burden we must bear for being human.
About a week after the publication of my article, I came across a press statement from the judiciary, dated 24 January, in response to my article. It contained a list of cases involving PF members to be heard in Zambia’s several courts. At a glance, I welcomed the institution’s intervention in the belief that it was out to deliver clarity on how the allocation of cases is done. Ordinarily, the judiciary does not react to statements made outside the courtroom; it speaks though its judgements or judicial opinions. For them to depart from this precept, I told myself before reading the statement, they must have recognised the significance of both the immediate and wider issues I am raising through the questions I posed. A closer reading of the judiciary’s press release subsequently shows that providing clear answers to the questions I posed was the least of its objectives. The body was far more interested in politicking, as the below paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of its response, shows. The body starts its reaction to my article, titled ‘Judiciary emphasises impartiality and commitment to the rule of law’, by deleting the identity of the person whose questions had caused the entire institution to issue a rare press statement.
The Judiciary of Zambia: “The Judiciary of Zambia wishes to dispel assertions circulated by some individuals and certain media houses that suggest the institution’s alignment with individuals, particular tribes, or political parties and particularly that “Judges are being cherry-picked to hear PF cases”.
Comment: We learn from this paragraph that the response is not coming from an individual office such as that of the Chief Justice or a respective High Court-judge in charge of the cases under discussion. It is coming from ‘[t]he Judiciary of Zambia’, which, according to Article 120 of Zambia’s constitution, consists of the Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, subordinate courts, small claims courts, local courts, and any other courts as prescribed by Parliament. The implication here is that all these courts sat, and this press release is a communique from that meeting. It is very sad and simultaneously frightening that the judiciary, the entire judiciary, is responding publicly to assertions by individuals and media houses who are unspecified. The judiciary deals with the law and specific facts from identified parties. It does not engage in rumour-mongering and has the responsibility to help the readers of their statement to know where their response is coming from. The decision to deliberately conceal my identity – even when anyone sane would know that the body were responding to what I said – appears to have been motivated by two considerations.
The first is to escape potential litigation since the judiciary knew that they were issuing a malicious statement over which they can easily be sued. The second is to create the false impression that the matter of case allocation had been raised by different people and institutions, and consequently warranted a general response. This way, the judiciary hopes to dissolve my identity into the generality of the population, including a lower layer of people who lack any basic understanding of how the judiciary works. The irrefutable fact is that I am the only person on earth who authored the article whose substantive contents the State institution found worth quoting. The Daily Nation, The Mast, and the Zambian Whistleblower, the only media outlets that carried my piece, simply republished it, and must be left alone. If the judiciary found what I said to be worth responding to, it should deal with me and have both the courage and decency to reference me as a human being. I have a name, a history, a clear identity.
We further learn from this opening paragraph that the goal of the judiciary’s press release is to dispel assertions ‘that suggest the institution’s alignment with individuals, particular tribes, or political parties…’. This is a misrepresentation of what I said, one that lowers the integrity of the judiciary and deepens our suspicions of it. No one said the judiciary was aligned to any individuals, tribes, or parties. The central issue I raised in my article, and which remains unaddressed, is how those four judges were allocated all the PF v Sampa cases. I am questioning neither their competence nor their qualifications. I am interested in understanding how only Lozi-speaking judges, three of whom are Hichilema’s appointees, found themselves as judges on all the four cases involving PF v Sampa. An impartial judiciary that operates on a rule-based system should have no problem in citing the source of the authority that determines case allocation. It is important that the judiciary answer this question. We have seen other institutions bow down to the manoeuvres or wishes of the executive and are closely monitoring the judiciary to see how they respond to the matter of the PF’s leadership wrangles. Picking out the fact that all the cases involving the PF versus Sampa factions have been allocated to judges with very particular shared characteristics is important. How was this possible? Can the judiciary explain?
The Judiciary of Zambia: “Our commitment to upholding the rule of law is sacrosanct. The Judiciary is an organ of State (sic) dedicated to upholding the principles enshrined in the Constitution and is above individual, tribal or party alignment. It is therefore essential that we dispel any misconceptions that may undermine public confidence in not only the institution, but the country as a whole.”
Comment: This reasoning commits the fallacy of diversion. By asserting that ‘the judiciary…is dedicated to upholding the principles enshrined in the constitution’, the institution is attempting to duck the central issue I raised and give itself leave to treat any evidence suggesting anything to the contrary as impossible and unthinkable. The implication of this absurd claim that the judiciary always upholds constitutional principles is that the body is therefore above criticism, and that anybody claiming to see evidence of malpractice is necessarily incorrect and mischievous. From this premise, the response from the judiciary consequently implies that all proper procedures must have been followed in selecting the judges to hear particular cases. The response fails to even mention – let alone consider – the series of questions I posed, or to contemplate the possibility that the judges-in-charge might have been influenced in case allocation by State actors from outside the judiciary itself. This is a very un-judicial approach that entails entirely refusing to look at the evidence presented in form of the very specific questions I asked, but instead asserting that the judiciary always upholds constitutional principles. No such argument would be tolerated in a respectable court of law.
The Judiciary of Zambia: “The cause-listed matters annexed hereto are those before the Constitutional Court, the High Court General List, the High Court Economic and Financial Crimes Division, clearly indicating the allocation of matters before the courts, which is a preserve of the respective Judges-in-Charge.”
Comment: I never talked about the PF-related cases before all the mentioned courts. I talked about the cases involving Sampa v PF. Lumping the specific four cases I mentioned with a whole cause list of totally unrelated matters represents a clear attempt to conceal the real issues raised and set up the person making the argument as a target for demonisation. There are only FOUR cases involving Sampa vs the PF that are before the High Court and the Constitutional Court in Zambia – with none in the Economic and Financial Crimes Division. I conducted research before publishing my 19 January article and found these same four cases. The cause-listed matters supplied by the judiciary’s own press release does not dispute my findings. Based on this evidence, I asked a simple and straightforward question: why were all these four cases that are before different courts allocated to only Lozi-speaking judges, three of whom were appointed by President Hichilema? Was the allocation a coincidence or it was planned? This is the matter at hand.
Why is the judiciary consciously muddying the waters by throwing to the public a long list of cases before them that have absolutely nothing to do with the PF vs Sampa cases? This manner of arguing is very strange, coming from our arbiters. If this is the quality of our judiciary, then we are in trouble. Instead of reasserting its independence, the body is coming out like it has been compromised by politics and is subservient to the executive. In essence, the judiciary is manufacturing its own evidence to support its cause. In the process, the State institution wants to bury the matter being raised. The question is: what is the judiciary trying to hide? The central issue at hand is a matter that is one of the burning questions in the country today: the executive’s support for one faction in the main opposition party aimed at assassinating our multiparty democracy. Any alert and patriotic Zambian has the responsibility to stop these undemocratic schemes. Thus, when the court cases involving the two factions are all allocated to judges who were mostly appointed by someone who has an interest in the outcome, the public have reason to be suspicious and demand answers. How did these political cases end up with only Lozi-speaking judges or only justices appointed by Hichilema? The problem here is not even the judges who have been allocated these political cases. It is the source of the allocation. Can the judiciary explain how case allocation is done and why all these four cases involving the PF v Sampa ended up before judges of a particular kind?
As I wrote in the article that drew the attention of the Judiciary, I know that case allocation is done by the respective judge-in-charge. What I do not know is whether there is an objective criterion that is followed by the judge-in-charge when allocating cases. For instance, at the High Court, does the judge-in-charge sit with the Chief Justice, who is an ex-officio member of the High Court, every day after 5pm to see what cases have been filed that day and to allocate them to specific judges based on their relative experience, case load, competence, or independence from bias? Or is case allocation conducted by a computer, a lottery or the piki piki na piki doli approach? Or is everything left to the decision of the respective judge-in-charge? Or perhaps case allocation is randomly done by machines with no human agency? Whatever the system it uses, can the judiciary explain how it was possible that the respective judges-in-charge allocated all PF v Sampa cases to only Lozi-speaking judges? Is the number of Lozi judges in the judiciary so high that any case is, on average, likely to end up with a Lozi?
Alternatively, can the State body refer me to or simply publish the rules governing case allocation? If there is no objective criterion for allocating cases, then the judiciary should simply state so and immediately devise a fair system that would guarantee impartiality. I am not interested in cases involving Lungu v the Attorney General, Brian Mundubile v the Speaker, the quarrels between Nakacinda and the DPP, or any other PF member who may have a case against anybody else. I am interested in the four political cases involving Sampa v the PF because this is the matter that Hichilema is using to undermine the principle of separation of powers in Zambia. The conduct of Hichilema, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the acting Register of Societies, and the Inspector General of police in the PF’s factional battles, and the fact that three of the four judges who were allocated these cases are Hichilema appointees and that all four come from a region that is perceived to be favoured in public appointments constitute enough reason for me to be suspicious and demand answers.
The Judiciary of Zambia: “Further, all matters filed in the Constitutional Court are allocated to a single Judge to handle all preliminary issues and to issue orders for directions. Once the matter is ready for hearing, it is cause-listed to be heard by a panel. All matters filed during a vacation, such as the just ended Christmas vacation are handled by the designated vacation Judge, as was the case with Justice Mulife. It is therefore impossible that any matter can be determined by a single Judge, as this is a collegial court.”
Comment: The issue at hand relates to allocation of cases, not their determination. Here, the Judiciary is conceding that before cases are cause-listed to be heard by a panel, they are allocated to a single judge. This is where my interest lies: What system is in place to guide the case allocations to avoid the potential of bias? To illustrate this point. The one who allocates cases filed in the Constitutional Court is the court’s Deputy President. This position is currently occupied by Mweetwa Shilimi, a Tonga speaker who is both a Hichilema appointee and someone who was simultaneously promoted to the role on his appointment over and above experienced justices who have served on the court longer. As well as determining the allocation of cases, Shilimi is also the one responsible for determining the composition of the panel that hears cases. It is reasonable to assume that President Hichilema strategically placed Shilimi in this position as a way of ‘rigging’ case outcomes from the beginning. Allocation of cases is thus very important, demonstrating the need to publicise the system of allocation.
More worrying is that Shilimi is also a close personal friend of the President, a relationship that even attracted the concern of the Parliamentary Select Committee that was appointed to scrutinise his appointment, as revealed in its final report: “With regard to his relationship with the Republican President, the nominee informed the Committee that he personally knew the President as they had attended university and national service together. He, however, explained that his relationship with the President would be immaterial to his decisions as he would not like to compromise his professionalism after many years of practice.” This is easier said than done, especially in matters where his friend in State House may have political interest. What is needed are rules that would prevent judges in Shilimi’s position from taking part in allocating cases in which Hichilema has an interest.
Another example that reinforces the need for publication of the rules that govern case allocations involves High Court justices Situmbeko Chocho and Sililo Siloka, both of whom were appointed by Hichilema and are handling PF v Sampa cases. Social media is awash with pictures of Chocho around the 2021 election in which she is seen expressing support for Hichilema. Anyone can be forgiven for thinking that Chocho may not be impartial in political matters where Hichilema has demonstrated clear interest by way of showing preference to working with members of one PF faction over the other. The same can be said of Siloka, whose CV shows that he once worked for Lukona Chambers, the law firm belonging to Nellie Mutti, the Speaker of the National Assembly who not only has ties to the ruling party but has also, like Hichilema, shown bias towards the Sampa faction of the PF.
If the provisions of the Judicial Code of Conduct were strictly enforced, the High Court judge-in-charge of the general list should not have allocated the PF v Sampa cases to Chocho or Siloka, since their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Sections 6 (2a) of the Code provides that “A judicial officer shall not adjudicate or take part in any consideration or discussion of any proceedings in which the officer’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned on the grounds that the officer has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s legal practitioner or personal knowledge of the facts concerning the proceedings”. And since the issue of bias is one of perception, can a reasonable person, given these outlined facts, conclude that the cases before the duo will be heard and decided fairly? The answer is no. If Chocho or Siloka finds in Sampa’s favour, they may be perceived as having decided the matter in the interest of a third party they once supported or worked for. If either of them found in the PF’s favour, they may be perceived as having decided the matter in the interest of the main opposition party as a way of proving that they are not influenced by personal, political or any other interest outside that provided by law.
Of course, both Chocho and Siloka could have also recused themselves from adjudicating on the political cases in the interest of safeguarding the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. The fact that they have not done so demonstrates their little regard for the Code or that they have greater incentive to violate it. All this emphasises the urgent need for publication of the rules governing case allocation so that we may learn how the cases were allocated in such a way that they all ended up before the Lozi-speaking judges. The decision by the judiciary to focus on case determination when all I did was to raise questions on how cases are allocated amounts to creating a strawman to divert attention from the central issue: how did the four specific cases involving Sampa v the PF all end up before judges from one region and predominantly Hichilema’s appointees – regardless of which court they were filed in? If I was to pronounce myself on any aspect to do with the determination of the cases, it would merely be to appeal to the presiding judges to attach a degree of urgency to these matters. This is because any undue delays in determining the PF v Sampa cases will keep the main opposition party in a state of paralysis, a situation that only serves to benefit Hichilema and the ruling party. Thanks to the executive’s manipulation of the Registrar of Societies, Sampa’s faction now enjoys formal recognition but holds no grip on the PF’s base and most of its MPs. The opposing faction enjoys the support of both constituencies but has no formal papers to back its claims of party ownership.
There is urgent need for the judiciary to earn its claims of independence and impartiality through demonstratable actions and positive feedback from the public, the consumers of its services. As the adage goes, justice must not only be done but be seen to be done. Merely insisting that the judiciary is impartial and committed to the rule of law is as hollow as President Hichilema’s claims that he has delivered even when people are starving and dying from preventable diseases like cholera. Impartiality is not determined by a single act but the conduct of the judiciary from the moment a matter is filed in court. In other words, when one goes to court, they set the judicial process in motion. The manner of allocating a case is part of the process. Invariably, when the process is tainted, it affects the outcome of the case. If the judge-in-charge cooks the allocation, they have, in effect, cooked the outcome. The alarm I sounded was not about how the case will be decided or the qualifications or competence of the judges to which the cases have been assigned, but the way the cases are being allocated. None of what the judiciary has said in their response indicates that there is impartiality in the allocation of cases. They do not even disclose how cases are allocated. The impartiality of the judiciary is reflected by the collective conduct of the judicial officers, not through declarative statements.
The Judiciary of Zambia: “We encourage citizens to engage in constructive dialogue and discourse, and to express their concerns through appropriate channels, in order to maintain and enhance the strength and credibility of the justice system.”
Comment: Here, we see the breath-taking hypocrisy of the judiciary. How can the judges call citizens to a meaningful engagement when they have failed to demonstrate the same spirit in the very statement in which they issued the call? My observations about the Lozi judges, three of whom were appointed by Hichilema, in the specific cases I cited are factually correct and relevant: the judiciary needs to explain how the cases were allocated to them. Constructive dialogue requires content-based discussion premised on facts and clear identification of the issues at hand. It is impossible to foster understanding and achieve consensus if one party to the debate only reads the title of a submitted piece of evidence and rushes to deliver verdict about the other party. The judiciary’s response, which did not make any reference whatsoever to a single statute or legal document, is not a refutation of the charge of cherry picking of judges, based on the questions I posed, but is instead a threatening stonewall denial. Rather than allaying fears concerning the cherry picking of judges, such a response must instead aggravate suspicions and fears that something funny is going on. It certainly does not give us any confidence that the judiciary can provide any bastion against the slide into dictatorship. Instead of a judicial response, I got a dictatorial answer. The statement is not referring to what was raised. If it was taken to a court, it would be thrown out as irrelevant to the matter in contest.
Also revealed in this paragraph is the judiciary’s attitude towards free speech. The idea that criticism of the judiciary should be conveyed through “appropriate channels” suggests that the exercise of free speech is subject to the use of particular outlets. What are these appropriate channels? Who decides them? Like the whole press release, this paragraph lacks grounding in any logical and known way of presenting arguments, especially those coming from an institution whose officers should ordinarily be imbued with a minimum level of rationality. Article 20 (1) of Zambia’s constitution, on the protection of freedom of expression, provides that “Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to impart and communicate ideas and information without interference, whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons, and freedom from interference with his correspondence.”
Any judiciary that is genuinely dedicated to upholding the constitution and fundamental human rights must recognise that long gone are the days when the undemocratic leader could block any individual from expressing themselves and when newspaper editors exercised greater control over ‘news’ content. In today’s world, the judiciary needs to protect my right to express myself on TikTok, X, Facebook, YouTube, and any other platforms through which we humans communicate. The right to free speech is not limited to undefined ‘appropriate channels.’ I conducted my research and have the right to demand answers, using any platform, arising from the facts that I discovered. No one has the right to decide where and how I should express myself. No one. Not even the judiciary. Rather than questioning the means through which free speech is exercised, the judiciary should only wait to adjudicate when institutions and individuals are injured by the exercise of this freedom by anyone.
The Judiciary of Zambia: “We remain resolute in our dedication to upholding the constitution and ensuring that the rights of every individual are protected.”
Comment: This is sloganeering most associated with trade unions. The job of the judiciary is not to deliver propaganda of this kind; it is to dispense justice. Upholding the constitution or the rights of individuals is an everyday thing that should be proved in practice, not through slogans. Such is the hypocrisy of the judiciary that in this paragraph, the institution is proclaiming its impartiality and that it exists to protect the rights of every individual, while in the next it is violating my right to be heard by effectively presenting me as among those who issue “careless and baseless statements” that “undermine the judiciary…jeopardize the integrity of the legal system and have a direct effect on investor confidence.”
The Judiciary of Zambia: “It is crucial to remind the public that careless and baseless statements undermining the Judiciary not only jeopardize the integrity of the legal system but also have a direct effect on investor confidence.
Kalumba Chisambisha-Slavin
DEPUTY DIRECTOR CORPORATE COMMUNICATION
www.judiciaryzambia.com
kâlumba.slavin@judicaryzambia.com”
Comment: It is this concluding paragraph that is most outlandish for two main reasons.
First, how can a person who is seeking to restore the integrity of the legal system be accused of ‘undermining the Judiciary’? The claim that criticism of judicial actions will ‘have a direct effect on investor confidence’ implies that any evidence of lack of integrity in the judicial system should be concealed from investors lest they desist from investing in the country. As a critic, I am not in the least concerned with protecting investors from any knowledge of corruption, but rather with protecting Zambians from corruption in government which is all to the detriment of the welfare of the people.
Second, since they have not answered how those Lozi-speaking judges and Hichilema appointees were allocated the cases involving Sampa v the PF, how did the judiciary reach the verdict that my questions were baseless and careless? Which trial found my submissions to be without foundation? Who sat to hear and assess the quality of evidence that was provided before deciding the matter in favour of the judiciary? Why is the judiciary making conclusions without due process? I am genuinely aggrieved that the “The Judiciary of Zambia” is tarnishing my reputation and insulting my integrity by questioning my capacity to decide what is careless and baseless. Now, since the “The Judiciary of Zambia” has already pronounced itself on this matter, where do I go to get justice?
There are several psychological elements of the judiciary’s unevidenced characterisation of my questions as ‘baseless and careless statements’. The first is to delegitimise me as a practising public intellectual. This is what the mob of Hichilema’s supporters in civil society and academia has been attempting to do since I turned my shield of criticism to the governance pitfalls of his administration. For this pack, debating by way of attacking the critic’s thoughts and demonstrating the weaknesses inherent in them is the least of its objectives. Its members are far more interested in discrediting me and rubbishing much of what I say so that no one, going forward, pays attention to my substantive criticism of Hichilema’s decisions, leadership, and administration. The style this group uses is to deliberately distort or misread what I say, to attack my person rather than my thoughts, or to boldly accuse me of making unsubstantiated statements without demonstrating how. Such is its enthusiastic support for the regime that several members of this group are even ruining their professional reputation.
By unfairly characterising my views in the manner it did, the judiciary has, wittingly or unwittingly, joined this mob in working to undermine my credibility as a source of political analysis on Zambian affairs. Shortly after the release of the press statement, several members of this mob were indiscriminately circulating it, some with some perverted additions of their own. The second element is to encourage the police to treat me as a person who is purposely ‘jeopardizing the integrity of the legal system’ and, by extension, an enemy of the State. This position by the judiciary puts the critic in the position of being open to a charge of sedition or economic sabotage, and therefore amounts to an implicit judicial threat against critics to keep their mouths shut or face the consequences. Since the judiciary has already pronounced me guilty of ‘careless and baseless statements’, the police have been given free rein to arrest me at the earliest available opportunity. The judiciary’s statement also puts me in harm’s way including by way of political violence especially in a society where many have been encouraged to believe that criticism of State institutions or the government is not only wrong but should also attract punishment.
Let me end by reiterating that the matter at hand relates to how all the Sampa v PF cases ended up before a quartet of Lozi judges. Can the judiciary demonstrate the impartiality and commitment to the rule of law that led them to allocate the cases to only justices from one ethnic group? All I am asking is for the judiciary to provide the evidence showing that the method that was used to allocate the PF v Sampa cases is fair and insulated from political or external considerations. We have an executive that is destroying institutions of the State and our multiparty system to enable Hichilema, who has vested interests in the outcome of these cases, to entrench himself in power amidst increasing despondency from citizens arising from the cost-of-living crisis. At a political level, there is legitimate suspicion that the executive will do the same to the judiciary, which does not exist outside this wider context. All sane and patriotic Zambians must therefore be extremely alert to how the judiciary now behaves in politically sensitive matters before it, especially those that have a huge bearing on the fate of our democracy. The first responsibility of the judiciary is to produce the objective criteria by which they chose the four Lozi-speaking judges. Can they please do so? That is all I am asking.
I ADMIRED MAZOKA…he’s a nationalist, a complete opposite of HH – Changala
By Fanny Kalonda(The Mast)
MAZOKA is a complete opposite of the current UPND president, complete opposite, says good governance activist Brebner Changala.
Changala said President Hakainde Hichilema does not accept to be led, “and that is his first failure”.
“I must say it and put it on record the President assured me, just like he assured everybody out there, that he is coming to unite this country and I believed him,” he said.
Speaking when he featured on the Conversation Programme, Changala said on a scale of zero to 10, President Hichilema might have scored one, being the least because he has made no changes.
“If Anderson Mazoka had lived longer, UPND would not have remained in opposition for 23 years. He knew how to mobilise. Anderson Mazoka was outgoing and he knew how to tap into human resource. And he knew how to relate and maintain friendship. And he knew how to harness and use the criticism that would be thrown at him. He never used to get angry but most importantly Anderson Mazoka never fronted a tribe. Anderson Mazoka was a nationalist. He was such a father figure that was accepted on either divide. He was brilliant. I get something that I repeat so often from Anderson Mazoka because I followed him closely and I admired him…” he said. “But I’ll tell you something, Mr Hakainde Hichilema does not accept to be led. He must be a leader at all times and at all levels and that’s his failure number one. I want to tell you here now which everybody knows in this country, Mr Hakainde Hichilema never and still doesn’t recognise ECL (Edgar Chagwa Lungu) as president. He never accepted him when he was president. He has never accepted him as a former president, even today.”
Changala said in his private conversation with President Hichilema, before he won the election, he asked him to do better than president Mwanawasa in terms of good governance, integrity and national building but “he over credits himself”.
He accused President Hichilema of driving an agenda of division.
“But I can tell you here now, on a scale of zero to 10, the President might have scored one being the least because he has made no changes to the way the PF ran this country. In fact, it is a replica of the Patriotic Front and many of us are wondering as to why did we change. We should have just panel beated Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu to remove the cadres from the streets because on that, we give him credit although he over credits himself. But we give him credit because he can’t finish a sentence without the Patriotic Front because it’s one animal that haunts him day in and day out. But our expectation when we supported Mr Hakainde and the UPND is change and the restoration of the rule of law,” Changala said. “He (President Hichilema) said ‘I have done all I could have done. I have offered you a job, I know your agenda. You want to start attacking me’. He told me that, the President. We have a very unusual situation which I have noticed at my age. I have attacked all administrations without exception. This is the first administration that I’ve seen which is highly sensitive to criticism and whenever you criticise it’s because you never wanted a Tonga to become President and it irritates me.”
Changala added that he finds it challenging that whatever platform President Hichilema finds himself, it becomes topical of him to talk about tribe and the challenges he faced in opposition.
“I supported him, he was president. HH is my friend. For your information we have never discussed a tribe before he became President but it has become a topical issue. And the President is driving this agenda of division. I must say it and put it on record the President assured me, just like he assured everybody out there, that he is coming to unite this country and I believed him. But I don’t like it and I wish he would watch me that every platform that he is given, the tribe and the challenges that he faced in the opposition becomes the central topic issue. Whatever forum, whether he’s talking to the permanent secretaries, whether he’s talking to ordinary citizens. I find it challenging,” said Changala. “If only I wanted to benefit I should have been very comfortable with Hakainde, that’s my friend but when it comes to national matters, it doesn’t work.”
Separating Fact from Fiction: Disputing Allegations of Purge in Zambian Public Service.
Ambassador Emmanuel Mwamba’s recent op-ed has stirred controversy, accusing President Hakainde Hichilema of fostering a purge within the Zambian public service.
However, a careful and verified investigation reveals significant discrepancies in Mwamba’s claims, suggesting a potential agenda to tarnish the reputation of President Hichilema.
Here’s a breakdown of the key points that refute Mwamba’s allegations:
1. Inflated Numbers: Contrary to Mwamba’s assertion of over 300 affected individuals, our verified investigation indicates that the number of people at cabinet awaiting deployment is less than 59.
This large difference raises questions about the accuracy of Mwamba’s information.
2. UPND’s Commitment to Fair Practices: It is crucial to emphasize that the UPND government, led by President Hichilema, has publicly stated its commitment to fair and just practices.
The claim that the administration is engaging in victimization tactics reminiscent of the PF government is refuted by this commitment.
3. Baseless Accusations: Mwamba’s narrative relies on accusations of discrimination based on alleged affiliations with the previous government.
However, our investigation reveals that these allegations lack substantive evidence, with individuals being dismissed or facing obstacles in their careers without proper justification.
4. Selective Use of Information: Mwamba’s article highlights specific cases, such as the recall and dismissal of a diplomat and the termination of a journalist’s employment, without providing a comprehensive view of the circumstances.
This selective use of information raises concerns about the objectivity of his claims.
it is evident from our verified investigation that Ambassador Emmanuel Mwamba’s op-ed is riddled with inaccuracies and lacks the necessary substantiation for its claims.
The attempt to portray President Hichilema as fostering a purge in the public service appears to be driven by a political agenda rather than a commitment to truth and transparency.
As responsible citizens, it is important to critically assess the information presented in such op-eds, considering the credibility of the sources and the verifiability of the claims.
President Hichilema’s administration should be judged based on verified facts and actions rather than unsubstantiated accusations driven by political motives.
In the pursuit of a fair and accountable public service, it is essential to discourage the spread of misleading information and promote a discourse based on transparency and truth.
THE REBRANDED NON VIOLENT PF MEETS THE EU IN LUSAKA
This afternoon at the invitation of the EU offices in Lusaka, I, our SG Morgan Ngona and some PF MCCs, has a meeting with the new Head of the EU Delegation to Zambia and the EU Parliament MPs that monitored the 2021 general elections.
We discussed a wide range of of issues of public and national interest from the 2021 elections to now and in future. We common at a point of wishing good democracy both in Zambia and Africa.
Will you support the UPND government if brought a bill in Parliament? Our answer was that only to the extent that the said bill is to benefit of the aspiration of the ordinary Zambian citizens e.g to stop a new nomination if a candaitate withdraws in a by or ordinary election. It’s costly for nothing. We said we will not support any bill that is not on the interest of ordinary Zambians and if for instance is to prevent people exercising their right to vote every 5 years.
We will also support the removal of a bill that will disband the Public Order act and we pointed out that every past President has promised while in Opposition to amend the Bill, but non has thus far been brave enough to do so once assumed the instruments of power. We remain hopeful that President HH will go down in history as one that was brave enough to do so and get the Public Order Act amended and to allow the opposition to assemble without Police notification.
We will play our role of giving checks and balances without Fear or Favour so we make Zambia a better democratic Country in the continent of Africa.
‘Twakomba akaka’, comrade ‘bo’ M’membe, HH has not refused to honour Barotseland Agreement
By Austin Mbozi(The Mast)
At this stage, the desirable is the reconciliatory approach of pleading, oh yes pleading saying ‘twakomba akaka’ (Tonga), with Socialist Party leader comrade Dr Fred M’membe to avoid accusing republican President Hakainde Hichilema of lying to the Barotseland ‘separatists’.
The truth is, the President never said he rejects the Barotseland Agreement. He only vowed to maintain Zambia a unitary state, which comrade M’membe agrees with. The problem is that many Zambians, totally ignorant about this issue and what the President meant, are saying ‘we agree with the president’s rejection of the Barotseland Agreement’. And comrade M’membe capitalises on this mass ignorance, saying ‘yes, the President promised lies to honour the Agreement and now he rejects it’. These HH supporters will end up further annoying the Barotse activists to rise against him while popularising M’membe.
The reality is that comrade M’membe’s and President HH’s solutions to this have more in common than differences. The imaginary differences are only superficially created by comrade M’membe. But still, in highly sensational political issue like this one it is better to plead with him to moderate his accusations for the utilitarian greater good of national unity rather than taking the deontological moral self-righteousness of attacking him.
Here are the highlights/analysis of their positions.
First, both comrade M’membe and President HH agree that Zambia should remain a unitary state, against Barotseland ‘separation’.
Second, both campaigned/campaign to restore the 1964 Barotseland Agreement. Yes, President HH campaigned/promised to honour it. And so does comrade M’membe. But we cannot tell the differences in how the two hope to honour it until we hear President HH’s proposals. We only know comrade M’membe’s approach: to extend the Agreement’s semi-autonomous powers to all provinces; much like I proposed way back in my column in his Post Newspaper. I will later address the merits and demerits of his proposal. For now, my point is that both he and HH promise to honour it.
Comrade M’membe is committing what academic philosophers call ‘attacking a strawman’ in accusing President HH of changing his position. You cannot accuse someone of what he has not said and then start attacking him for it! President HH only said he wanted a unitary state. He never said he rejected the Agreement. Advocating for a unitary state does not contradict the Barotseland Agreement, because its very appendix accepts sovereign unitary Zambia as ‘one nation’. When President HH said he wanted a unitary state he was not attacking advocates of the Agreement. He was responding to advocates of ‘separation’.
I agree with that Barotse action which says: Either the Zambian government honours the Agreement or we will separate to return to our pre-Agreement colonial-era status. But the other faction has gone too far in saying ‘we no longer want to Agreement’. Remember that in 2022, I wrote two articles in this column, suggesting that UPND must take a pro-active move to negotiate with the activists because they will doubt its commitment if the push comes from the activists? I hope UPND will now become more pro-active, approach the activists for negotiations. Then, hopefully, the activists will tone down.
Third, both comrade M’membe and President HH have no problems calling Western Province ‘Barotseland’. Comrade M’membe again commits a fallacy of attacking a strawman. President HH only said he has problems with having a Barotseland separate republic. But comrade M’membe accuses him of rejecting the name Barotseland in reference to Western Province as part of Zambia. It is not President HH who removed the name Barotseland. It is Zambia’s first President Kenneth Kaunda. This region was called Barotseland Protectorate after the 1890 Lochner Concession between King Lubosi Lewanika and Cecil Rhodes’ agent Frank Lochner. Then it was re-named Barotseland Province in 1964 after the May 1964 Agreement after Kaunda negotiated with Lewanika Mwanawina III that Barotseland becomes part of unitary Zambia on condition that Barotseland retained autonomous regional rights over locally-generated finances, land, fisheries and a regional parliament (the katengo Kuta), presided over by the Ngambela (prime minister) under the Litunga (king).
But privately, Kaunda planned to discard the irritations associated with administering this region with semi-autonomous power. He began by rejecting his own pre-Agreement verbal assurances to include the Agreement in the Zambian Constitution. Then in 1969, he organised a national referendum, asking Zambians to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the question of whether or not the Agreement should be honoured. The majority within Barotseland Province supported the Agreement. But the majority in mainstream Zambia rejected it. Yet Kaunda said ‘the majority of Zambians allowed me to reject it’. So he rejected it and renamed the region Western Province.
Kaunda’s action was crooked and illegitimate. He should not have asked the non-Barotse Zambians to vote in this referendum. He should have adopted the majority vote of the Barotse people.
International legal jurisprudence governing plebicites admits only the voice of the legitimately aggrieved, not the majority oppressors. Suppose you find some among five women protesting that the ten men around are trying to rape them. You are irresponsible if you allowed a vote of all the 15 persons and then allow the sex to go on just because all the ten men voted for it plus one woman. The referendums on Scottish, Basques or Quebec ‘separatist’ movements only ask the members of the legitimately aggrieved, not the English, mainstream Spanish, or English speaking Canadians respectively, whether these minorities should separate. Hey there Professor Hamalengwa, my fellow columnist across the ‘river’ (opposite page). Is my law correct?
So, the rest of you non-Barotse Zambians saying ‘we support the President for rejecting the Barotseland Agreement’ shut up. After all, ‘nanga Barotseland niya a nyoko?’
The author has media-written hundreds of ethnicity-related articles, academic-published on global economic justice, wrote a book ‘Language Politics in Zambia’ (2018), and teaches at the University of Zambia. Phone +260-978-741920. Email: austin.mbozi2017@gmail.com
Stop the blame game and fix the problems, M’membe advises HH
By Rhoda Nthara(The Mast)
YOU are now heading to three years in government so stop the blame game, Socialist Party leader Fred M’membe has advised President Hakainde Hichilema.
He says President Hichilema is not God, “so every human being is fallible. Just admit your failures and seek help”.
“It has now become a tradition for Mr Hakainde Hichilema and the UPND to pass blame on Mr Edgar Lungu and the PF for their economic policy inertia without being introspective,” Dr M’membe said.
He noted that President Hichilema’s core team also served in the PF government.
“Who are the key economic managers in any government, who are key advisors to the President on economic matters? It is the Central Bank governor who is responsible for monetary policy and the Minister of Finance who is in charge of the fiscal policy, including being custodian of budget formulation and execution,” Dr M’membe said. “Now let’s look back. Who was the substantive Central Bank governor during Edgar Lungu’s rule? It was Dr Denny Kalyalya who was only removed 11 months before the August 2021 elections. So we can agree that substantively Mr Lungu’s monetary policy was anchored on Dr Kalyalya. So when you say PF left high inflation, then it should point to the office holder. Who is the current Central Bank governor? Same person. In addition, even the deputy served under Mr Lungu and is still there. So introspect if you want to blame Mr Lungu and PF who left the kwacha at K15.89 per dollar to now K27.”
He then moves to Minister of Finance.
“In 2016, after PF won the election, what was Zambia’s external debt balance? Approximately $7 billion (I stand to be corrected). Who became the finance minister post-2016 elections? Mr Felix Mutati. How much debt did he contract? He can answer for himself! It is estimated that by the time he left, it was around $11 billion (again, I stand to be corrected). Where are these economic managers at the moment? Serving in Mr Hichilema’s government. So the bad you blame PF is part of your core team,” noted Dr M’membe. “In a nutshell, stop the blame game and fix the problems. You are now heading to three years in government, so stop the blame game. If you have failed, just admit, we will forgive you. You are not God, so every human being is fallible. Just admit your failures and seek help.”
There’s no proof HH commented of presidential jet case-Court
THE Lusaka Magistrates’ Court has ruled that the jet case involving former ministry of defense permanent secretary will be determined under the Subordinate Court Act as a normal case and not under the Economic and Financial Crimes Court.
Lusaka chief resident magistrate Davies Chibwili has since urged members of the public to desist from commenting on matters that are active in Court.
In this matter Mwale is jointly charged with Isabel Wilima Chinji, and military personnel general Micheal Obister Mbewe, Evaristo Sakala, Frank Hardy Sinyangwe and Dr John Phiri for wilful failure to comply with procurement procedures relating to purchasing of the presidential jet Gulf-stream G650 and corrupt acquisition of public property.
At the last sitting five accused President Hakainde Hichilema of having convicted them publicly during a conference attended by adjudicators in Livingstone last year, when he hinted of selling the presidential jet which he said was purchased at an exorbitant price.
The accused sought an assurance on whether their prosecution will be just after having been publicly incriminated by the most powerful man in the land and his minister of defense Ambrose Lufuma.
Mwale and his co-accused asked the Court to refer the matter to the High Court for a determination on whether they will have a fair trial following the statement made by the President.
The accused also wanted the court clarify under which category their case fell whether the Economic and Financial Crimes Court (EFCC) or an ordinary case under the ACC Act.
They argued that if the case fell under the EFCC, it was being heard outside schedule pursuant to gazette notice no. 17381738 of 2023 issued by the Judiciary directing Subordinate Courts to hear such cases in sessions within five months effective February 5, 2024.
But ruling on the applications magistrate Chibwili said the case will be heard in conformity with the Subordinate Court Act as a normal case under the ACC Act as it was taken to Court in June 2023 before divisions of specialised Court were created at the Subordinate Court.
“The matter came as a normal case in this case, it’s specification is yet to be known and the impact of the gazette notice will also be known therefore making this application is neither here nor there,” magistrate Chibwili said.
“I will continue to hear this matter as a normal criminal case.”
The Court further refused to refer the matter to the Superior Court on reasons that there is no material evidence to prove that President Hichilema and Lufuma publicly convicted the five.
“There was no evidence that the President and the minister made the comments complained of. If they did so it must have been made before the case commenced. As guided by the Supreme Court persons must desist from commenting on matters that are pending determination before Court,”said magistrate Chibwili.
“The arguments that the comment amounted to instructions to the Judiciary and other independent were rejected in similar applications made before the Supreme Court therefore the application for a constitutional reference cannot be granted. I find no merit in the applications and accordingly dismiss them.”
He adjourned the case to February 7 for commencement of trial
In urban communities where gossip and rumours are taken as gospel truth, and spread fast, Emmanuel JJ Banda – the Petauke Independent Member of Parliament- is known as a thug. But not with his people, in Petauke Central Constituency. JJ, to his constituants is Godsent, an answered prayer. A leader they should have had a while ago.
Previously, those who felt intimidated and threatened by his destined leadership as MP, branded JJ a thug. It is a notorious tag which JJ struggled with for a very long time, and even today, it leaves scars in his political journey.
But along the way, he realized that while he could not change many people’s views on him, he could change the lives of people in Petauke Central Constituency. So, that is where his energies were focused. JJ faced Dora Siliya, an experienced and versatile political female version of bulldozer. She served as Petauke Central MP since 2006 and served as Deputy Minister and Minister in both the MMD and PF administration. She built the necessary connections, financial power and political knowledge. In 2016, she used all these to her advantage and thwarted JJ who then stood as Independent MP, challenging her.
Just immediately after JJ lost the 2016 elections, he embarked on a journey to Parliament. As usual, Dora Siliya and her team underestimated him. By this time, the young JJ knew how to get voters.
Here is what JJ did based on The Candidates investigations.
1. First, JJ invested in utility vehicles. These were used to aid people, in times of misfortunes such as funerals and other social social gatherings/ programs. These vehicles were available to people for use, with fuel and other logistical expenses met by JJ. If anyone had a funeral anywhere in the perimeters of Petauke Central, all they had to do was inform JJ’s team which was set up in Petauke.
2. JJ would mobilise finances to support any grieving families with a Coffin and other related needs such as food while mourning.
3. JJ embarked on identifying deserving yet poor pupils who lacked education support. He took them in, under his sponsorship. While he could not help everyone at once, he would do his best to help those he could afford.
4. JJ embarked on operationalizing boreholes that were broken in communities. He would mobilise funds and fix water problems for communities that had been neglected and drunk water from the same pools as animals.
5. JJ created a system that supported farming. He did so by helping raise funds for FISP contributions, required for one to access fertiliser. In this same line, he helped farmers secure markets for their farming produce during harvest.
6. Most importantly, JJ had identification with youths. He told the youths he understood their challenges and that, by virtue of this, he would serve them better because he knew what they wanted. He turned to the majority poor farmilies in Petauke. He shares a history with. He grew up having difficulties to pursue education and walked long distances to access education. Sometimes, and many times, he would never make it to class during rain season because roads and bridges became impassable. This story was a testimony to the people. They realised they had someone who hailed among them and knew exactly their challenges.
When voting day came in 2021, JJ won. You know him as a Thug but in Petauke JJ is the people’s messiah. For the people, he has the heart of an angel having served them diligently and as per campaign promises, thus far. Clearly, the people of Petauke will still put their “Thug with a heart of an angel” in Parliament, again.
One of the Achilles heels of some of our leaders in the current New Dawn Administration is their failure to pick up calls from ordinary citizens or indeed the rank and file within the party! President Hichilema is in fact on record castigating his ministers and other senior government officials for not picking up calls from ordinary citizens. Every time you try to call some of these officials, their mobile phones go unanswered; and when you decide to pay them a visit at their offices, they hide behind their secretaries on the pretext that they’re very busy!
Let those who looted the treasury in the previous regime who still have “tusaka twandalama” hidden in their houses and on their farms try to call them with some bogus business proposals, you’ll see how their eyes will instantly be transformed and glow with excitement!
Imwe ba Cabinet Minister, ba Permanent Secretaries naimwe ba District Commissioner; it’s not always that whenever ‘ba kabusu’ call you, they want to ask for ka “sumfing”…..learn to pick up our calls, please! Sometimes we want to share vital Intel with you or bring you up to speed with issues that may require your urgent attention. Kudos to a few exceptions such as mama Doreen Mwamba, the Minister of Community Development & Social Welfare, Ministry of Information Permanent Secretary, the legendary Thabo Kawana and indeed Messrs Christopher Mundia and Levy Ngoma, the Legal and Political aides to the President, respectively. They’ll easily pick up their calls or promptly get back to you in case of missed calls.
As it is not our nature to speak from without, we shall share a few practical examples. We shall however spare the concerned leaders any embarassment by not mentioning any names.
Flouting labour laws with impunity One day, some rural country folks working at our neighbour’s farm who is building a double storied structure approached us with complaints that their boss, a youngish man of Asian origin, was paying them slave wages and failing to provide them the necessary personal protective equipment such as hard hats and safety boots. And whenever they complain, he’d go ballistic and call them names…….baboons and monkeys for that matter!
Our immediate reaction was to confront the man and punch him right on his nose, but common sense obviously prevailed and we decided otherwise. We tried to get hold of the concerned government officials to convey our grievances but they kept ignoring our calls. When we finally called on one official, he promised to pay the “investor” a surprise visit in the company of labour officers and a ZNBC news crew. But lo and behold……the Asian man continues to abuse his workers with impunity to this day!
Using street kids in illegal mining Before the Senseli mine disaster in Chingola, we raised the “alarm” regarding street kids being used in such hazardous operations. Evidence is readily available on social media and of course Zambia National Broadcasting Services Corporation archives as we had given them an interview.
Of course, we took a step further and tried to engage one or two government officials to alert them on what was obtaining at the said mining site and yet no one cared to listen. As fate would have it, tragedy struck resulting in catastrophic proportions. There’s a possibility some of the street kids got buried in those tunnels as the so-called Jerabos used to coerce them to go and work there as well.
Mining in game reserves In their quest to possibly catch-up with Patriotic Front cadres in terms of accumulation of massive wealth, some UPND cadres and party officials have “invaded” some game reserves in their droves and are busy mining copper and other precious minerals without following any laid down procedures. This is totally wrong! We didn’t get rid of PF Mafias to replace them with another bunch of criminals!
On several occasions, we’ve tried to bring such criminalities to the attention of relevant authorities but as usual, our calls have remained unanswered!
We can prepare a whole catalogue about how our leaders have become so “unreachable” but we won’t bore you with such nitty gritties. In the few years that UPND has been in power, it has obviously recorded a number of successes but there’s still some more work yet to be done. However, immediately the leadership begins “insulating” itself from the ordinary masses, it becomes impossible to appreciate what is obtaining “pa ground” and before you know it, the ground would have long shifted far away from you. These are our prophetic words.
Ba Minister, ba Permanent Secretary naimwe ba District Commissioner, start picking up our calls! Start attending to the needs of our people……or you’re waiting for 2026?
TRIAL CONTINUES IN THE TEN YEAR OLD BOY CHIKONDI BANDA MURDER CASE
Ngwerere Police Station Chief Inspector Frizel Sikalulu has testified in a matter in which 24 year old Nalukui Akafelwa is charged with the murder of ten year old boy Chikondi Banda of Chilulu Garden, on March 24th, 2023.
Inspector Sikalulu told the Court that Chikondi Banda’s body was found in a decomposed state and quickly informed his grandmother Agnes Tembo who identified the deceased and later took the body to University Teaching Hospital (UTH) mortuary for postmortem.
He informed the court that the postmortem was conducted on March 24, 2023 and the findings showed that the cause of death was a blunt impact trauma to the head due to the assault.
The incident is reported to have happened on March 17, 2023.
Inspector Sikalulu told the court that investigations were instituted and officers managed to get the number of the accused.
He said the number was registered in the name of Nalukwui Akafelwa.
Inspector Sikalulu told the court that the accused hit the boy with a stone on his head on March 16, 2023 between 20 to 21 hours.
He also told the court that the accused sent a message to the deceased aunty Elizabeth Tembo demanding a ransom of twelve thousand kwacha for the exchange of the boy.
Inspector Sikalulu said that according to the aunty to the deceased, she received the message around 24:03 hours on March 17th, 2023 and quickly involved the police.
” Your honor, the accused was on March 28, 2023 put in detention and cooperated with police in leading them to where he killed the little boy and where he left the body behind Emmasdale Police in the maize field, every move was recorded on camera your honor”, he testified.
He told the court that later a docket of murder section 200 of the penal code chapter 87 of the laws of Zambia was opened against Nalukui Akafelwa.
Judge Bowa Mwape has adjourned the matter to February 12, 2024.
An Italian watchdog says that ChatGPT, an AI-powered chatbot, has broken rules about keeping data safe.
Italy’s Data Protection Authority (DPA) looked into a situation and found that there were privacy problems with how data was being handled. However, it didn’t say exactly what the problems were.
The chatbot started in 2022 and needs a lot of information from the internet to work.
OpenAI, the company that made ChatGPT, has 30 days to give its response. The BBC has reached out to OpenAI for a statement.
Italy has strongly supported protecting data when it comes to ChatGPT.
It was the first country in the Western region to stop the product in March 2023 because they were worried about people’s privacy.
ChatGPT was allowed again about four weeks later, after saying it had fixed the problems the DPA had brought up.
Italy’s data protection authority started an investigation and found that there have been privacy breaches.
In a statement, the DPA said that they found evidence showing that there were violations of the rules in the EU GDPR.
Under the EU’s GDPR law, companies that don’t follow the rules can be fined up to 4% of their total income.
Italy’s Data Protection Authority (DPA) is working with the European Union’s European Data Protection Board to keep an eye on ChatGPT. They created a special team to do this in April 2023.
When ChatGPT was allowed again in Italy in April 2023, the Italian regulator told the BBC that they were happy with the changes OpenAI made, but they wanted even more rules to be followed.
A person speaking for the company said they want to do more to check people’s ages and tell Italians about their right to not have their personal information used for training computers.
An OpenAI representative said they would keep talking with the regulator.
OpenAI is closely connected to the big company Microsoft, which has put a lot of money into it.
Microsoft has added AI to its Bing search engine and to its Office 365 apps like Word, Teams, and Outlook.
E Jean Carroll wants to use some of the $83. 3 million she won in her case against former President Donald Trump to spend on something that he doesn’t like.
She was very scared to go to court against Mr. Trump, but when she saw him, her fear went away.
Before the trial, a judge decided that Mr. Trump had hurt her reputation by saying that her accusation of sexual assault against him was not true.
He was held responsible last year for sexually abusing Ms. Carroll in the 1990s. The jury did not believe that she was raped.
Mr Trump said he will try to change the court’s decision because he believes it is very unfair.
Ms Carroll, who is 80 years old, said to ABC News on Monday that she wants to give the money to something that Donald Trump doesn’t like.
“If giving money to certain things will hurt him, then that’s what I want to do. ”
The writer of the magazine recommended using the money to help women who were sexually attacked by Donald Trump.
Many women have said that the old president hurt them, forced them into sexual things, and bothered them sexually starting from the 1970s. He says he didn’t do anything wrong.
Ms Carroll said that Mr Trump did something wrong to her in the dressing room of a fancy store in Manhattan in the 1990s.
The person being interviewed on Monday said she had a hard time eating and sleeping before the trial. She was sitting next to her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, during the interview.
However, she said she felt less anxious when she saw him in court.
“I saw outside,” she said. “He was there, and it seemed like he had nothing on – like an emperor with no clothes. ”
Ms Carroll told ABC that some of the people who make decisions in the court smiled at her when they left. They decided to give her $18. 3m to make up for her losses and $65m as punishment.
“It made me cry because they looked into my eyes for the first time,” she said.
Mr Trump, who is 77 years old, has to start paying Ms. Carroll, as stated by her lawyer, unless there is an appeal.
Ms Kaplan said that Mr Trump would need to get a bond so he doesn’t have to pay all of the $83. 3 million at once.
However, he would also need to borrow a large amount of money from a bank and pay interest on it.
Mr Trump could also just put $83. 3 million in the court.
Last year, he had to pay $5. 5 million for saying bad things about Ms Carroll. He paid all the money.
If he doesn’t do what he’s supposed to, Ms Carroll can start collecting money right away. Ms Kaplan said she is sure he will eventually pay.
The man who claimed to have stolen Judy Garland’s ruby slippers from the Wizard of Oz will not be imprisoned.
Terry Jon Martin, who is 76 years old, admitted in October that he stole an important piece of artwork.
His lawyers had requested no jail time and made an agreement for the time he has already spent in jail.
Martin confessed to stealing the slippers because an old friend from a criminal group convinced him to do it for one final big job in 2005.
During a court meeting in Minnesota, the former criminal didn’t show any feelings when the punishment was given. He couldn’t stand up from his chair after the meeting, as reported by the Associated Press.
Martin, who was in jail for stealing things, is now getting special care in hospice. His lawyers say he might only have six months to live.
The ruby slippers were stolen from a museum in Minnesota in 2005, when someone broke in through a window at night.
Martin’s lawyer, Dane DeKrey, asked for mercy in a letter last week. He said that Martin hasn’t done anything wrong in almost 10 years since getting out of prison.
However, someone who used to be in the mob contacted him and persuaded him to steal the slippers. The slippers were borrowed by the Judy Garland Museum in Grand Rapids, Minnesota.
At first, Terry said no to joining the illegal job. DeKrey wrote that old habits are hard to change, and the idea of a ‘final score’ kept him awake at night.
Martin confessed to breaking the glass of the museum door and display case with a heavy hammer to steal the slippers, which were insured for $1 million.
He said he wanted to sell the rubies from the slippers, but he found out they were made of glass and got rid of them a few days later.
Martin said he never watched the Wizard of Oz movie and doesn’t know why the slippers are important in our culture.
He didn’t get in trouble for the crime until 13 years later. The FBI found the slippers and arrested him after a man offered to help the insurer get them back.
At least five sets of ruby slippers worn by Garland in the movie are still around.
BRIAN MWALE SACKED BEFORE REPORTING FOR HIS NEW JOB AFTER RESIGNING AT ZNBC
Good morning dear ZNBC workmates, the past 11 years plus have been an awesome experience working at the public Broadcaster. Its been a childhood dream come true.
I am grateful to management for having had the faith in me to serve from Reporter through to Assistant Assignments Editor for TV1 which is a position that comes with lots of pressure but with your help we managed.
Memories have been sweet, exploring the world for reporting and training during which I have established a global network of media people.
Through ZNBC I managed to upgrade my academic credentials from Diploma to Degree and soon to finish my MBA. I remain indebted to my immediate supervisor Mwila Nsofu for having been flexible for me to pursue my studies through ma local leave or some arrangement for exams.
Apologies to those I may have hurt, obviously unintentional because I’m one of the sweetest and gentle souls that you will ever come across. (It’s not bragging if you can back up. Lol, thats on a lighter note.)
Most likely hurtful things could have emanated from my insatiable appetite of not massaging the truth and saying things as they are. That’s just a trait I live by and I guess won’t change.
I am leaving ZNBC for other ventures. I am sure that most of you know that I resigned early this month and proceeded on leave.
With a reputation and brand that most of us who go on TV at ZNBC have made, it’s obviously difficult to keep word of joining another firm under wraps because employees in those organizations also get excited that we are joining them hence word spreads faster than wild fire. It’s no secret that the name Brian Mwale is a strong national brand supported by works and experience.
For the avoidance of doubt, some of you may know that my resignation was necessitated by a job offer as Corporate Affairs Manager at ZEMA whose contract was signed last year and was set to report on Feb 1.
However, in a dramatic turn of events my contract was terminated by the new DG for unknown reasons within hours if him reporting. But word is that some known ZNBC Reporter engaged political players who influenced the termination on allegations of me being a PF Cadre. Being linked to a party that almost kicked me out of ZNBC on allegations that I was opposition. Records are there with HR.
We all have the potential to be petty and speak ill of others to politicians but doing so is evil as we put humanity in front hence refrain. Our conscious would not allow us to sink so low because the question is how does that benefit me, my family and faith?
Those who know me pretty well can attest that partisan politics has never been my cup of tea. It’s sad that some people could even stoop so low and take to social media of their ill intentions after learning about my appointment. The evidence is clear.
Colleagues, these jobs are advertised to the public and everyone is free to report. The only thing they request for are academic credentials and proven experience which some of us have having offered our services to local and foreign firms. They never say these jobs are a preserve of some people from a particular region or who like this.
However, you can only slow progress and success but you can’t stop it. I’m well educated, experienced and innovative and we shall survive because GOD takes care of his own.
It’s unfortunate that those that wined and dinned with PF are the ones claiming to be more UPND than Mazoka the founder all because of pushing for a sense of belonging. Unfortunately politicians easily fall for such nonsense and never look at the impact that such moves have on individuals or government.
So picture this; you are given a job offer, sign contract and even resign from your work and part away of with part of your benefits accumulated over 11 years then someone tampers with your appointment sending you on the streets suddenly.
You have a G12 leaver reader to go to University and a new G10 coupled with other children in pre-grade. NO Health scheme which my ailing parents used more and now completely NO income. This is pure witchcraft.
You may jubilate now thinking you are all powerful and all but remember nature has a way of balancing itself and such acts don’t just slide away like that. Remember not everyone within the system is fooled by your acts, some love us and enjoy our works and professionalism.
For those in the habit of fighting others because they don’t want to see others succeed, fate will give you what you deserve. Making innocent people shade tears because of your bad mouthing basically means you are attracting bad omens and generational curses. For now all maybe well and smooth for you but tears of those you hound out even after leaving ZNBC will not leave you in peace. Generational curses mean you, your children and their children not finding peace and success all because of your sins.
I Harbour no ill feelings for you and the people you connived with ine because I refuse to be trapped in hatred. I however prayed for your long life as I know we shall cross paths another day or your name will pop up through your children.
I am thankful for having built a strong family and network in and through ZNBC. For me the greatest gift of all is being alive, because it presents you an opportunity of pushing and making things better.
I will be leaving all the ZNBC groups soon I’m just here to say goodbye and we shall be meeting on the streets for ZNBC has had a huge positive impact on my life.
