Don’t kill Fr Mwewa over his opinion of Rupiah

Don’t kill Fr Mwewa over his opinion of Rupiah
By Editor
Wed 06 Jan. 2010, 04:01 CAT

Criticising Rupiah Banda is not a crime that Fr Augustine Mwewa should be taken to Calvary and be crucified for.

Criticising the President of this country is a right that every citizen has. Every Zambian should have an undoubted right to lay what sentiment he or she has about the President of this country before the public; to forbid this or intimidate anyone trying to do so, is to destroy the freedom of expression in our country. And when the freedom of expression is destroyed in a country, meaningful citizen participation in governance becomes impossible. Where there is no meaningful citizen participation, dictatorship and tyranny are bound to appear and become the order of the day.

Fr Mwewa has every right to criticise Rupiah – whether this is palatable or unpalatable. And there is no doubt, of course, that criticism is good for people and institutions that are part of public life. No institution – the presidency, Parliament or indeed the judiciary – should expect to be free from the criticism of those who give it their loyalty and support, not to mention those who don’t.

It also should be borne in mind that the structures of our government and those who serve in them exist and are there to serve the people; the people do not exist to serve the government and its officers.

Freedom of speech and expression is the lifeblood of any democracy. Before people can govern themselves or participate meaningfully in the affairs of their country, they must be free to express themselves. Citizens of a democracy live with a conviction that through the open exchange of ideas and opinions, truth will eventually win out over falsehood, the values of others will be better understood, areas of compromise more clearly defined, and the path of progress opened. And the greater the volume of such exchanges, the better.

But what should the government do in cases where the freedom of speech and expression is abused with statements that may be considered to be false, repugnant, irresponsible or simply in bad taste? The answer, by and large, is: nothing. It is simply not the business of government to judge such matters. In general, the cure for free speech is more free speech. It may seem a paradox, but in the name of free speech, a democracy must sometimes defend the rights of individuals who themselves advocate such non-democratic policies as repressing free speech. Citizens in a democratic society defend this right out of the conviction that, in the end, open debate will lead to greater truth and wiser public actions than if speech and dissent are stifled.

Furthermore, the suppression of free speech that we find offensive today is potentially a threat to our exercise of free speech tomorrow – which perhaps you or someone else might find offensive. It is said that “all people are harmed when speech is repressed. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth, if wrong, they lose the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error”. And this being the case, why should Fr Mwewa be killed for simply expressing his opinion on the way Rupiah is running the country; for saying that the President is a chintelelwe who moves anyhow without a vision? Probably we will need to go back and reproduce a viewpoint United States president Theodore Roosevelt had on criticism of the presidency:

“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right.

Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President , or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about anyone else.” This quote was part of an editorial Roosevelt wrote on May 7, 1918 for the Kansas City Star during World War I.

Probably it may be appropriate to also include one of Roosevelt’s top three most requested quotes, that is, the one regarding the “man in the arena” or “not the critic” contained in a speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910: “It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring great, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

It is quite true that acceptance of criticism implies the highest respect for the human ideal, and that its denial suggests a conscious or unconscious lack of humanity on our part. Intolerance to criticism must surely rank as one of the worst forms of immorality in human affairs. We can see the horror in people who go out of their way to organise violence or attempt to kill someone for simply being critical of the way Rupiah is governing.

Rupiah’s supporters have every right to disagree with Fr Mwewa. But their disagreement should be expressed in ways devoid of any violence and slander of Fr Mwewa. All citizens must be guided by the truth, integrity and justice which, for Christians, are anchored on God’s commandments.

It is necessary to remind all our people who are in one way or another involved in politics that politics is for the good of people, and not for political survival of any individual or political party. If the spirit of the primacy of the common good were to animate all our political parties and their cadres, we would not witness the politically-motivated violence which leaves the public dismayed and disheartened. The quality of democracy is determined by the establishment of proper structures which facilitate the freedom of thought and expression. The interests of our political parties and their leaders should be kept subordinate to the public good.

As we have stated before, no doctrine, no principle or proclaimed political position and no political differences can justify violence against anyone. No crime should be committed in the name of politics, in the name of supporting and defending Rupiah. It is very easy to start violence but it’s very difficult to stop a culture of violence when it’s planted in a nation. There is only one basis on which violence can be justified by anyone and that is only in self-defence. And this means that if no one can use violence against anyone save in self-defence, then there will be no violence to talk about. But we have seen and heard Rupiah and his supporters justify violence on the basis that their supporters will not tolerate them being insulted. Again, insults cannot justify violence because there are many ways to address and redress such issues. Those who justified the violence of their cadres because they were insulted will today find it very difficult to stop them from committing similar crimes in their name.

It’s easy to start a fire but it’s not that easy to put it out. Similarly, it’s easy to start violence but it’s not that easy to stop it. Violence begets violence and those who try to live by violence will they themselves one day perish in it. This is because no one has the monopoly of violence. And violence can only do one thing, and that is to breed counter violence. Those who hire unemployed youths, propel their weakened souls with Chibuku to go and attack a defenseless Catholic priest with the intention to kill him are no better than animals. And we hope that those who are behind those criminal youths in Ndola will realise that their violent actions against Fr Mwewa and others who from time to time cross their path put them next to animals.

Fr Mwewa has a right and a duty to continue speaking fearlessly and forthrightly about what is going on in our country; about how Rupiah is governing this country. But this culture of violence that they are today encouraging will tomorrow backfire on them. The bells tolling for Fr Mwewa today will tomorrow toll for Rupiah, toll for the whole country. Let’s work to stop violence whatever its source and motivation. Violence is not good for its perpetrators, for its victims and for the whole country.