Maravi

True meaning of reconciliation

True meaning of reconciliation
By Editor
Wednesday June 04, 2008 [04:00]

THE issue of reconciliation between President Levy Mwanawasa and opposition Patriotic Front leader Michael Sata seems to be generating unending controversy. Lusaka Archbishop Telesphore Mpundu says he doesn't understand what this whole reconciliation is about. And Sata himself says Archbishop Mpundu is not the only one who is confused about his reconciliation with President Mwanawasa because even his own party members do not understand it.

It seems Sata's error is his neglect of his own party leaders and members. As Sata has admitted, they don't understand what he is doing or where he is going or what he has done with President Mwanawasa.

Sata has taken little or no trouble to explain his reconciliation. It seems dangerous to explain, but even more dangerous not to do so.
Sata seems to be going his tortuous way, over-confident that he only has to speak and his party and supporters will follow.

Sometimes it is necessary to present one's colleagues with a policy that is already a fait accompli. But this can sometimes be very dangerous, it can lead to serious misunderstanding in an organisation and among individuals. Archbishop Mpundu has raised a number of questions concerning this reconciliation. He wonders if this reconciliation is about a one-party system.

He wonders what this reconciliation is all about. Archbishop Mpundu says if this reconciliation meant that Zambians should not oppose whenever they saw something wrong, then he had nothing to do with their kind of reconciliation. And he concludes that in a multiparty system political opponents are not enemies, so there's no need to reconcile.

Truly, political competitors in a multiparty political system don't necessarily have to like each other, but they must tolerate one another and acknowledge that each has a legitimate and important role to play. And no matter who is in power or in office, they must all agree to cooperate in solving the common problems of the society. Those in the opposition should continue to participate in public life, with the knowledge that their role is essential in any democracy worth the name. Their commitment is not to the specific policies of those in government, but to the fundamental legitimacy of the state, and to the democratic process itself.

The concerns raised by Archbishop Mpundu are legitimate and need to be considered. True reconciliation should be the fruit of honesty, truth and solidarity and it must be actualised by people thirsting after an ever more perfect reign of justice. And to make reconciliation meaningful, all are called to maturity, tolerance and responsibility.

And for political reconciliation to be meaningful, it is important to maintain and strengthen democratic structures; it shouldn't rely totally on the goodwill of two individuals.

We hope this reconciliation does not lead to political insulation, complacency and unchecked use of political power and indeed political degeneracy and decay. If gold rusts, what will iron do? Sure, iron readily rusts and we could be looking at cheap iron. The gold is here all right, but the problem lies in its identification and processing in the surrounding rock.

Therefore, reconciliation must be looked at in the context of advancing democracy, strengthening checks and balances in the governance of our country.

Democracy is a much more important human ideal to strive for than political reconciliation between two leading politicians of the moment. Reconciliation is not a human ideal, it is a matter of political expedience in the struggle for political power.

Reconciliation must never be seen to be more important than democracy because doing so will be tantamount to making a historical conversion that alters the course and purpose of our independence struggle.

Reconciliation between two leading politicians of the moment is a political phenomenon without inherent virtues. The substantive meaning of reconciliation should be seen against the background of the quest for democracy. Without this context, it becomes misleading to suggest that there is something inherently sacrosanct about the reconciliation between Sata and President Mwanawasa.
Reconciliation must be a dialectical result of competing politicians under common broad-based democratic constitutional rules. The political and other interests of the Zambian nation are too complex and by far larger than the similar interests of Sata and President Mwanawasa combined.

Therefore, the mission of reconciliation should be underpinned by uplifting the most trodden sections of our population and all-round transformation of society. But there is always a danger of being easily enticed to read reconciliation as meaning parity between justice and injustice; between wrong and right; between good and evil. Injustice and evil must be fought.

And wrong must be corrected. If criticism is justified, it must be made. Reconciliation that takes away an individual's right to make just and honest criticism doesn't seem to be right because it is not in the interests of our people to do so. There shouldn't be reconciliation made out of fear of being undermined by open and honest criticism.

But of course we shouldn't forget the biblical side of reconciliation which is premised on the understanding that true reconciliation is to seek and accept forgiveness. Reconciliation requires that all parties respect each other and that all of them in turn recognise and respect the government as a legal institution. And all parties have to be attached to this word of Christ: "If you forgive others the wrong they have done to you, your father will also forgive you" (Mt. 6:23-24).

And let us not forget Mt. 5:23-24: "If you are bringing your gift to the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go and be reconciled with your brother first, and then come back and present your gift."
Reconciliation should not remain just mere words; it has to be visible in concrete actions. And the primary requisite for this is to eradicate the cause of dissention, animosity, rivalry between or among people.

If the reconciliation between Sata and President Mwanawasa is based on these issues and has taken into account these factors, then it comes near to being true reconciliation. If it doesn't, then it's meaningless and not worth talking about.

Labels: TELESPHORE MPUNDU

posted by MrK @ 3:31 AM