Response to Hon. Binwell Mpundu’s Statement on Climate Parliament Exclusion
By : Tobbius Chilembo Hamunkoyo -LLB , 10/07/2025
While Hon. Binwell Mpundu raises important points about Zambia’s need for consistent international representation on climate matters, it is imperative to clarify the legal and procedural basis for the Speaker’s decision.
We must know that, It is a well-established principle of governance, both within public institutions and private organizations, that disciplinary action carries with it temporary limitations on privileges and participation in certain activities.
Binwell Mpundu should understand that this is not an infringement on rights, but a standard accountability mechanism meant to uphold institutional integrity and decorum.
As per the Standing Orders of the National Assembly and general administrative norms, a Member of Parliament who is suspended for misconduct or indiscipline cannot continue to act in representative capacity, locally or internationally, while that suspension is in effect.
Participation in events such as workshops, seminars, or international conferences, even those not funded by Parliament, remains subject to the Speaker’s clearance, especially where the MP is representing the country in any official or semi-official capacity.
The fact that Climate Parliament is an independent forum does not exempt a Member of Parliament from the rules governing conduct and representation.
It is still a platform where the MP would be seen as a representative of Zambia, and therefore, parliamentary clearance and ethical standing remain prerequisites.
Furthermore, administrative consistency and institutional discipline require that privileges are not selectively applied based on political affiliation or personal initiative. If such exceptions were made for one member during suspension, it would undermine the authority of Parliament and set a damaging precedent.
Hon. Mpundu’s suspension, albeit brief, was a result of internal disciplinary processes, and it is within the Speaker’s jurisdiction to withhold permissions during such a period.
This decision should not be politicized or mischaracterized as a denial of Zambia’s climate voice. Rather, it is a reaffirmation that no member, regardless of status, is above institutional rules.
Zambia’s commitment to climate action remains strong and is not dependent on the actions or presence of one individual. What is required going forward is a renewed sense of respect for institutional processes, which serve as the bedrock of democracy and accountability.