By Kholiwe Miti(The Mast)
WE reject this concept of wamuyayaya, says Muhabi Lungu.
Lungu has charged that the UPND government is bent on creating a one party state that was rejected by Zambians years ago.
During the Zambia We Want (ZWW) briefing on Wednesday, Lungu said the creation of a political messiah or a saviour, within the institutions of governance is undesirable and abhorrent to a democratic system of governance.
“[There’s] a general dissatisfaction with the current political, social and economic situation as being managed by the current administration. An economic situation appearing hopeless, misunderstood and dangerously undermanaged. Instead of boldly confronting the issues at hand, government continues to play the blame game even after more than two years in office. It will be three just in a few weeks, next month in August,” he said.
Lungu noted a clear propensity by the government to attack, weaken and obliterate all opposition political parties with a view towards the creation of a de facto one party state.
“This is in an apparent attempt at killing the dream of a functional multiparty state as envisioned in 1990 by the people of our republic,” he said.
Lungu said there was insufficient checks and balances between the three arms of government.
“… and consequent elevation of the presidency above and beyond other institutions of governance. Too powerful a presidency. The creation of a political messiah or a saviour within the institutions of governance is undesirable and abhorrent to a democratic system of governance. Only one Messiah, up in the heaves, sited at the right hand of the father, and deeply embedded through all our hearts through the Holy Spirit but certainly not an ordinary man. We reject this concept of ‘wamuyayaya’,” he said.
Lungu said the dream of 1990 of a free and democratic country has been demoted to the back of the classroom.
“In evaluating these and many other problems that were discussed in the first gathering of concerned citizens and in subsequent meetings that were to follow it was unanimously agreed that we as a people were living in a Zambia that none of us wanted. That this was not the Zambia we wanted. That the aspirations of our forefathers at independence 60 years ago for effective self-governance, towards a proud self-reliance, equitable ownership of our natural resources and the means to produce and add value to our collective inheritance had all but dissipated and that in its place there was nothing but disillusionment. That the dream of 1990, just a little bit more than 30 years ago, of a functional democratic state, promoting free expressing of freedoms; freedom of speech, freedom assembly, freedom of uninterrupted worship and freedom from social, economic deprivation has all been relegated to the very back of the classroom,” he said. “And instead at the front of the line has been placed personal ambitions of politicians and their friends as well as their domestic and international business partners. This cannot be the Zambia we want. Definitely not the Zambia we want. Every youth in our republic, each one of us, should seriously and honestly probe and understand how we have gotten here? Because it has not been by accident. How have we gotten here, to this undesirable and sad situation, to this desolate place?”
He lamented the growing incidence of promoted ethnicity, tribalism and government behaviour with tendencies of creating exclusion on the basis of political affiliation, family ties and or regionalism.
“Under no circumstance can this be deemed right or acceptable. A noticeable luck of transparency in government procurement, offloading of national assets and affirmations to questionable international agreements, raising legitimate fears and concerns at the possible explosion of white collar corruption; a more dangerous vice than petty theft that we previously have been used to,” said Lungu. “The dangerous and therefore undesirable habit that has developed in our country by the people of Zambia and its opposition political parties to allow a discontented situation to degenerate to a point where the voter is only concerned with the removal of the current administration without carefully probing and making a careful assessment and consideration as to who the possible replacement will be; a possible replacement in terms of quality of leadership and a workable policy framework…”