African States urged to massively develop their infrastructure
Thursday, April 7, 2011, 7:25
African Development Bank (ADB) has called for a massive infrastructural development on the continent. ADB Resident Representative for Zambia , Freddie Kwesiga says African States Should put in place measures to improve on road and other infrastructure development in order for Africa to have a medium to long term development thereby contribute towards poverty reduction.
Dr. Kwesiga said infrastructure development plays a key role in achieving economic development and fight poverty in Africa.
“ Major areas which needs attentions include transport, Information Communication Technology (ICT), agriculture, and social infrastructure, “ he said.
The 2011 World Bank study indicates that Zambia’s economic performance which has reached 7 percent growth rate needed to make a significant impact on poverty reduction. However, according to ADB representative , the Southern African country’s economy can improve to a middle income country if it invests in infrastructure.
Dr. Kwesiga said this in Lusaka today at the Expert Group Meeting which is reviewing the handbook on Infrastructure Statistics in Africa.
He has further called on donors and members countries to scientifically measure and quantify the contribution of infrastructure towards overall economic development.
He said the bank has started the process of developing an African specific index for measuring the progress towards the development of key infrastructure which is known as the Africa Infrastructure development index.
Labels: AfDB, FREDDIE KWESIGA, INFRASTRUCTURE
Read more...
Sadc Troika meeting was a success, says Charamba
By: Floyd Nkomo
Posted: Thursday, April 7, 2011 6:42 am
PRESIDENTIAL spokesperson, George Charamba says contrary to media speculation the Sadc Troika meeting was a success, although there were procedural problems. He said the meeting held in Livingstone, Zambia had procedural problems, but these have since been ironed out.
Charamba applauded the Troika's condemnation of violence across the political divide and that the inclusive Government should fulfil all the GPA outstanding issues including the sanctions.
Online and international media had misinterpreted a Sadc report that condemned violence as directed against Zanu-PF. Charamba explained that opinion pieces did not constitute government position.
The former opposition MDC-T has also been fingured in acts of violence before and during election time. The two main parties in 2008 signed a Memorandum of Understanding in which they bot admitted culpability for violence.
"The Troika condemned violence, it did not ascribe violence to any political party but emphasised that all parties should refrain from intimidation," said Charamba in an interview with our correspondent in Harare.
"It also exhorted parties to fully implement the GPA, which means the removal of sanctions and the completion of the constitution making process to pave way for the elections.
"So in summary, Livingstone was a success as it emphasised on issues that the President and every progressive Zimbabwean has always been advocating,” said Charamba.
The Troika emphasized that elections will herald the end of the inclusive Government, in other words it wants the money to be released quickly for the completion of the constitution making process, which will pave way for the referendum and the eventual holding of elections.
Charamba dismissed reports by private media alleging that President Mugabe told SADC to ‘go to hell,’ saying the reports are from those who do not wish the government well.
Charamba also said an opinion piece in the Sunday Mail newspaper is not a government opinion.
“That opinion does not represent the government position. Zimpapers is a public quoted company and it is not a government mouthpiece, the government has its own channels of communication and I am the Presidential Spokesperson,” he said.
The SADC Troika Summit resolved for the full implementation of the GPA and the creation of a conducive environment for peace and security in the country.
As a result, parties in the GPA are currently working on the compilation of a report on the progress of the implementation of the GPA following review meetings held by representatives of the parties on Monday and this Wednesday in Harare.
The reports will be handed to South African president, Jacob Zuma’s facilitating team, which is in the country at the invitation of the inclusive government.
Labels: GEORGE CHARAMBA, SADC
Read more...
Rights groups threaten street protests
by Eddie Chihwape
07/04/2011 00:00:00
HUMAN rights group on Wednesday warned they would stage massive protests if security agents are unrelenting in their harassment of civic society leaders. The groups met at a Harare hotel where they discussed a recent crackdown on government critics.
Speaking under the banner of the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, National Constitutional Assembly chairman Lovemore Madhuku said it was time to stand up to police “brutality”.
“We have no reservations for mass protests regarding the abuse of human rights and arrests of activists in the country. What is happening to the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum is unacceptable and we’ll stand against it,” said Madhuku.
The threat to stage mass protests by civic society leaders follows the arrests of officials at the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, including executive director Abel Chikomo.
Chikomo is every week being called for questioning by police and his offices have been raided on more than three occasions.
The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum has been documenting incidents of violence, torture and human rights violations by security agents and war veterans around the country.
Madhuku said: “What is happening at the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum is unacceptable and we will stand against it. If you arrest one of us, you would have arrested all of us.”
Last week, the SADC Troika on Defence and Security came down heavy on President Robert Mugabe, demanding a cessation to violence against opposition groups, arbitrary arrest of opposition ministers and hate speech in the state media.
Labels: LOVEMORE MADHUKU, NGOs
Read more...
Revolutionary spirits of Nehanda and Lobengula sting Sadc: Moyo
By: Jonathan Moyo, MP
Posted: Monday, April 4, 2011 6:53 am
IF REGIME regime change consultants out there thought they would get away with sending a subliminal but pointed neo-colonial message to Zimbabweans by having Livingstone in Zambia as the ironic venue of last Thursday’s summit of the Sadc Troika on politics, defence and security co-operation, then they must have been stung by the revolutionary spirits of Mbuya Nehanda and King Lobengula which took hold of the colonially named city to remind the ghost of David Livingstone that Zimbabwe will never be a colony again by ensuring that the summit failed in a big way.
The roots of this failure are to be found in the incomprehensible fact that the Sadc mandarins kept the Zimbabwean delegation led by President Robert Mugabe waiting for the whole day until 8pm when the official session was convened for no more than an hour during which the troika reported its decisions without much dialogue, which is traditionally essential for the success of such summits.
This was despite the fact that President Mugabe’s delegation had arrived the previous day after having been informed that the summit would be held in the morning on Thursday.
The unprecedented anomaly was made worse by the fact that the report of the Sadc facilitator, President Jacob Zuma, on the political and security situation in Zimbabwe, was not shared with the Zimbabwean delegation before, during or after the summit.
Against this backdrop, it is no wonder that the summit ended in unmitigated failure not least because it lacked all the necessary political features and diplomatic ingredients that usually foreshadow a successful summit.
In effect, the Livingstone summit was one of the worst Sadc meetings on Zimbabwe in recent years which set a dangerous precedent whose trappings will make it very difficult for Sadc to play a meaningful role in the unfolding events in our country unless immediate and visible steps are taken by the regional group’s highest levels to reverse the anomaly and ensure that it does not repeat.
What this means is that notwithstanding the predictable claims that the summit was a huge success by Zimbabwe’s usual detractors in the media and among regime change donors that have imposed illegal economic sanctions that are causing untold suffering among ordinary Zimbabweans, the fact is that the summit was a catastrophic failure for Sadc simply and only because the Republic of Zimbabwe cannot implement or in any way be part of any external decision which comes as an imposition to the detriment of our national sovereignty.
That we will never do as Zimbabweans not least because we know that, within the confines of international law, no other self-respecting sovereign country, including those in Sadc, will ever do.
In this connection, there is one utterly sinister decision that the Sadc Troika made in Livingstone which must not see the light of day not only because it was made without prior consultation or subsequent agreement with the Republic of Zimbabwe but also because it is a clear and evil attempt to open a treacherous window for regime change donors to trample on our sovereignty in the vain hope of influencing the organisation and outcome of the forthcoming general election.
The offensive and unacceptable decision was cast in the following words under paragraph 17(e) of the troika’s communiqué issued last Thursday:
“The troika of the organ shall appoint a team of officials to join the Facilitation Team and work with the Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC) to ensure monitoring, evaluation and implementation of the GPA.
The troika shall develop the Terms of Reference, time frames and provide regular progress report, the first, to be presented during the next Sadc extraordinary summit. Summit will review progress on the implementation of the GPA and take appropriate action.”
This intrusive decision is a nullity not only because it is an imposition with suspicious regime change roots but also because it is a blatant violation of the GPA itself, an unacceptable affront to Zimbabwe’s sovereignty.
While some sell-outs and puppets have celebrated this so-called Sadc decision as if it has come from God in heaven, the fact is that it is not worth the paper it is written on because it cannot be implemented without the willingness and co-operation of the Republic of Zimbabwe.
If there is anybody out there in Sadc or elsewhere that imagines that the Republic of Zimbabwe will cooperate in implementing a decision that attacks its sovereignty, then that person is a lost cause because nothing of the sort will happen.
Ask any student of public policy and they will tell you that it is very dangerous for any authority anywhere to make a decision that it has no capacity to implement.
The so-called team of officials, that is proposed to join the Facilitation Team and to work with JOMIC in Zimbabwe, will need diplomatic and other facilitation by the Republic of Zimbabwe to be able to work in our country but this won’t happen, given how the decision for the team’s appointment and deployment has been made, let alone the motives thereof.
If past experiences in Zimbabwe and elsewhere are anything to go by, then nobody needs to be a rocket scientist to see that the presumed Sadc team of officials, if allowed to come into our country, will be nothing but a bunch of regime-change spies deployed to distort things and lie about Zimbabwe on behalf of the US and the EU to craft false evidence in the vain hope of making Zimbabwe a “UN Chapter VII” case while conveniently riding on Sadc’s treacherous back authored in Livingstone.
What makes this more than a sickening possibility is that, President Zuma, the Sadc facilitator on Zimbabwe who apparently made the proposal for a Sadc team of officials in a report that has thus far been kept secret from the Republic of Zimbabwe, recently authorised his representative at the United Nations to join the representatives of Nigeria and Gabon to underhandedly vote for the UN Resolution 1973 which essentially authorised the US and NATO members to individually or collectively bomb and kill Libyans under the pretext of enforcing a “no-fly zone” to ostensibly protect the very same Libyans that are now being killed by the US and NATO bombs on a daily basis.
This is very painful when you consider that the world has helplessly watched the slaughter of civilians by brutal Israel forces with US and EU support in Gaza and other Palestinian territories without anything like UN Resolution 1973 being invoked.
Why have the African puppets that have supported a no-fly zone in Libya not also supported the same in the Gaza strip in the Middle East?
Why is there no-fly zone in Afghanistan to protect innocent civilians that the US and NATO forces are killing like flies from the air day and night?
The nauseating logic effectively supported by South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon is that while it is indeed wrong for the government of Libya to kill civilians in pursuit of its survival, it should be right for the US and NATO forces, with Britain and France taking the leading murderous role, to allegedly defend Libyans from the self-indulgent Colonel Gaddafi by killing them.
With all due respect, and please take note that there is a lot of it, the mere fact that President Zuma of South Africa voted for the atrocities that the US and its NATO allies are committing in Libya under UN Resolution 1973 makes him an undesirable Sadc facilitator on the political and security situation in Zimbabwe. Zuma can no longer be trusted if he ever was.
Are we to believe that any rebel group or treacherous political party that wants to kill civilians or any government that wants to kill its own people or any country that wants to sell out another country or any former colonial power that seeks regime change in its former colony must use the UN to outsource the killing of innocent people to the US and its NATO allies as has happened in the Libyan case?
Is that what regional bodies such as Sadc, African Union and the UN have become: conduits of regime change politics and mass killings by former colonial powers that want to plunder our natural resources?
Let's face it.
President Zuma is now tainted beyond recovery by the Libyan situation and his commitment to the African cause has become as questionable as South Africa's suitability for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council.
The same applies to Nigeria. While Africa cannot be expected to support South Africa and Nigeria to become permanent members of the UN Security Council given their treachery in Libya where the least they should have done was to abstain from the vote as did Brazil, China, India, Germany and Russia; Zimbabwe cannot be expected to accept an intrusive Sadc team of so-called officials funded by regime change donors to come and work in our country to plot the so-called electoral roadmap with a view to ensuring that the forthcoming general election is decidedly organised in a manner that ensures regime change with President Zuma’s endorsement simply because he has been used to make the ridiculous proposal. We will not allow that to happen. Never ever!
And let those who are entertaining this folly remember that, unlike Libya or even the likes of Tunisia and Egypt whose violent protestocracies have excited idle minds in our country, Zimbabwe got its independence whose 31st anniversary we are celebrating in two weeks only in 1980 and that the combatants who won that independence are not only still alive but also that their critical mass occupies critical space in key sectors of the State.
These comrades know the caves, mountains and township spots from which to defend their liberated motherland without using any air power. Zimbabwe was not liberated from the air but from the ground. And this ground of ours which we shall forever control as liberated sons and daughters of the soil is the one terrain we know only too well.
If you ask Americans about their ill-fated campaign in Afghanistan, they'll confirm that he who controls the ground through the caves, the bushes, forests and the mountains is far better than he who is exposed in the air with all his his hi-tech weapons to “awe and shock” while God is watching it all.
There’s therefore no need for anyone whether in Sadc or elsewhere to play neo-colonial games here on behalf of imperialists who are seeking illegal regime change through their puppets in the MDC.
Zimbabweans expect Presidents Zuma, Hifikepunye Pohamba of Namibia and Armando Guebuza of Mozambique to know this only too well because Zimbabwe’s current onslaught from imperialists in the US, the EU and their allies also mirrors theirs if not today certainly tomorrow.
Back to the offensive communiqué of the Sadc Troika issued last Thursday, what was unacceptable about it was not only its decision to appoint a foreign team of officials who are for all intents and purposes Western spies to join JOMIC without consultation or agreement with the Republic of Zimbabwe but also the expectation that our country would implement a decision it did not make.
What is even more infuriating is the fact that this unacceptable decision which cannot be implemented was made without consultation or agreement with the Republic of Zimbabwe on the basis of the following three equally unacceptable background findings made by the Sadc Troika without any foundation whatsoever.
In the first place, paragraph 14 of the troika’s communiqué says that “the summit appreciated the frankness with which the report was presented by the Sadc facilitator and commended him for the work that he has been doing on behalf of Sadc”. It is preposterous in the extreme for the Sadc mandarins to describe as “frank” a report that was kept away from the Zimbabwean delegation before, during and after the Livingstone summit.
Furthermore, it is mischievous in the extreme to claim that a report that was presented under patently opaque and disrespectful circumstances in apparent pursuit of opaque Western interests was done on behalf of Sadc. No sane person should expect the Republic of Zimbabwe to implement alleged Sadc recommendations based on a report whose authorship and contents are not known. We know the difference between dictatorship and facilitation and we are determined to resist the former.
In the second place, paragraph 15 of the troika’s communiqué says that, “summit recalled past Sadc decisions on the implementation of the GPA and noted with disappointment insufficient progress thereof and expressed its impatience in the delay of the implementation of the GPA”.
Wow, this is very rich in a sick way!
What delay in the implementation of the GPA? It is a shame that the Sadc communiqué makes a bald generalisation over a matter that is crying for specifics. The GPA commits its signatories, Zanu-PF and the two MDC formations, and its guarantors — which are Sadc and the AU — to seek the removal of the illegal and evil economic sanctions.
Has that been done? Who is responsible for the delay in implementing this fundamental pillar of the GPA whose non-implementation has caused untold suffering among ordinary Zimbabweans?
Sadc undertook to set up a ministerial team to engage the Western countries that imposed illegal and evil economic sanctions against Zimbabwe to remove them.
Does President Zuma, who has occasionally spoken out forcefully against these biting sanctions imposed with the support of the MDC and which have not been removed, expect the world to now pretend that the illegal and evil economic sanctions are no longer an issue in Zimbabwe even though they have not been removed?
How can the GPA be fully implemented when the illegal and evil economic sanctions remain with no roadmap towards removing them?
Who is fooling who on this matter? If it is true that Sadc has lost its impatience in the delay of the implementation of the GPA, so have the people of Zimbabwe who now think that Sadc sups with the devil by saying one thing during the day and doing the opposite at night.
In the third place, paragraph 16 of the communiqué of the troika says, “summit noted with grave concern the polarisation of the political environment as characterised by, inter alia, resurgence of violence, arrests and intimidation in Zimbabwe.”
Now, if there’s a resurgence of violence, why should there not be any arrests? Are arrests not a logical consequence of any resurgence of violence?
Surely violence should beget arrests! And if there’s a political party, such as the MDC, which instigates violence to get international attention and then uses that as a political manifesto for the forthcoming general election, should the law enforcement agencies fold their arms and play politics by not arresting the obvious culprits for fear that Sadc and other Western puppets will cry foul by alleging that there’s intimidation or selective arrests and prosecution?
Is it now Sadc policy at the behest of its facilitator, President Zuma, that the MDC should violate the laws of Zimbabwe with impunity such that its officials or Cabinet ministers should be treated as if they are diplomats who cannot be arrested under the Geneva conventions? What’s going on here and what geopolitical nonsense is this?
Already the US and EU regime change donors have put together a dossier of political violence in Zimbabwe in 2011 whose catalogue has gory pictures and images not only taken from the brutal violence committed in KwaZulu Natal in South Africa between 1994 and 1999 but also used before by the US, EU and their allies to justify illegal and evil economic sanctions against Zimbabwe.
It is a shame that President Zuma, who happens to be from KwaZulu Natal, is falling for this over-used trick when he is in a position to know better.
The way that the Sadc Troika is behaving on the Zimbabwean situation against the backdrop of how South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon voted with the African enemy on UN Resolution 1973 against Libya, shows beyond doubt that the time has come for a major rethink in Zimbabwe on who our friends are or should be.
Just because someone is your neighbour does not make them your friend. Cuba and the US are neighbours, but they are not friends. But of course Zimbabwe prefers to be friends with everyone anywhere, especially those countries with which it shares its borders, yet it takes two to tango.
Meanwhile, Zimbabwe should start seriously considering the fact that the only countries whose national security is assured today fall only in two categories. One category is made up of countries with weapons of mass destruction which have the capacity to wage nuclear or biological warfare. The US, EU and their allies will always think twice before instigating regime change or enforcing no-fly zones in such countries.
The other category is made up of countries that have defence pacts with countries that have a capacity for nuclear or biological warfare as more or less exemplified by the India-US defence pact signed in 2005.
Following the Livingstone Sadc Troika on Zimbabwe and the African vote on Resolution 1973 against Libya, it has become very clear that Zimbabwe's national security interests do not lie in Sadc or AU pacts given the Judas Iscariot fact that is now rampant in the region and the continent. The time to forge strategic partnerships that really matter in today’s geopolitics has come.
The summit in Livingstone was an early warning signal for our country to move rapidly to make defence pacts with real friends with real power.
*Professor Jonathan Moyo is a Zanu-PF legislator for Tsholotsho North and former Minister of Information and Publicity. This article in reproduced from The Sunday Mail
Labels: JONATHAN MOYO, NEHANDA, SADC
Read more...
Poverty amidst economic growth
By The Post
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:30 CAT
Economic development is meaningless if it just means recording increments in GDP and not in improving the living conditions for the great majority of our people.
You can’t say you are developing a country when you are not developing the people. A country can’t claim to be developing when its people are not developing. Economic growth should depend, in the very first place, on social progress.
There is a great danger when government policies are not combined with clear social concern because they will bring socio-economic deprivation. And this is what we are seeing in Zambia today. While the government is everyday boasting or bragging about development, the situation for the great majority of our people is not improving – it is actually deteriorating.
And this is the reality that Prof Mubiana Macwan’gi is trying to draw the attention of the nation to when she observes that the benefits of economic growth are not trickling down to the majority of our people. Prof Macwan’gi says that poverty and unemployment have increased during the period the country is recording steady growth as reflected in increasing poverty levels, poor housing, unemployment, poor infrastructure and poor access to social services such as health, safe water and other services required in an organised society.
While we are recording growth in GDP, the number of people who, each day, cannot meet the basic needs necessary for a decent human life is increasing in our country. It is a strict duty of justice and truth not to allow fundamental needs to remain unsatisfied. And one cannot talk of development if the fundamental needs of the great majority of our people remain unsatisfied.
Economic justice requires that each individual has adequate resources to survive, to develop and thrive, and to give back in service to the community.
Over the past five decades, the human race has come to a more refined appreciation of what development is all about. Based on this understanding, the United Nations, for example, forwarded eight core areas that constitute the focus of attention in trying to attain higher levels of development during the period 1990 to 2015. These areas are: ending poverty, gender, education, child health, maternal health, combating infections, environment and global links.
These are interrelated areas that require simultaneous and systematically coordinated investments. The global community is, to a larger extent, in agreement that sustained efforts in these areas and attainment of the associated eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will significantly improve the standards of living and help to reduce poverty and the inhuman conditions under which millions of the world’s population still live.
Prof Macwan’gi’s statements on the situation in Zambia gives a lot of food for thought. She raises concerns that we have raised many times in this newspaper. We totally agree with her that the current pattern of economic growth is not improving the standard of living of most Zambians; it is not pro-poor. She also drives the point home that the policy environment is not supportive of Zambian workers and entrepreneurs. It is also a painful fact that an opportunity for a healthier fiscal status is recklessly missed through an inappropriate tax regime.
For a country that has committed itself to the MDGs, Zambia’s policymakers still seem oblivious to the extreme poverty, disease and squalor that still characterise the majority of the country’s population. The excessive excitement with the “GDP growth rate” over the recent past poses the question whether the complexity of the developmental phenomenon is well known and if the rationale behind the MDGs is well understood. Is it a question of lack of capacity to understand the issues or is it a calculated move to blind the populace amidst widespread corruption and lack of political will for genuine development?
Ironically, our world is full of recent examples of countries that have attained remarkable social progress in health and education. The policies and investments that allowed countries such as South Korea, Cuba, Egypt, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam to succeed are well-documented and subject of much policy analyses. Most of these countries have attained levels of life expectancy at birth equivalent to those of highly developed countries. They also constitute a group of countries, next to the BRICs group (Brazil, Russia, India and China) whose economies are more favourable for rapid economic transformation. In other words, they possess masses of well-educated and healthier people that will serve as a basis for sustained economic development. Why can’t Zambia draw lessons from these countries?
Zambian surveys and analytical studies continue to point to the fact that extreme poverty is still very high countrywide; that most of the poverty is in agriculture and especially amongst those producing less than two hectares of a crop such as maize; that in urban areas the extreme poor are largely the unemployed in our slum areas, and that Western, Northern and Luapula provinces are proportionally worse off, in that order, than the rest of the country.
Instead of using this information as a basis to design social and economic policies that will improve the livelihoods of the population, the policymakers cowardly ignore and at times arrogantly gloss over it in a now familiar fashion. These are policymakers that will hold back useful information that indicates that poverty levels are still high in the country – as is currently the case with the latest Living Conditions Monitoring Survey Report.
They are not ready to disaggregate public finance data to account for how expenditure is linked to needs or poverty levels.
They would rather ignore the latest study on the 2010 maize marketing that clearly shows that current marketing arrangements are not pulling the small, poor farmers out of poverty. They seem lost on how to aggressively address the poor quality of education and health services amidst huge data bases from routine reporting systems and regular surveys. They are not motivated by other countries that are advancing. The immense suffering of the majority of the citizens still leaves them cold. Again, is it a matter of capacity or political will?
Great economic and political thinkers like Professor Macwan’gi are non-partisan and hold independent views. Our policymakers will do well to listen to them carefully and take action on the salient issues being raised. It is high time a more realistic understanding of development was embraced. The evidence base is available to transform this country on a developmental path. The policymakers need to convince us that they are capable leaders and mean well for mother Zambia.
Read more...
COMMENT - We need three things: 1)
massive taxation or nationalisastion of the mines to finance economic diversification; 2)
decentralisation of government to local coucnil level; and 3) a switch to
Demand Side Economics, away from Supply Side Economics (neoliberalism - privatisation, deregulation and free markets for transnational capital).
Poverty amidst economic growth raises concerns
By Masuzyo Chakwe
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:00 CAT
REAL economic growth should translate into improved health care services, increased employment levels and improved infrastructure, says Professor Mubiana Macwan’gi.
Prof Macwan’gi, who is a research professor of public health and director of the Institute of Economic and Social Research at the University of Zambia, said
the benefits of the economic growth were not trickling down, as evidenced by glaring inequalities in almost all the sectors and the obvious rural deprivation.
She said this was also evidenced by the large population of the urban poor against a small clique of middle class.
“The benefits are not trickling down to the majority of people in Zambia especially in those areas where the mining is actually taking place. However, to some extent, we are seeing the emergence of a ‘middle class’ in Zambia who are benefitting from the economic growth, though the majority of Zambians are not benefitting,” she said.
Prof Macwan’gi said poverty and unemployment had increased during the period of steady growth as could be seen by the deplorable or non-existence of infrastructure especially in the rural areas.
She said the majority of the population remained poor or become poorer, implying that only a small proportion of the population and few privileged ones had benefited.
“Poverty levels are increasing as reflected in poor housing, unemployment (especially among the youth), poor infrastructure and poor access to social services such as health and safe water. Rural poverty also remains high making it difficult for poor people to move out of the poverty cycle,” she said.
Prof Macwan’gi said the growth had been lop-sided toward the mining industry, and was not felt in other sectors like education, health and roads.
She said there was need to review incentives given to foreign companies in terms of tax breaks and by creating an environment which would encourage Zambians to get more interested in diverse business opportunities which would benefit from the economic growth.
Prof Macwan’gi said access to finance also needed to be encouraged and regulated because microfinance institutions had prohibitive interest rates for their loans.
She said there was need to undertake studies that would shed light into how correct the inflation figures were or how appropriate the indicators used were.
Prof Macwan’gi said this would explain why inflation was reported to be falling while prices of general goods were rising.
She said to increase benefits of growing economy to the public, the state must take a centre role in re-distribution of national income.
Labels: NEOLIBERALISM, POVERTY
Read more...
Lienda explains drift to PF in W/Province
By Roy Habaalu
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:00 CAT
Alfred Lienda says people in Western Province are drifting to PF because they want someone who can deliver in 2011. Lienda, who is a former deputy minister of commerce and Lukulu East member of parliament, says Sata is the only person who can compete with the MMD and liberate people from their sufferings.
He said the collapse of the PF-UPND pact would not affect the voting pattern in Western Province because the PF had a wider coverage across the country and that was why people were joining the party.
“In Western Province we’ve decided to dump HH (Hakainde Hichilema) for Michael Sata because we want someone who can deliver in 2011. Sata is the only one who can match the present regime to produce the required change. Each time we wanted change, we identify a party that can deliver change, and this year that party is PF and Sata,” said Lienda.
“For HH after the pact collapsed, we were satisfied that that he can’t contribute to the change we want. His system is depleted but PF remains with a wider coverage across the country. It’s time for change now, MMD has over stayed.”
He said Hichilema had himself to blame and not the people over the political happenings in the province.
“If people run away from you it means there is something wrong with you. He has been let down by his own cadres. If Daily Mail, Times of Zambia and ZNBC praise you, then you’re not with the people,” Lienda said.
He said it was illogical for MMD and President Banda to claim that they were the only ones who could bring about development as no single individual could achieve this.
Lienda said people would continue making changes and identifying grey areas of any regime.
“President Banda has deliberately failed to manage Western Province and people feel their rights have been violated. He should forget about Western Province, people simply won't vote for him.
Constructing a road is no justification to torture people. When people complain, he (President Banda) kills them…what has the construction of a road got to do with human life?” said Lienda.
Labels: MICHAEL SATA, MMD, PF, WESTERN PROVINCE
Read more...
Expelled Mpombo mocks Kunda
By George Chellah and Kombe Chimpinde
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:02 CAT
GEORGE Mpombo says Vice-President George Kunda is the greatest loser who has been rejected by his own party membership. And Mpombo says President Rupiah Banda has successfully re-branded MMD into UNIP.
Commenting on the decision to freeze the party vice-presidency at the ongoing MMD convention in Kabwe, Mpombo, who is Kafulafuta parliamentarian, said the move was a desperate bid to save Vice-President Kunda from what he termed a humiliating ignominious defeat.
“The party sensed that he was headed for a historical shellac kind so they had to rig the process,” Mpombo said. “His own party members don’t have confidence in his leadership qualities. George Kunda is the greatest loser here. It’s embarrassing that all attempts to save him failed.”
And Mpombo has said President Banda had managed to successfully re-brand MMD into UNIP.
“It’s very clear now that it's a one-party state mentality,” Mpombo said. “Those who are celebrating a people who are not able to see beyond their noses.”
He described the MMD convention as a sham.
“Just looking at what is happening in Kabwe, you can clearly see that Mr Banda is the greatest political drama king we have ever had. Even his boasting to say he is popular is preposterous,” Mpombo said.
“The man shouldn't even be excited because he has gone through unopposed in a sham election, which had no opponents. Really, it's shameful that he can even be excited. By using well-calculated political gymnastics, Mr Banda managed to eliminate all possible competitors and remained as a one-man horse race. Sadly for him, that horse is racing towards the knackers yard.”
Meanwhile, reacting to his expulsion, Mpombo said President Banda would soon be kissing the ground when he losses the election this year.
He said President Banda together with his allies had become arrogant because they were thinking they had already won the elections at the party convention.
“He's got his head buried deep in the sand and therefore he can't see what is going on around him and that is why he is arrogant. You know, once he kisses the ground that is when he will realise that he no longer has the support of the Zambians,” Mpombo said.
He said he had not lost anything following his expulsion from what he termed an undemocratic party.
Mpombo, however, wondered why the convention had sat to adopt his expulsion when his case was in court.
“They are doing things in a jittery and irrational manner and in a very undemocratic manner. I, however, have no regrets because what is going on in the party right now is a complete farce,” Mpombo said.
The second MMD extraordinary convention on Tuesday, resolved to uphold expulsions of Mpombo, Mike Mulongoti, Jonas Shakafuswa, and Ng'andu Magande.
This was after acting MMD deputy national secretary Chembe Nyangu proposed to the convention for the expulsion of the quartet said to be in bad standing with the party.
Also commenting on his expulsion, Mulongoti, who is former election chairman of the party, cautioned President Banda and the MMD not to think that they had won.
“They haven't won. Going to the convention, and wining at the convention is one thing, the next thing is to get the popular mandate of the people of Zambia. That's what everybody should be looking forward to. You can win in a political party. You can organise, even intimidate, you can do whatever, that's one thing, but what happens in the end? Are you going to manipulate and intimidate the whole country?” Mulongoti asked.
He said he had no regrets about getting expelled for defending democracy and added that he still had value and usefulness in the political arena that he would offer to any democratic party that was ready to accommodate him.
“I can assure you I will not form a political party. I will look around, see which party can accommodate me. It will not be wrong for me to offer services for anyone who thinks we can work together. I’m still in my Republic, more opportunities are still there,” Mulongoti said.
“My problem is, am coming from a party where they have developed intolerance and I hate intolerance and undemocratic behaviour. If on that account I can remain without being in a political party, so be it.”
Mulongoti cautioned the party leadership not to think they had won and that the true victory lay ahead of elections.
He said the country needed democratic leaders who would uphold Zambia's democracy as opposed to the undemocratic leadership of President Banda.
“We have people who have come from nowhere just to bring archaic ideas and undemocratic tendencies in a party that was formed for democratic reasons. President Banda had lost regard for the values and ideas on which the party had been formed,” Mulongoti said.
He said he supported President Banda because he thought he would push for the party's democratic agenda.
“But he has introduced intolerance, lack of respect for other people, lack of respect for democratic values. These were the reasons why we fought the UNIP and the third term, now this is the same old baggage from UNIP which is coming back and wants to be in front, it’s not acceptable,” said Mulongoti.
And Shakafuswa who expressed amazement at the move by the MMD convention to adopt his expulsion only said, “But how do they expel me when my case is in court?”
Labels: GEORGE KUNDA, GEORGE MPOMBO, JONAS SHAKAFUSWA, MIKE MULONGOTI, MMD
Read more...
Oasis Forum demands Kunda’s resignation
By Chibaula Silwamba
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:01 CAT
VICE-President George Kunda must immediately resign failure to which President Rupiah Banda must fire him, the Oasis Forum demanded yesterday.
And Council of Churches in Zambia (CCZ) general secretary Reverend Suzanne Matale said the MMD government had failed the Zambian people on the constitution-making process.
Addressing a press briefing at the Catholic Church’s Kapingila Guest House in Lusaka, the Oasis Forum said Vice-President Kunda, who is also justice minister, had been misleading successive Republican presidents concerning the constitution-making process, hence costing taxpayers colossal sums of money.
The Oasis Forum is an umbrella of Zambia Episcopal Conference (ZEC), Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), CCZ, Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) and the Non Governmental Coordinating Council (NGOCC) advocating good governance, adherence to democratic tenets and constitution reforms.
The Oasis Forum said the failed constitution-making process was an indictment on the performance of Vice-President Kunda and Zambians would force him to resign.
“We call for his immediate resignation as an honourable thing to do or be fired,” said Beatrice Grillo, chairperson of the Oasis Forum and NGOCC, on behalf of the member groups.
“In the same vein, we lament the lack of political will of the President, Attorney General and political parties in general in promoting a democratic dispensation through a constitution-making process that is a driver for greater participation of all Zambians.”
The Oasis Forum demanded that the government unconstitutionally apologise to Zambians for the misapplication of resources in a process that failed to recognise and appreciate that a constitution was not a political manual but a good governance tool where all Zambians have a say and participate in its development process.
The Oasis Forum demanded that the government be held accountable for all the resources expended on the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) process since its commencement in 2007.
It said Vice-President Kunda's announcement in Parliament that the NCC cost Zambians in excess of K83 billion was a gross undervaluation of the expenditure because the original budget was K135 billion for a shorter period but the process was extended.
The Oasis Forum described the failed constitution process as a big scandal and denounced the government for underplaying the setback.
The Oasis Forum said it would be tragic to hold this year’s elections on the basis of the current Constitution.
“The Oasis Forum is of the considered view that it is possible to have a new constitution before this year's elections if there is political will. In short, we are saying that there is simply no justification for not concluding the constitution review process eight years after its commencement,” said Grillo, flanked by Rev Matale, ZEC secretary general Fr Cleophas Lungu and EFZ executive director Rev Pukuta Mwanza, though LAZ was not represented.
“It is our belief and recommendation to all Zambians and in particular the government of the day that the following road map, if implemented between now and the elections we can have a new constitution: (a) Creation of a lean technical committee of experts to validate Mung'omba Draft Constitution and report, (b) subjects the validated constitution to a referendum and (c) enactment of the adopted constitution by Parliament,” Grillo said.
The grouping said it would mobilise and organise Zambians for their participation in the referendum and sensitise and educate them on the need to repeal the current Constitution and not piecemeal amendments.
And Rev Matale said it was unfortunate that MMD spokesperson Dora Siliya claimed that the ruling party had not lost but the Zambians, after the collapse of the constitution-making process.
“If Zambians have lost then the MMD has failed,” said Rev Matale.
Rev Mwanza said the Oasis Forum would use non-violent means like a green ribbon and petitions to compel the government to heed their demands on the constitution-making process.
Last week on Tuesday, the Banda-MMD-led government failed to garner the required two-thirds majority vote to pass the Constitution of Zambia bill to second reading in the National Assembly.
The ruling MMD that has lost some parliamentary seats in by-elections has 78 legislators in a 158-member National Assembly.
Labels: CCZ, GEORGE KUNDA, OASIS FORUM
Read more...
Lukulu regrets voting for Rupiah
By Bright Mukwasa
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 04:00 CAT
THE people of Lukulu regret having voted for President Rupiah Banda, says Batuke Imenda. In an interview, Imenda who is ULP Lukulu East parliamentarian, said the people in his constituency would never vote for President Banda as he had failed to deliver on his promises he made during his presidential campaign.
“We regret having voted for MMD and it’s President (Banda) in 2008 and we want to tell them that this year we are ready for them,” Imenda said. Imenda blamed the MMD for the under development of Lukulu, including the poor state of the Lukulu-Kaoma road.
He said President Banda must not brag about the little projects in the district as those were initiated by his late predecessor Mwanawasa.
“He (President Banda) further promised to connect Lukulu to the national grid. That has not been done. In this year’s election we will ensure he gets no massive vote,”Imenda said.
He said it was sad that the district remained under funded as compared to others, saying that was a reverse of the allocation it received during Levy Mwanawasa’s reign whose concern was to lift up Lukulu economically.
He said President Banda should not brag about the little developmental projects as he has failed to initiate his own.
“They should not mislead us about development which was brought by Mwanawasa. They should forget about Lukulu I can assure you.”
Imenda said if the MMD was mindful, the people of Lukulu could have felt to be part of Zambia.
He said people in his contituency had learnt from other provinces that had not voted for him but they had attained some reasonable development.
Labels: BATUKE IMENDA, MMD, PF, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
Sole candidate ‘means everything’ to me - Rupiah
By Ernest Chanda in Kabwe
Thu 07 Apr. 2011, 09:01 CAT
PRESIDENT Rupiah Banda says he was anxious someone could challenge him at the last minute during the MMD convention. And Vice-President George Kunda says he is not bitter about the party’s decision to abolish the position of vice-president which he had contested.
Responding to questions from journalists after he cast his votes in the remaining 23 national executive committee positions being challenged by various candidates yesterday morning, President Banda said his sole candidature meant everything.
“It his sole candidature means everything. I was anxious you know at the last minute somebody could have turned up and challenged me. You don't know what people are thinking,” President Banda said.
“It was a wonderful feeling that I was unanimously elected as president and unanimously as a candidate for the 2011 election. And if you know where I'm coming from, I had lots of problems the last time I stood after we lost our president. Some colleagues were resistant to my presidency.
But this time it has gone well and I think my colleagues have done well.”
Asked why the MMD, which had traditionally been associated with violence at its conventions, had been relatively peaceful this year, President Banda attributed the turn of events to the banning of alcohol at the event.
He claimed that since the MMD had been preaching peace, they had to set an example by practicing the same at this year’s convention.
“We have been preaching peace and obviously this is leading to the main event the country's general election. As a ruling party we have been preaching peace, and so we must lead by example so that the rest of the Zambians can emulate us,” said President Banda.
“It’s very possible that the banning of beer could have helped maintain peace around here. You know when people are drunk they tend to do unreasonable things. It's not only here, there's also problems in the country; long hours of alcohol all the time everywhere. I think as a people we should consider ways and means of resisting that.”
And Vice-President Kunda who appeared low and did not speak much said he would serve the MMD in other ways.
Vice-President Kunda who was lined up to vote in the first stream together with President Banda, NEC members and Cabinet ministers, did not vote by press time.
“I’m going to contribute to the welfare of the party, so the position of vice-president is not the only position which is available in the party.
So, I will contribute,” said Vice-President Kunda.
Meanwhile, voting started on a low mood following the disqualification of two candidates, Kelvin Sampa and Patrick Musonda who vied for the positions of national youth chairman and chairperson for communications and transport respectively.
Most supporters for the two candidates have since left the convention as a show of displeasure.
While Sampa was still at the convention yesterday and refused to say anything about his disqualification, Musonda had left.
And health minister Kapembwa Simbao who had contested the position of chairperson for health has since withdrawn his candidature.
MMD electoral commission chairperson Christopher Mundia announced Simbao’s withdrawal yesterday, but did not give reasons for the development.
The voting which was kicked off by President Banda at about 11:08 hours went on through the night as each province was allocated an hour within which to vote.
The results will be announced this morning before the convention officially closes.
Labels: DEMOCRACY, MMD, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
94pc of MDC-T rallies approved: Chihuri
by Staff Reporter
06/04/2011 00:00:00
POLICE Commissioner Augustine Chihuri has dismissed claims by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai’s MDC-T party that the ZRP was barring its rallies, insisting that 94 percent of applications by the party had been approved this year.
The MDC-T accuses the police of selective application of the law and turning a blind eye to perpetrators of political violence linked to President Robert Mugabe’s Zanu PF party. Tsvangirai repeated the allegations on Wednesday at a memorial service for youths the party claims were killed by suspected state agents in 2008.
“We are angry because the Commissioner-General, Augustine Chihuri has chosen to engage in selective application of the law and to personalise what should otherwise be a State-institution,” Tsvangirai said.
“There has been no single arrest of these murderers. We urge Commissioner Chihuri to arrest all perpetrators of violence without fear or favour and without the needless selective application of the law.”
However, in a report prepared for a cabinet committee following complaints by the MDC-T, 644 political gatherings were allowed to go ahead by the police out of 682 applications by the party. This represented a 94 percent approval rate for MDC-T meetings.
The MDC led by Welshman Ncube made 31 notifications and 29 (94 percent) were sanctioned while Zanu PF had 816 notifications with 788 (97 percent) being approved.
Chihuri said in the instances applications were not approved, the MDC-T had deliberately organised their activities on the same days as important national events.
"Despite being in the inclusive government, the MDC-T does not only ignore national events but even has the audacity to despise those events on the national calendar like the Heroes Day," he said.
The police commissioner said political parties could not be allowed to do as they please otherwise the police force -- which numbers 30,000 for a population of 13 million people – would not be able to cope.
"If each individual was allowed to do as he/she pleased, holding parallel events to national events, no doubt the ZRP will fail in its mandate to maintain peace in the land,” he said.
"The ZRP will not brook any spurious, vexatious and cheap propaganda stunt targeted at portraying the organisation as partisan."
Labels: 2011 ELECTIONS (ZIMBABWE), POLICE, ZRP
Read more...
Rushwaya, Chiyangwa split AAG
by Staff Reporter
06/04/2011 00:00:00
THE Affirmative Action Group (AAG) has been rocked by a major split after founding leader Phillip Chiyangwa tried to impose disgraced former ZIFA CEO Henrietta Rushwaya as a vice president. The entire AAG board led by Supa Mandiwanzira has resigned in protest.
Rushwaya, axed as ZIFA CEO after he was fingered as the nexus of a match fixing scandal involving the national team, announced her new position in a newspaper, forcing the AAG board to issue a statement disowning her.
But Chiyangwa stepped into the row, revealing that he had appointed Rushwaya, claiming: “I am the founding president and I am the sole appointing authority.”
The AAG’s executive director Davison Gomo said: “The founders of the AAG believe that they have perpetual power to control the organisation. They believe that they have executive authority in spite of an executive authority running the organisation.
“If an organisation is privately and individually owned, the owner has a right to decide as he pleases. Mr Chiyangwa has made it very clear that he owns this organisation and he must do as he pleases. I think it in his interest to run AAG as he wants.”
The oft-radical lobby group which has been at the forefront of championing black economic empowerment had, among other members on its board, Mandiwanzira, Temba Mliswa, Advocate Farai Mutamangira and Sam Ncube.
Labels: AAG, PHILLIP CHIYANGWA
Read more...
COMMENT - It more than looks like a negative campaign about the SADC Troika and President Mugabe has been instigated in the media, but without any substance to it.
The truth about SADC troika summit
Facilitator ... South African President Jacob Zuma
by George Charamba
06/04/2011 00:00:00
[MrK - Not contented to let a ZANU-PF spokesman write an editorial, the editors of NewZimbabwe.com interject:]
THE fall-out from last Saturday's SADC troika summit continued to be felt this week after President Robert Mugabe appeared to criticise South African President Jacob Zuma, followed by an intemperate editorial comment in the state-run Sunday Mail newspaper which also published an opinion by Tsholotsho North MP Jonathan Moyo who said Zuma "can no longer be trusted, if he ever was".
A spokesman for Zuma responded saying "governments have their own channels of communication … Should the Zimbabwean government wish to understand our position ... they will contact the South African government through the normal channels as they always do".
Mugabe's spokesman George Charamba today dives into the diplomatic spat, saying it is "not very clever" to take newspaper editorials and comments by opinion writers as representative of government policy:
FROM its inception in 1980 as the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCc), Southern African Development Community (SADC) was and has always operated as a consultative and consensual body. Its structures, procedures and leadership style have and are all subordinated towards this one core mores.
No one knows this better than President Robert Mugabe, himself a founder President of this sub-regional body, and a major player in most of its anti-colonial and anti-apartheid struggles in the 1980s and 1990s, himself a major actor in most of its conflict prevention, management and resolution efforts during and after these defining struggles.
There is no compelling reason for SADC to depart from this winning approach which has turned our sub-region into both a haven of peace and an organisational exemplar.
Since the late nineties and especially after 2000, in the context of the Third Chimurenga for the restoration of national land rights, Zimbabwe has fought for the recognition of its right full rights as an independent and sovereign African State. It has done so within the context of the larger family of SADC.
Indeed, its victories on this crucial front against neo-colonial forces are, to a significant extent, explained by the principled stance which SADC has consistently adopted, in keeping with the founding pan-African, libertarian ideals that animated its predecessor organisation, the Frontline States (FLS).
Advertisement
Zimbabwe stands to enjoy more victories in this continuing fight for national empowerment by working within the familial context of SADC.
As a founder member of SADC and a geo-economic part of Southern Africa, Zimbabwe finds neither the reason nor the wish to rescind its membership or to conduct its struggles and affairs in a manner that repudiates SADC. Zimbabwe's membership to SADC is existential.
Zimbabwe's political challenges - themselves an offshoot of its strong affirmative stance on all-round sovereignty - have been a concern of SADC from their onset.
No year has passed without a SADC initiative or pronouncement on Zimbabwe, with the decision to appoint South Africa under former President Thabo Mbeki as facilitator of the inter-party political dialogue, amounting to a culmination of this characteristic engagement.
The point to emphasise is that both the recommendation for dialogue on Zimbabwe, and definition of mechanisms for operationalising that dialogue, came from SADC through a searching process of consultation and consensus building.
It is quite significant that SADC chose to call its point-man on Zimbabwe, His Excellency President Thabo Mbeki, a facilitator and not something else more exhortative or even peremptory. Gingerly, engagement and persuasion, as opposed to high-handed, intrusive diplomacy, is the correct way, is the winning way, indeed is the SADC way!
Read against this well-founded and established mores and etiquette, the SADC Troika Summit held last Thursday in Livingstone, Zambia, was somewhat of an anomaly from this tried and tested SADC tradition.
The meeting, which was slotted for early Thursday morning, started just after midday - a delay which was graciously and convincingly explained by host President and Chairman of the Troika, His Excellency President Rupiya Banda.
He knew that President Mugabe was coming to spend a night in Livingstone - itself literally a stone's throw away from Victoria Falls - both out of respect and to ensure he would not delay the meeting. President Mugabe's submission to SADC and total respect for the sister Republic of Zambia - itself host to our liberation - can thus not be doubted.
After the opening and lunch, the real meeting actually began close to 1500hrs, initially bringing together Troika members of the SADC Organ on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation who are Zambia (Organ Troika Chairman), Mozambique (past Chairman of the Organ Troika) and Namibia (Chairman of SADC).
South Africa wore two hats of deputy chairman of the Organ and facilitator of the Zimbabwe Inter-Party Political Dialogue.
The Summit itself focused on two situations, that in Madagascar and that in Zimbabwe, with former Mozambican President Joachim Chissano as facilitator for Madagascar.
The meeting of the Organ went on well into the evening, and it was not until after 2000hrs that the principals and leaders of Zimbabwe's three political parties were called in. I am referring to President Mugabe (Zanu-PF), Prime Minister Tsvangirai (MDC-T), and according to the wording of the communiqué, Professor Welshman Ncube as president of MDC-N, and Professor Mutambara as Deputy Prime Minister.
It is interesting that the communiqué recognised all these players by their official designation in the inclusive Government, and stayed clear of any controversies related to party representations. Except for Professor Mutambara, each of the principals had in tow his team of negotiators and officials.
Soon after, President Banda as chairman of the troika addressed the Zimbabwe leadership, apprising it on troika deliberations founded on a report which President Zuma as facilitator had tabled.
Basing its deliberations on both the facilitator's report and other decisions SADC had taken on Zimbabwe in the past; the chairman then spelt out the decisions which the troika had taken on that day on Zimbabwe.
Thereafter, he opened the floor firstly to Zimbabweans and later to the rest of the group. Since Zimbabwe is not a member of the troika, I am not at liberty to disclose what followed. Suffice it to say all parties to the GPA spoke to the meeting and its decisions.
Soon after and that evening, President Mugabe, in the company of Ministers Mnangagwa, Goche, Chinamasa, Mumbengegwi and Biti, left Zambia for home.
The following morning, on Friday, the President addressed the Central Committee meeting of his party, Zanu (PF), at which meeting he publicly rejected dictation to Zimbabwe by the troika, as opposed to facilitation. Expectedly, Saturday press carried screaming headlines of varying accuracy and emotions.
Arguably, the most dramatic headline came from NewsDay which read: "SADC can go to hell - Mugabe". You looked in vain in the body of the NewsDay story for a quote on the President which captures the headline. It was a marketing headline, not a reflection of what the President actually had said in his address.
Besides, the President was addressing the troika of SADC, not SADC itself whose membership is more than the four countries which attended the Livingstone meeting. The troika itself reports to SADC Summit. The two should never be conflated.
Clearly and unambiguously, the anvil of President Mugabe's address related to procedures and style. He was making a procedural point vis-à-vis a committee of SADC, a point stirred by what he saw as a clear, unexplained and arguably inexplicable departure from SADC norms and practices.
He never ever addressed the substance of the communiqué itself and, as will be clear shortly, Zimbabwe has very little difficulties with the communiqué itself. In fact, it has no difficulties at all, merely cautionary concerns with one or two of its proposals.
But something grossly untoward and uncharacteristic happened in Livingstone which Zimbabwe found quite objectionable. The facilitator's report on the strength of which Summit decisions were made, was not availed to parties to the GPA, at least in the meeting. What we have are decisions of Summit whose founding premise we do not officially know.
All we know from the communiqué is that the facilitator's report was "frank". How frank and over what, no one among parties to the GPA officially knows. How accurate and founded on what consultations, again no one officially knows beyond the communiqué intimation that the facilitator was "commended" for "the work he has been doing on behalf of SADC", and that the troika "endorsed the report of the SADC Facilitation on Zimbabwe."
And this procedural anomaly was raised in the short opportunity availed to the Zimbabwe political leadership by the way.
There were more worrisome procedural anomalies preceding that Summit. On the eve of the Summit, it emerged that two of the three parties to the GPA had been invited by the facilitating team to make individual submissions on a roadmap for Zimbabwe's possible political future.
Such a request was not only unfair and divisive, but actually departed from a set, consensual procedure where all parties produce a joint review and mapping document for submission to the facilitator.
Fortuitously, a meeting towards that end had been called early in the week of the Livingstone Summit. It was at that meeting that it emerged that two parties to the GPA had in fact made individual submissions to the facilitating team at its behest, a development which advertently or inadvertently amounted to implying divisions and irreconcilable differences between or among the political parties.
Far from that being the case, the negotiating teams of the parties were in communication and actually looking forward to joint work.
Noteworthy, negotiators of the three parties met this Monday, three days after Livingstone, to review progress in the implementation of the GPA, something they would have done had it not been for the dates of the Livingstone Summit which intervened.
Additionally, the parties are set to meet today, Wednesday, to now produce a roadmap which is closely aligned to timelines of the GPA to the extent that these are still feasible. All have resisted a self-invitation by the facilitating team to fly in today in order to be part of the review and drafting of a roadmap.
The consensus view is that the team will be invited once this internal process is complete, or if it falters. This is exactly the exercise which would have produced a report for the facilitating team ahead of Livingstone, but which was circumscribed by circumstances I have already described.
Facilitation proceeds on due care and consensus. It cannot be arbitrary, preclusive or a matter of dictation. That antagonises parties. Above all, it should assist interaction of differing parties, not substitute or abort it.
And in the case of Zimbabwe, facilitation has been by invitation, specifically in those instances where internal, inter-party dialogue and consensus will have failed. That happened repeatedly under President Mbeki's tenure, which is how we have come this far.
As matters stand, all the parties had in fact addressed the same concerns a week or so before at a special cabinet meeting convened for the purpose. The Prime Minister tabled a report which highlighted areas of concern, leading to a decision to have a series of special cabinet meetings dedicated to dealing with actual matters of the GPA and other environmentals.
The point to stress is national platforms are being used to resolve nagging issues, itself clear proof that we are well before and well away from a deadlock, indeed that we are within mutual trust and confidence.
One does not want to see that burgeoning internal conflict prevention, management and resolution mechanism delayed or even destroyed by incautious external facilitation.
Ultimately Zimbabweans must be the first line of resolving their own problems, including developing mechanisms for such resolution. Livingstone should nurture and augment this national capacity building through careful facilitation.
In terms of substance, the Livingstone communiqué amounted to one huge step forward towards resolving problems in Zimbabwe. This precisely is what makes a compelling case for proper procedures and fitting respect to all involved.
There was no need to keep documents away from parties. There was absolutely no reason not to hear formal presentations from all parties prior to arriving at decisions.
Nations are sovereign; nations do have sensitivities and boundaries beyond which solicitous facilitation becomes irritating intrusive dictation.
We know this from protracted negotiations on Mozambique; we know this from the protracted negotiations on Angola; we know this from the DRC conflict; we know this from problems in Lesotho where a facilitator was actually rejected and dropped. More fundamentally, we know this from South Africa's own Convention for a Democratic South Africa, CODESA for short.
I said the Livingstone communiqué marks a quantum leap forward. It does. It abhors violence which it blames on all parties to the GPA. This is consistent with the facts on the ground and consistent with the findings of Jomic which blames all parties for spurts of violence we have witnessed in the country.
It calls on "all parties to the GPA" to implement "all the provisions of the GPA", itself quite in sync with calls inside the country, especially on sanctions, external interference and intrusive broadcasts, all of which have stood in the way of "a conducive environment for peace, security and free political activity" desired by SADC on our behalf.
More fundamentally, the communiqué exhorts the inclusive Government to "complete all the steps necessary for the holding of the election including the finalisation of the constitutional amendment and the referendum."
The accent is on finalisation of the constitutional process, something Zanu PF and the President have been agitating for. The endgame is elections, again something all parties must accept as an unavoidable pang of the routines of democracy.
That means the Minister and Ministry of Finance can no longer delay or under-fund COPAC without falling foul to the dictates of the Livingstone Troika communiqué. That means Zanu PF's call for elections has now been endorsed by the Troika.
Penultimately, the Troika is urging SADC to assist Zimbabwe towards peaceful, free and fair elections by ensuring polls that are held under SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections.
As a matter of fact, these guidelines are already domesticated and are now part of our electoral laws. This cannot be an onerous demand, surely? Zimbabwe cannot be opposed to, or pained by what it has voluntarily adopted and already incorporated into its national laws.
The final decision relates to a team of officials appointed by the Troika of the Organ to assist Facilitation Team and Jomic "to ensure monitoring, evaluation and implementation of the GPA."
Of the three parties to the GPA, only MDC-T endorsed this proposal unconditionally. MDC accepted the principle of it, but insisted it would be guided by its terms of reference. Zanu PF would neither accept nor reject the proposed team for the simple reason that it was not privy to the reasoning behind its founding. Nor were its parameters spelt out to it.
Accepting it meant embracing an unknown, something responsible and experienced leaders can never do. And going by the President's Friday reaction, the test lies in the tone of the proposed body, which should never be one of dictation.
The accent on Zimbabwe's reaction to the Livingstone Summit has thus been on procedures and style of managing facilitation and engagement by the Troika. It has not been on substance. That is quite far off from making or breaking SADC. Matters must be reported in proportion.
Lastly, a lot of dire reading has been made out of this week's Sunday Mail editorial comment and an opinion piece it carried on the same matter.
The opinion of the Sunday Mail has been conflated with the opinion of the Government of Zimbabwe. I hope this article which reflects views and concerns of the Government of Zimbabwe puts this needless conflation to rest.
No one in Government is naïve enough to think that the views of SABC stations or The Citizen amount to the views of President Zuma and/or his Government. It is not very clever to wilfully expunge institutional distinctions we honour and uphold elsewhere simply because we are dealing with Zimbabwe.
The Zimbabwe Government has a voice that speaks when it is necessary. Like it has just done!
Charamba is the Presidential Spokesman and Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Media, Information and Publicity
Labels: MEDIA, NELSON CHAMISA, SADC
Read more...
MMD must be kicked out, says Sichinga
By Kombe Chimpinde
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:01 CAT
MMD must be kicked out of power because they have failed us, says Lusaka economist Bob Sichinga. And Rev Edith Mutale from the Anglican Church has called on the opposition parties and the Zambians to unite and get rid of the MMD government.
Featuring on Radio Phoenix’s Let the people talk programme yesterday, Sichinga charged that it was shameful for President Rupiah Banda and Vice-President George Kunda to give Zambians the impression that the country was not in a crisis after it failed to come up with a constitution.
“Did President Banda bother to know who was attending that NCC? Did President Banda know what the motive of his Vice-President was? Did he not know that, in fact, at the end of the day, there would be no referendum, did he read what was in the terms of his predecessor to the Constitution Review Commission; did he have a particular objective or vision for the NCC? If the answer is yes I would have thought that instead of running around from country to country, he would have sat down and ensured that this is a critical item in any President’s tenure of office,” Sichinga said.
He charged that he would personally not sit idle and watch the country “go to the dogs”.
“MMD must be kicked out because they have failed us, they have failed to give us a constitution, a document which is the anchor and foundation of the country. Instead of being apologetic, we are hearing arrogance. I think Zambians have got to decide if they want this government to stay,” said Sichinga.
“We now have the 1991 situation where one person by the name of William Banda is going round, mobilising cadres and collecting money at markets and causing confusions. Where is he getting authority? Where is the IG? Where is the President? Why is he not saying anything.”
And contributing to the programme, Rev Mutale said admission of failure by Vice-President Kunda and President Banda would be the honourable thing for them to do if they respected Zambians.
And former Church of God overseer Bishop John Mambo said President Banda had missed out on a chance to salvage himself through the constitution-making process.
Labels: MMD, ROBERT SICHINGA
Read more...
Panji gives Hakainde 48-hour ultimatum to retract, apologise
By Chibaula Silwamba
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:01 CAT
COLONEL Panji Kaunda has accused Hakainde Hichilema of being a liar and has given him a two-day ultimatum to retract his lies and apologise for alleging that he left UPND because he was broke. Col Panji said if Hichilema doesn't retract the statement and correct it, he will be in court to substantiate his claims.
“He Hichilema said I was broke; I wanted money from him; he didn't give me money, that's why I left. That is not true,” said Col Panji, the 64-year-old son of Dr Kenneth Kaunda.
“I am giving him 48 hours to retract that statement and apologise to the nation and the youths because a leader who wants to go into State House should not lie. If he doesn't retract the statement and correct it, I will get legal advice and he will be in court to go and substantiate his statement.”
Col Panji advised Hichilema to stop the bad habit of telling lies.
“I want to inform Mr Hakainde that what he is saying to the people is a lie. When we had a meeting where he said those tribal sentiments, UPND vice-president Mr Richard Kapita wasn’t there.
Secondly, I haven't seen Mr Hakainde for almost two and half years since the 2008 elections. What he is saying is not true.”
Col Panji recently endorsed the presidential candidature of Patriotic Front leader Michael Sata saying that was the most realistic thing to do because Hichilema had no capacity to win the Republican presidency. Answering a question from a caller during a QFM Radio’s Monday Nite Live program who queried him about Col Panji’s revelations concerning him, Hichilema said the revelations were not correct but that it was something that was expected from someone who expected cash but never got it.
Two weeks ago, Col Panji revealed that Hichilema had told him and ex-diplomat George Zulu in 2008 that he could not work under Sata and that people were opposed to his candidature because he is Tonga.
Col Panji said Hichilema had queried him and Zulu whether they thought he could be president of Zambia but Zulu had told the UPND leader that they considered him to be vice-president.
“Then Mr Hakainde said, 'yes, I know, because I am Tonga, you guys don’t want me to be president. Everybody who is calling in is saying that I must be vice-president. Do you think us Tongas cannot be presidents? Even Ng'andu Magande that was why he was not made MMD president because he is Tonga. Late Mazoka's victory was stolen from him because he was Tonga’,” Col Panji revealed.
“Then I said, ‘No Mr president, Andy Mazoka was Tonga, the people of Zambia voted for him in large numbers. You, when you were UDA president you were Tonga, we voted for you. It’s not about being Tonga. We are saying that if you go in as individual parties, you will lose.’ Then Mr Hakainde said: ‘Do you guys support Sata? Do you think he is normal?’”
Col Panji further revealed when he and Zulu suggested that since he Hichilema did not want to work with Sata, he should consider asking Kapita to serve as vice-president, the UPND leader indicated that he could do that.
“Then Mr Hakainde said, ‘yes, I will give you Kapita but then I will resign and when I resign UPND is gone. I am UPND; UPND is me. Even if you come with AK 47s, I will be the last Tonga standing here. I know I am going to stand; I know I am going to lose. But I will make sure Sata does not win’,” revealed Col Panji.
Labels: HAKAINDE HICHILEMA, PANJI KAUNDA, UPND
Read more...
Let’s emulate Rwanda on media regulation
By The Post
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:00 CAT
Statutory regulation of the media is a recipe for tyranny. The unregulated voice isn’t as dangerous to the public as is the voice regulated by the government.
The decision by the Rwandan government to abandon statutory regulation of the media and embrace self-regulation is in line with what is happening or what is expected to broaden and not restrict democracy. This is the way every progressive government is moving. And it is difficult to understand why George Kunda and his boss thought they could push the country towards statutory regulation of the media.
Are they so convinced that they are the few chosen ones who should be going where others are coming from to fulfil God’s secret plan to serve us? The fact is, statutory regulation of the media is always linked with tyranny and dictatorship. Any honestly genuine person who still thinks clearly can see that there is a serious problem with George’s attempt to impose statutory regulation of the media on our people.
There is need for all of us to realise that freedom of the press is not just important to our democracy, it is democracy itself.
We hope George and his boss will learn something from the Rwandan experience and totally abandon their ill-conceived idea of introducing statutory regulation of the media in this country. Of course, we know that for now, they have retreated on this issue. But as George himself put it, they have not abandoned the idea, they are ready to come back to it should need be – to put it in George’s words, should the media start insulting them again. But as we have said before, the weaknesses of our media can never be the basis or justification for introducing statutory regulation. George insults others more than the combined media of this country does; George tells more lies than the sum total of the lies told by the Zambian media. In fact, most of the lies that the Zambian media carries are his own lies. George defames more people every day than our media does. And he does this with impunity, sometimes abusing the parliamentary privileges he enjoys to malign and defame others. If it was a question of irresponsibility, George wouldn’t be the Vice-President of our Republic today, he wouldn’t even qualify to be a member of parliament. George has been very irresponsible when it comes to respecting the dignity of others, especially those he considers to be his enemies. George has insulted us; he has told many lies about us. And he knows this very well but he doesn’t care because he considers it politically beneficial to him to insult us and defame us.
As we have stated before, we will never claim that the media in this country always carries out its functions responsibly. And right now, the most irresponsible media in this country is the state- owned and government-controlled media. And this can be seen from the number of successful libel cases against them. The state-owned media in this country is highly regulated and controlled by those in power. But look at the way it conducts its affairs! Is this the route the rest of the Zambian media should take? Should The Post and other media become like the Daily Mail and Times of Zambia which the government controls and directs on a daily basis? The effect of the statutory controls that George and his boss had been trying to impose on the Zambian media would be devastating for good governance and democracy in this country.
But what should the government do in cases where the news media abuse press freedom by publishing stories that in the opinion of those in government and others, are false, insulting, repugnant, irresponsible or simply in bad taste? The answer, by and large, is simple: nothing. It is simply not the business of government to judge such matters. In general, the cure for abused press freedom is more press freedom. It may seem a paradox, but in the name of press freedom, a democracy must sometimes defend the rights of the news media with irresponsible practices. 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, dissent and press freedom are stifled.
Furthermore, the suppression of the media we find offensive today will be used as an authority to suppress other liberties or freedoms tomorrow – which we or someone else might find offensive. All people are harmed when the news media is regulated by the government. If the media being suppressed through statutory regulation is right in what it is doing, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth. On the other hand, if it is wrong, they lose the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error.
And as we have stated before, press freedom is a right or liberty that cannot be earned by conduct. As such, it is difficult for us to understand George’s reasoning when he says that they have for now backed off from statutory regulation because the media has stopped insulting and they will introduce statutory regulation if it starts insulting. This is tantamount to saying the news media will enjoy press freedom and self-regulation when it is worth of it; when it is more “responsible”. Press freedom is a right that does not need to be earned. If the conduct that accompanies it is unacceptable and wanting at law or otherwise, those responsible should be liable to the extent of their abuses of that right. A mere fact that press freedom is accompanied by conduct should not mean that it should be suppressed under the guise of prohibiting the conduct. And at the risk of being boring and monotonous to our readers, we conclude with a quote from Nelson Mandela on this score: “None of our irritations with the perceived inadequacies of the media should ever allow us to even suggest faintly that the independence of the press could be compromised or coerced.”
Labels: GEORGE KUNDA, PRESS FREEDOM, REGULATION
Read more...
Govt shouldn’t be jittery over press freedom - Celli
By Misheck Wangwe
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:00 CAT
The Zambian government should not be jittery over press freedom because it is one of the fundamental principles of democracy, says visiting good governance advocate Marilyn Celli. Celli says it is impossible for Zambia to attain real democracy and good governance if the government does not appreciate the need for a totally free media.
In an interview yesterday, Marilyn Celli said developing African countries like Zambia must be encouraged by the move taken by the Rwandan government to move from statutory regulation of the media to self-regulation.
Celli said the resolve by the Rwandan government to move to self-regulation of the media was a clear demonstration to the rest of Africa and the world that it was committed to improving democracy and good governance in that country.
“We’ve interacted with many people since we arrived and they told us that press freedom is there but there is a lot of inference and intimidation from government especially in the operations of the public media. And true to what others observed, we've seen that the public media is actually state controlled. They just propagate government activities and talk about how good President Rupiah Banda is,” Celli said. “It will be difficult for this country to develop if the media does not alert government about the sufferings of the people because I personally believe that one of the fundamental principles of the media is to be the mirror of society.”
Celli said it was difficult to understand why after 47 years of Independence, Zambia had no law that promotes freedom of information.
She said it was sad to learn that media advocates and institutions had been pushing the Freedom of Information Bill for many years, but it seemed government was reluctant over the issue.
Celli said while it was commendable that Zambia had private media institutions that were questioning government policies and monitoring the way it was managing tax payers’ money, it was imperative for the public media to reflect the needs of the people.
She said Zambia faced many economic challenges due to lack of leadership in many areas of governance hence the need for freedom of information in its quest to attain real democracy and development.
“We can say Zambia is a democracy but what is needed is mature democracy where leaders would be able to appreciate the need for good laws that promote freedom of information and independence of the media. If many Africa countries can be inspired by the Rwandan government that has taken a bold decision for the betterment of their country and the people,” Celli said.
The Rwandan government through the Minister of Information Potrais Musoni last Wednesday decided that the media, which is currently regulated by the Rwandan Media High Council, starts to regulate itself by June 1 this year.
Labels: PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
Delayed response irritates BRE
By Mwala Kalaluka in Limulunga
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:01 CAT
THE Barotse Royal Establishment says President Rupiah Banda’s government is taking too long to respond to its suggestions on how to resolve the Barotseland Agreement controversy.
And the Barotse Royal Establishment's acting Ngambela prime minister Litia Walubita says people that were circulating rumours that the Litunga is 'dead' are pathological liars.
During an inter-denominational service attended by Litunga Lubosi Imwiko II at his Limulunga palace grounds on Friday morning, Ngambela Walubita said the BRE had not relaxed efforts to engage the government on the Barotseland Agreement issue.
“I know that people are very anxious about the Barotseland Agreement but we are not just seated,” Ngambela Walubita told a crowd that came to see Litunga Imwiko. “We are being prodded by the district royal establishments and the latest is the Imangambwa chief induna at Naliele in Kaoma, who is here with us and had been asking how far we are on this issue.”
Ngambela Walubita said the Barotse Royal Establishment BRE was of the view that issues around the Barotseland Agreement needed to be dealt with one at a time.
“Some people were sent to Lusaka to go and find out because the other time we Barotse National Council went to State House and told the government that ‘what we have come here for is not to secede. What we are here for is to ensure that our Agreement is respected,” Ngambela Walubita said.
“The President and his people gave their side and they said 'it won't take long, we shall respond to you.' But there will be a problem because people are now wondering when that response will come.”
Ngambela Walubita said in view of the silence from the government another BRE delegation was sent to Lusaka recently to go and find out the government's position on the matter.
“They came back the other day and they told us it was promising and that the government will reply this week,” Ngambela Walubita said. “That letter from the government will determine whether we go and meet with them or we call on people to come and dance the warriors' dance ngomalume.”
Ngambela Walubita, who rubbished assertions that the Litunga and his indunas had been paid billions of kwacha in order to kill the discourse on the Barotseland Agreement, urged the people to wait for the outcome of the BRE's involvement.
“Such kind of mudslinging is not constructive,” he said.
“It is shameful that some people from the royal family are also involved in this malicious campaign but it shall not take a while we will catch them.”
Ngambela Walubita said the Kuomboka Ceremony of the Lozi people would take place this year and rumours suggesting that it would not take place were baseless.
“Preparations have already started,” Ngambela Walubita said. “Next week I might be announcing the date for the Kuomboka.”
And Ngambela Walubita said the rumour that the Litunga had passed away was a wake up call to the BRE.
“Those lies that are circulating, tell the people that they are all lies. Look, today he Litunga Imwiko is here. Can you say someone is mad when he is not mad?” Ngambela Walubita said amidst ululations.
“But these rumours have made us realise that from now on we shall not allow our Litunga to be only in one place. We shall advise him to be mobile.”
Ngambela Walubita said those that continue to think that the Litunga was only benefitting by virtue of being on the throne should go to his village, Nasiyongo, and see the number of cattle he had.
“The Litunga is self-sustaining,” said Ngambela Walubita.
Labels: BAROTSE ROYAL ESTABLISHMENT, BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT, LITIA WALUBITA
Read more...
Defeat of Kunda’s bill should end govt - Wila
By Chibaula Silwamba
Wed 06 Apr. 2011, 04:01 CAT
THE defeat of the constitutional amendment bill in the House warrants the resignation of the Vice-President and Cabinet as well as dissolution of Parliament, says Wila Mung’omba.
In an interview in Lusaka yesterday, Mung’omba said he agreed with lawyer Dr Rodger Chongwe that the government does not take constitution and budget bills to Parliament to go and lose and expect to stay in office.
“A vote on a constitution or a budget bill in all Commonwealth Parliamentary practice is a confidence vote. If a government loses on a confidence vote, it must resign and the House dissolved,” said Mung'omba, who chaired the Mung'omba Constitutional Review Commission (CRC).
“In Zambia where both parliamentary and democratic practices are still a threadbare pretence, the defeat of a constitution bill which was apparently intended to usher in a new constitution, is a matter of no consequence and a minor setback.”
Mung'omba said Speaker of the National Assembly Amusa Mwanamwamba must have told the members of parliament the implication of the defeat of the motion.
“When the vote had been counted, it was the duty of the Speaker of the House to explain the serious implications of that defeat: (a) that the bill did not command the confidence of the House and, therefore, of the nation; (b) that he was going to advise the President accordingly and that dissolution of the House was the expected consequence according to Parliamentary practice.”
Mung'omba said it would then have been President Rupiah Banda to take the most appropriate action to accept the resignation of the entire Cabinet, from the Vice-President downwards.
He said President Banda would have considered the efficacy of calling early elections when the tripartite elections were being anticipated in the next few months, but only after consulting with the opposition parties.
Mung'omba, a lawyer of more than 40 years experience, said it was not enough for Speaker Mwanamwambwa to only announce that the next elections would be held under the 1991 Constitution.
Mung’omba was first admitted to the English bar as a lawyer in 1968 before being admitted to the Zambian bar the following year. He also served as a member of parliament from 1972 to 1979 in the UNIP government. Mung'omba, said Mwanamwamba's announcement that this year’s elections would be held under the 1991 Constitution was too obvious a statement to convey the seriousness of what had taken place in the House. He said Mwanamwambwa’s lucid explanation of the implication of the vote would have prevented government chief spokesperson Lieutenant General Ronnie Shikapwasha and MMD spokesperson Dora Siliya from trivialising a tragic national event.
“When a bill of that importance has been lost in the House, it is totally repugnant to parliamentary practice to start extolling its virtues at press conferences. That is the job leaders of the House do before debates open by way of lobbying and consultation with other parties,” Mung’omba said. “In any event, even after six months period has lapsed, government or MMD will not be expected in terms of our Constitution and parliamentary practice to reintroduce the same bill; it will have to be a Constitution bill of a different nature and substance.”
Mung’omba said it was not the opposition parties, Patriotic Front (PF) and United Party for National Development (UPND), that defeated the constitutional bill but the whole House and it did not matter which party spear-headed the defeat.
“The House considered that it was not in the best interest of Zambia to vote for such a bill. The bill was a threat to Zambia’s democracy and it had to be stopped by the people’s representatives,” Mung’omba said. “Members of parliament are elected for that purpose, to protect the interests of the nation. When we decided to operate within institutions of democracy we must also accept to live with some of the most painful demands that democracy imposes on society.”
Mung'omba said the constitution bill was not defeated by PF leader Michael Sata or UPND's Hakainde Hichilema. He said Sata and Hichilema did not even sit in the House.
“The bill was defeated by the House comprising representatives from PF, UPND, UNIP, Alliance for Democracy and Development (ADD) and MMD - all exercising their free conscience in accordance with the trust placed on them by the electorate,” said Mung'omba. “Information making rounds is that although a three-line whip was expected on MMD members of parliament, some of them, including ministers, stayed away from the House when the vote was being taken. So what is the point blaming the opposition for the failure?”
Last week on Tuesday, the Banda-MMD-led government failed to garner the required two-thirds majority vote to pass the constitutional amendment bill to second reading in the National Assembly.
The ruling MMD that has lost some parliamentary seats in by-elections has 78 legislators in a 158-member National Assembly.
Labels: CONSTITUTION, NCC, ROGER CHONGWE, WILLA MUNG'OMBA
Read more...
