Maravi

Levy and the new Constitution

Levy and the new Constitution
By Editor
Tuesday April 17, 2007 [04:00]

It is not easy for any right-thinking member of society to believe Benny Tetamashimba's statement that the MMD and President Levy Mwanawasa have no intention of differing with Zambians on the constitution-making process. We say this because Levy's record in this matter has been characterised by the shifting of goalposts and statements that suggest that he is the sole authority. Now he has even gone to the extent of saying that the Constitution Review Commission (CRC) together with the Oasis Forum are stubborn when it is his government that appointed the CRC with specific terms of reference.

It is clear that there is some element of delaying tactics in the way Levy and his administration have been handling this issue of the Constitution. When Levy appointed the CRC, he said work had to be done quickly because the constitution issue was very important and it needed to be looked at with the necessary urgency.

It is now five years down the line and the new constitution is nowhere in sight. Lately, Levy himself has publicly announced that the new constitution will only be ready in 2009. In fact, there is even a budget for this process which goes up to 2009. If this matter is important and urgent, why should it take eight years for Zambians to have a new constitution?

We are all aware that there have been some misunderstandings concerning the constitution-making process between the government and other stakeholders for some time now. And in our view, these misunderstandings have been perpetrated by Levy and his government because they think they know-it-all.

They might not accept this but it is a fact that Levy and his administration have not been so eager to engage all the stakeholders to ensure that consensus is reached on the matter. Yes, there have been a few meetings here and there but nothing much has been achieved because it looks like the government has a fixed position and therefore they do not seem to discuss the matter with open minds.

As we have stated so many times before, for consensus to be reached, we feel the stakeholders in this process must strike a compromise. And a compromise can only be struck when there is dialogue between the government and all the stakeholders. But it looks to us that the government is not interested or prepared to reach consensus on this matter through a compromise. That's why they can't sit down with the Oasis Forum or other stakeholders to negotiate.

When we talk about compromise, we are not asking the parties involved to undermine their positions on this matter. But we think that through dialogue, meaningful consensus can be reached for all the stakeholders to work together with a common purpose in mind.

Now as it is, the government has maintained that there is no alternative to its roadmap but at the same time invites comments and suggestions from stakeholders. What purpose will it serve for anyone to suggest otherwise when it is already decided that the only acceptable roadmap is that of the government?

Assuming the government has stronger and better points for their arguments or the position they have taken, why not engage and reason with the other stakeholders for them to see sense in their arguments? Why not sit together around the same table and let the ones with practical and reasonable solutions, be it government or the Oasis Forum, carry the day?

Why is the government not interested in meeting with the Oasis Forum? If the Oasis Forum's views are not practical, why not sit down and show them why their position on this matter is not feasible, instead of continuing to exchange words in the press? Today the government says this is not possible and tomorrow the Oasis answers that it is possible.

Anyway, going by Tetamashimba's statement, we do not think Levy and his administration are ready to dialogue. Why? Because Tetamashimba says that they are aware that the Oasis Forum and NGOCC campaigned for other political parties so as to remove the MMD government for a government they thought could lead Zambia and attend to the new constitution. He further says that Zambians on September 28 last year voted for Levy and therefore gave him the mandate to govern the country and make decisions on their behalf.

In short, Tetamashimba is saying that deciding when and how the Constitution should be given to the people of Zambia is the preserve of the government because it is the one with the mandate from Zambians. As far as the MMD government is concerned, the Oasis Forum has no locus standi in this matter because they do not have the mandate from Zambians.

This is not a progressive way of looking at issues. There is nothing wrong with members of the Oasis or NGOCC having campaigned for a party of their choice. What the Oasis Forum and other stakeholders are insisting on is for the country to have a new constitution as soon as possible. This is the issue that has to be attended to because if we leave it to Levy's whims, 2011 will come and Zambia will have no new constitution.

If Levy does not intend to differ with Zambians on this issue of the constitution-making process, let him demonstrate that through action. As it is now, there is too much rhetoric. They say actions speak louder than words. So let us see Levy act. We are tired of his political rhetoric on this matter.

Labels: CONSTITUTION, CRC, EDITORIAL

posted by MrK @ 4:02 AM