The choice is ours

The choice is ours
By The Post
Sat 10 Sep. 2011, 14:00 CAT

In casting our votes on September 20, we should not, in any way, be swayed by personal profit, tribal or regional bias, but solely by the consideration of which of the candidates is better for the nation.

We must vote wisely and only for people who are known for their honesty, ability, dedication and concern for the welfare of all. Personal, group or partisan interests should be kept subordinate to the public good. It is necessary to remind ourselves, once again, that the September 20 elections are for the good of the people and the country, and not for the political survival of any individual, group or political party.

Therefore, the decision on who we should vote for should be based on who we think will maximise the promotion of the common good and the service of all the people. It is very important that we use our votes wisely and bravely because it is a powerful weapon for justice, peace and development. On our voting, on the quality of it, the discernment behind it, depend the progress and peace of our country.

And drawing from the importance of the common good, we should only vote for candidates who have demonstrated sufficient courage to speak out the truth; we should only vote for candidates who have shown great concern for social justice and have struggled and shown great desire to work for the common good instead of self-enrichment, disposition to use power for service, especially service for the poor and underprivileged. It is also important to seriously consider the candidate's moral standing and commitment to transparency and accountability to the electorate.

We should only vote for candidates whom we think and believe will serve the country with justice towards all; people who have shown great hatred or dislike for corruption and abuse of power or public office; people who have not gone out to seek our votes through corruption and bribery. If we vote for people who have been bribing us with all sorts of things which we don't even know where they got the money to buy them, then we should not blame anyone else when the government they form is a corrupt one. These are people who have shown us that they are corrupt and they will not hesitate to use corrupt means to get what they want, including our votes.

The issues Ng'andu Magande is raising about corruption should not be taken lightly. It is true that this election's MMD campaign has been the most expensive, the most extravagant in its 20-year history. We all know that the MMD doesn't have businesses like UNIP. This being the case, then the critical question arises: where are the huge amounts of money the MMD is spending on this election coming from? Money does not grow on trees. We all know this. There are only two primary sources of money for the MMD: the government and the business community. It cannot be denied that the MMD has been using or abusing government institutions and resources. Government-owned automobiles are being used in the MMD's campaign. There is adequate evidence in the public domain on this issue and it needs no further disquisition.

Magande has raised the issue of the MMD having mortgaged itself to its election sponsors. Again, it is true that those giving money to the MMD today are businessmen who are benefitting or have benefited from the MMD's corrupt contracts. And they are paying back for these contracts. These are simply kickbacks to the MMD. Then there is money also stolen directly, through all sorts of ways, by those who control this political party.

It is not the grassroots funding the MMD. It is not poor people propelling the MMD's campaign. It is corrupt special interest groups and individuals driving the MMD campaign to protect their contracts, their looting and so on and so forth. The MMD cannot today say it is a party of the masses, for the masses, by the masses. It is simply a party for the corrupt, of the corrupt, by the corrupt. Therefore, corruption will be the character of any government that the MMD will form if it wins the September 20 elections. We agree with Magande's observation that Zambians should not expect the MMD to fight corruption once they bounce back to power because they will have too many corrupt interests, individuals and groups to satisfy. Moreover, the same reasons which Rupiah said were holding him from fully fighting corruption will still prevail. Rupiah told the World Bank vice-president that it was difficult for him to fight corruption because he was being pulled in different directions by the different constituencies that were keeping him in power. The September 20 elections will not free Rupiah from the influence and control of these special, powerful but corrupt constituencies that are today holding him back from fighting corruption. They will still be in control of him after September 20 because they are the ones who have bankrolled his election. And above all, Rupiah is not held captive by this corrupt group. He is voluntarily part of it; he is a key member of this corrupt league. Rupiah benefits, politically and otherwise, from belonging to this corrupt league. It is this league that put him into power in 2008 and sustained him in power up to this time. And it is the same group that is today in the forefront of fighting for his re-election.

But the nation will pay highly for all this. Rupiah has taken money to a record level in our politics. This is the most expensive and extravagant election campaign that any political party has ever engaged in since independence. Only corrupt elements can spend money this way trying to buy weak souls to vote them back into office. Rupiah has mortgaged himself and any government he may form if he wins this election to the corrupt and to corruption.

And if this type of excessively money-based politics is not stopped, the poor will have no meaningful role to play in the governance of their country; they will not be able to set themselves any meaningful political agenda. The campaign funders will be the key decision makers in government, and not the people, not the voters. The interests of the corrupt campaign funders will take precedence over obligations to the people, to the voters. What type of democracy are they going to leave us with if they are to win this election?

We have no alternative but to struggle without respite to construct a political system that is not totally based on money; a political system in which the poor, those without a lot of money, can set for themselves political goals. If we decide to sell our government, our votes, our destiny to the highest bidders, we will have to pay a very high price to buy them back.

Again, these elections in themselves guarantee us nothing. They offer us, instead, the opportunity to succeed as well as the risk of failure. They are both a promise and a challenge. They are a promise in the sense that as free human beings, if we vote wisely, we will be able to govern ourselves in a manner that maximises the common good, that will serve our aspirations for personal freedom, economic opportunity and social justice. These elections are a challenge because what we will get from them will depend on us, on our decisions, on the way we vote and on no one else. And if we fail, we shouldn't blame anybody but ourselves. We must take responsibility for the fate of our country. In the end, we will get the government we deserve. The choice is ours.