Maravi

Mpombo’s apology

Mpombo’s apology
By The Post
Wed 06 Oct. 2010, 04:00 CAT

It is said that “it is wrong for a judge to be prejudiced. If he pronounces a guilty person innocent, he will be cursed and hated by everyone. Judges who punish the guilty, however, will be prosperous and enjoy good reputation” (Proverbs 23:23-25).

What the Bible says in Proverbs 23 is something that all those who exercise any judicial authority should bear in mind when they exercise their powers. It is usually better for a judge to protect the simple and humble than to side with the powerful.

We say this because the powerful are able to defend themselves and do not need protection from others. It is the weak and lowly people, who are usually exploited by the powerful, that require protection.

Our democracy is also designed with that principle in mind. One of the principal functions of the courts is to check the powers of the powerful and ensure that justice is available to all. In this regard, the judiciary is meant to be independent of the executive, which in many instances finds itself tempted to trample upon the rights of our people.

An independent judiciary ensures that this is not the case. As powerful as the executive is likely to be, it can be controlled by a principled judiciary that exercises its power with integrity and determination to hold all our people, regardless of their station in life, equal before the law.

But there is something wrong with the way the organs that are supposed to defend our people and keep the executive in check are falling all over themselves to be in good books with the executive. We have seen our courts giving embarrassing decisions in circumstances that suggest that they wanted to ingratiate themselves to those in power.

We have seen the executive freely trampling upon the independence of the judiciary without seeming to have any fear that they will be called to account by anyone or that the courts themselves will call them to order. There is something wrong in the way that they are exercising democracy in our country.

If the executive, and particularly the presidency, is going to be all-powerful and all the organs of the state are inclined to dance to its tune, then we have disaster stalking us. Our democratic experiments cannot be sustained in circumstances where one of the organs of the state is overarchingly superior to the other organs that are meant to check its power.

What we have when this happens is an elected dictatorship that cannot be held to account by the electorate until there is an upheaval that results in a landslide defeat of such a regime. We say landslide because it seems that in our politics, as in the sport of boxing, the incumbent dictator cannot be defeated on a split-point decision; he has to be knocked out completely.

And to achieve this, there has to be a landslide decision by the electorate or else, the ballot remains subject to manipulation as we have come to learn from experience. It is unfortunate that we continue to witness the capitulation of important arms of the state to the hegemony of the executive.

What happened to Kafulafuta member of parliament George Mpombo in Parliament yesterday is nothing short of shameful. The conduct of Speaker Amusaa Mwanamwambwa is shocking and unfortunate. He is in that office to ensure that Parliament operates as an effective check on the excesses of the executive.

But of late, we are noticing a trend that suggests that he is nothing short of an extension of the executive. We say this because it does not make sense for the Speaker of the National Assembly to rise to the defence of the all-powerful executive. The executive has enough powers and resources at its disposal to defend itself. Why should the National Assembly be used as a vehicle to defend the executive?

In a period of about two weeks, the Speaker has made comments and decisions that have brought his ability to be an effective check on the excesses of the executive into question. It is unfortunate that both those issues have had to do with Mpombo. A few days ago, a rebel PF member stood on a point of order, questioning Mpombo’s comment on Rupiah’s speech to Parliament.

Mpombo had said that Rupiah was a liar for reasons that he elaborated. Speaker Mwanamwambwa found it proper to wonder why the law enforcement agencies were not acting against Mpombo because according to him, Mpombo had insulted the President. Again we ask, why should the Speaker consider it within his gift to defend the President? The President has more advisors and legal representatives than the Speaker can ever muster. It simply shows that Parliament has embraced a psychology of subservience to the executive.

Having taken this posture, it is impossible for this Parliament to be an effective check on the excesses of Rupiah Banda and his minions. Yesterday, we saw the Speaker trying to bully Mpombo into an apology to George Kunda. Again, the Speaker was acting as a defender of the executive, not the people that Parliament is meant to defend.

To understand what is going on, it is necessary to trace the background to the apology that Mpombo was forced to read in Parliament yesterday. Clearly, that apology was prepared by Parliament for Mpombo to read. Why should the Speaker and his officers prepare a text of apology for Mpombo? Again, it seems clear to us that this is in their continued posture of subservience to the executive.

It seems they want to please Rupiah and his minions at any cost. If Mpombo is going to apologise, do you have to write an apology for him? Surely such an apology is not an apology at all. They may have forced Mpombo to read that apology but even they know deep down their hearts that that apology was not an apology at all. If anything, it makes a mockery of the independence of the legislature.

The issue that has given rise to this contrived apology was Mpombo’s reaction to George’s threat against Katuba member of parliament Jonas Shakafuswa. Shakafuswa had asked George to confirm whether the state was planning to remove the offence of abuse of office from the Anti Corruption Commission Act.

George threatened Shakafuswa with arrest for raising a matter that was clearly in the public interest. Shakafuswa should enjoy the right to debate and raise on the floor of Parliament issues that concern the welfare of the state without being subjected to intimidation.

George resorted to intimidation on the floor of the House. The Speaker and Parliament in general did not protect Shakafuswa. Was it in order for the executive to threaten a member of parliament with arrest for asking a question?

In that context, Mpombo called George the most stupid Vice-President we’ve ever had. Mpombo’s comment was in the context that if George thought that the removal of the offence of abuse of office from the Anti Corruption Commission Act was going to protect him and his political masters, he was wrong.

And anyway, today Parliament is considering an amendment to the Anti Corruption Commission Act which does exactly what Shakafuswa was asking about and for which he was threatened by George.

George, acting as one of Rupiah’s chief minions, has pushed for the removal of the abuse of office offence from the Anti Corruption Commission Act. It is this that Mpombo thought to be stupid. We have discussed this before.

Stupidity is not an insult, it is a description of a kind of behaviour. A simple dictionary definition of stupidity will tell you that to be stupid is to show a lack of thought or good judgment. This is what Mpombo thought of George’s behaviour.

Mpombo thought that George had acted treacherously in relation to Levy Mwanawasa’s legacy on the fight against corruption. Put another way, it was Mpombo’s opinion that George was showing a lack of judgment in pushing for the removal of the offence of abuse of authority from the Anti Corruption Commission Act.

It should not surprise Speaker Mwanamwambwa that many of our people share Mpombo’s opinion on George’s stupidity. Forcing Mpombo to apologise does not change the reality of what our people and Mpombo himself believe.

It is a shame that Parliament that is supposed to guarantee the debating of matters that concern our people is now being used to intimidate and gag the people’s representatives from raising issues that are pertinent to the interests of our people.

Why shouldn’t a member of parliament express the strongest views that he can muster on the attempt to legalise public officers' corruption by removing the duty to account for their wealth? Well, what happened in Parliament yesterday tells us that our democracy is in critical ill-health.

The checks and balances that are supposed to exist have stopped functioning. It does not appear that Parliament, the judiciary and the executive are operating as counter-balancing forces designed to deliver the best possible services to our people.

It seems we now have a democracy that is of the executive, by the executive, for the executive. The other arms of the state could close down and the executive may not even notice. Forcing Mpombo to apologise in the manner that his issue was handled in Parliament is a disgrace to our democracy.

Labels: AMUSA MWANAMWAMBA, GEORGE MPOMBO, PARLIAMENT

posted by MrK @ 3:19 PM