Sishuwa Sishuwa’s  academic credentials are often overshadowed by his deep-seated hatred of Hakainde Hichilema- Chilufya Tayali

By Chilufya Tayali

DR. SHISHUWA SHISHUWA NEEDS A LECTURE — HERE IS ONE FROM ME
========================
People say, “BaShishuwa Shishuwa balisambilila” (educated), but his academic credentials are often overshadowed by his deep-seated hatred of Hakainde Hichilema, allegedly because he was not appointed after supporting him when he was in opposition.

Dr. Shishuwa Shishuwa appears unable to accept the reality that President Hichilema is a duly elected Republican President, rather than the leader of a little-known socialist party.

Despite his academic accolades, Dr. Shishuwa seems unable, or unwilling, to distinguish between a petty politician using the pulpit of the Catholic Church for partisan purposes and a Republican President formally addressing citizens in church.

But if I can help Ba-Harvard guest lecturer, when the Catholic Bishops in Zambia issued a pastoral directive stating that political leaders should not be allowed to use the pulpit for political agendas, they did not imply that the Republican President is barred from addressing the public at Church gatherings.

That directive was meant to prevent partisan campaigning within sacred spaces, not to silence the Head of State acting in his official, constitutional capacity.

What must be emphasized—and which many critics, like Dr. Shishuwa, fail to grasp—is the fundamental difference between an ordinary politician and a sitting Republican President.

With all the education that BoShishuwa possesses, one would expect that he knows the Republican President is not merely another politician. He is the embodiment of executive authority under Zambia’s Constitution and the foremost symbol of national unity.

By long-established protocol and political convention, the President is a guest of honour at public functions held within the Republic, including those convened by faith-based institutions such as the Catholic Church.

To suggest that recognizing the President at such an event amounts to violating a pastoral directive is to deliberately blur the line between partisan politics and state authority. No serious democracy operates on such a confused premise.

Therefore, the Church did not invite a politician to campaign before the faithful. Rather, it formally recognized the Republican President in his capacity as Head of State. This distinction is crucial and must be understood in its proper context.

Furthermore, to propose that the Vatican should “chide” Benjamin Phiri for formally recognizing a sitting Head of State is absurd on multiple levels.

Firstly, BoShishuwa must know that the Vatican does not micromanage routine pastoral or protocol decisions of diocesan bishops, especially where no doctrinal violation or canonical abuse has occurred.

What is truly at stake here is not Church doctrine, pastoral consistency, or Vatican authority. It is this hatred of President Hichilema that leads to the refusal to accept President Hichilema’s constitutional legitimacy.

Anyway, BoShishuwa, allow me to say this: academic critique demands precision, restraint, and fidelity to institutional facts—not emotional tantrums.

In sum, it is not Bishop Phiri who owes an explanation to Rome. It is Dr. Shishuwa who owes the public a more honest, constitutionally literate, and intellectually disciplined argument.

Napwisha mukwai (I submit).

TAYALI — THE PUBLIC LAWYER OF THE PUBLIC COURT OF OPINIONS!!!