(LUSAKATIMES) Elias Chipimo Snr warns of an Imminent Revolution
Time Posted: January 11, 2014 1:24 pm
Former Freedom Fighter Elias Chipimo Snr has warned that growing levels of discontent among citizens might spark a revolution in Zambia soon.
Mr. Chipimo who is Father to NAREP President Elias Chipimo Jnr said there is a lot of tension in the country due to discontent among citizens.
Mr. Chipimo Snr, a former diplomat who was once imprisoned on treason charges by the Kaunda regime said the PF government should start listening to its citizens.
“A revolution is coming soon in this country because people are totally upset and the government is not listening. People are being intimidated everywhere and are not free to express themselves,” Mr Chipimo Snr said.
He added, “Wherever people get upset and that anger is allowed to be bottled up, that always sparks a revolution and I can see that happening here if the government does not start listening to its people.”
Mr Chipimo Snr was speaking Friday morning during a live special interview on Hot FM’s Red Hot Breakfast Show in Lusaka.
He further charged that Zambia has lacked the inspiration with which it was founded upon in 1964.
“It’s like people are no longer free. When we fought the white minority rule, we fought so that we could be free to speak but today if one says something that the government is not happy about, they are arrested. This is not the freedom we fought for,” he said.
Mr Chipimo Snr also explained that Chumbu Munshololwa does not amount to an insult.
“I’m surprised that somebody is taken to court for calling someone Chumbu Munshololwa. This is not defamatory at all. It simply means one who cannot be advised.”
Labels: ELIAS CHIPIMO, ELIAS CHIPIMO SR, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, NAREP
Read more...
Don't fear to express yourself
Sat 01 Sep. 2012, 10:12 CAT
We all have a duty to speak out when something is wrong. We shouldn't be silent when things are not going well. Our ability and willingness to speak out when things are wrong, when things are not going well, is the lifeblood of our country.
Mankind's ability to speak out, to speak up is the bedrock of civilisation. And on this score, the Gospel according to John is very instructive: "Before the world was created, the Word already existed; he was with God, and he was the same as God. From the very beginning, the Word was with God. Through him, God made all things; not one thing in all creation was made without him. The Word was the source of life, and this life brought light to mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has never put it out" (1 John 1-5).
Clearly, everything begins with the word, with our ability to express ourselves, to speak out. Freedom of speech and expression is the lifeblood of any democracy. To debate and vote, to assemble and protest, to worship, to ensure justice for all - these all rely upon the unrestricted flow of speech and information.
Clearly, democracy is communication: people talking to one another about their common problems and forging a common destiny. Before people can govern themselves, they must be free to express themselves.
Citizens of a democracy live with a conviction that through the open exchange of ideas and opinions, truth will eventually win out over falsehood, the values of others will be better understood, areas of compromise more clearly defined, and the path of progress opened. The greater the volume of such exchanges, the better.
Democracy depends upon a literate, knowledgeable citizenry, whose access to the broadest possible range of opinions and information enables them to participate as fully as possible in the public life of their society. Ignorance breeds apathy. Democracy thrives upon the energy of citizens who are sustained by the unimpeded flow of ideas, data, opinions and speculation.
But we also know that not all ideas that are propagated are good, correct and acceptable. Some of them are blatant lies, harmful speculation and propaganda and an abuse of the freedom of speech.
But what should the government do in cases where freedom of speech is abused with information that, in the opinion of the majority, is false, repugnant, irresponsible or simply in bad taste? The answer, by and large, is nothing. It is simply not the business of government to judge such matters. In general, the cure of free speech is more free speech. It may seem a paradox, but in the name of free speech, a democracy must sometimes defend the rights of individuals and groups who themselves advocate such non-democratic policies as repressing free speech.
Citizens in a democratic society defend this right out of the conviction that, in the end, open debate will lead to greater truth and wiser public actions than if speech and dissent are stifled.
Furthermore, the advocates of free speech argue, the suppression of speech that I find offensive today is potentially a threat to my exercise of free speech tomorrow - which perhaps you or someone else might find offensive. One of the classic defences of this view is that all people are harmed when speech is repressed. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth, if wrong, they lose the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error.
We believe that the strength of a democracy lies in the involvement of people in their own governance. As such, participation is a key component of any democracy.
We also believe that participatory governance generates an environment where matters of abuse of power, corruption and such other social evils could be controlled and even overcome. Through checks and balances, mechanisms that curb any abuses, through the separation of power among political structures, could be put in place. Through this separation of power, political structures are able to restrict each other's political discretion, whereby none of them is overly powerful and uncontrollable.
It is necessary that we all participate in the governance of our country according to our position and role, in promoting the common good.
No one should be afraid to speak out their minds. And as Nelson Mandela advised, "men must follow the dictates of their consciences irrespective of the consequences which might overtake them for it".
And as Fr Gabriel Msipu correctly observes, we all have a special mandate to help each other and to alert those in authority and make them know what is happening in certain places which sometimes they cannot visit at all. For this reason, no one should be afraid to express themselves and become tight-lipped because of fear.
We cannot deny that there is a growing culture of intolerance in our politics. And intolerance is not limited only to those in government. It is something that one sees even in our opposition political parties. You dare to challenge some of the top leaders of our opposition political parties and see what happens to your membership, to your position in the party! Freedom of expression is suppressed in many of our political organisations. It is even suppressed in the church. Dissenting voices are rarely tolerated in our political parties and in our churches. Dissent is equally not tolerated in our traditional institutions. Oppose some of our chiefs and see what happens to you!
But for as long as legitimate bodies of opinion feel stifled, vile minds will take advantage of justifiable grievances to destroy, to kill and to maim.
Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right. And to deny any person their human rights, their freedom of expression is to challenge their very humanity.
We all know that some of this intolerance is the result of fear. And fear arises when we view everyone else with suspicion. And as we all know, the route of all problems is anger, attachment, jealousy, hatred. These are the real enemy. And there is one enemy who is always an enemy, with whom we should never compromise; that is the enemy inside your heart. You cannot change all these bad thoughts in your friend. But you have to confront and control them.
Some people turn very negative when things are not going their way. But negativity is never the solution. Anger, jealousy, impatience and hatred are the real trouble makers; with them, problems can never be solved. Though one may have temporary success, ultimately one's hatred or anger will create further difficulties.
No good ever came of anger. Anger may seem to offer an energetic way of getting things done, but a perception of the world is misguided. The only certainty about anger and hatred is that they are destructive.
And we think that anger can be of two type: hatred with ill-feeling is one while another anger - with compassion as the basis of concern - may be positive.
There is need to keep anger in check. Usually people consider that anger is part of the mind, and that it is better to show it, to let it come out. We think that is a wrong conception. Resentment because of grievances may be let out, because then it is finished. Constant anger - that, we think, it is better to check. Hatred cannot be overcome by hatred. Hatred will only regenerate more problems. If we live our lives continually motivated by anger and hatred, even our physical health deteriorates. If you succeed through violence at the expense of others' rights and welfare, you have not solved the problem, but only created the seeds of another. Tolerance and patience with courage are not signs of failure but signs of victory. Actually, if you are too important, that's a real failure. We shouldn't forget that one's own actions create one's life situation.
And as Mandela aptly put it, "anger is a temporary feeling - you soon forget it, particularly if you are involved in positive activities and attitudes. It is not easy to remain bitter if one is busy with constructive things".
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, GABRIEL MSIPU, RICHARD LUONDE
Read more...
Freedom of expression is fundamental -Fr Luonde
By Ernest Chanda
Sat 01 Sep. 2012, 10:20 CAT
FATHER Richard Luonde says freedom of expression is a fundamental ingredient in any human society which should be utilised in love. Commenting on Chipata Catholic Diocese treasurer general Fr Gabriel Msipu's message that people had a special mandate to speak against injustices in society, the Kitwe Anglican priest said such freedom was good for healthy human interaction.
"In as much as it is there, where your freedom ends, another person's freedom starts. So it means that even those in authority have got such freedoms and should be respected. Nevertheless, no one should stifle another person's freedom of speech because it is a constitutional right that should be respected and upheld whether we agree with what others say or not," he said.
Fr Luonde therefore advised that people should exercise their freedom of speech with love and respect.
"…It does not pay to insult others or call them names in the name of freedom of expression. If we have issues to speak about we should bring them out genuinely and in love. Free speech is fundamental right which all of us should enjoy at all times," said Fr Luonde.
Delivering a sermon during morning mass on Radio Maria on Wednesday, Fr Msipu said it was everyone's right to express themselves on issues of national concern.
"It is the duty of all of us as Christians, as church leaders and as concerned citizens of this country. We all have a special mandate and this is our human right to express that what we feel is not okay and we do not do it out of bad will, but we are there to help each other and to alert those in authority and also to make them know what is happening in certain places which sometimes they cannot visit at all," he said. Fr Msipu said those in authority were sometimes detached from reality because of being misinformed about what was happening in the country.
"When you look at the church and indeed some church leaders, brothers, sisters, priests, pastors and other religious leaders, we are found in most places, sometimes even in remote places which cannot be reached by people in authority, to inform them what is happening among certain people in society," said Fr Msipu.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RICHARD LUONDE
Read more...
JCTR calls for compliance with law in airing views
By Fridah Nkonde
Tue 28 Aug. 2012, 10:30 CAT
JCTR has advised Zambians not to break the law in their quest to have their views heard. In an interview, Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection programme manager Geoffrey Chongo also said it is not a must that the government must always go by what people suggest because those in government also have a plan.
Chongo said although there was need for the government to exercise tolerance all the time, there was also need for people not to break the law.
"Every ruling party is supposed to exercise tolerance if development is to take place in a country. But a government being open-minded it does not mean that people should break the law; everything has to be done within the confines of the law," he said.
Chongo said since the PF were in government, they had all the rights to do what they thought was right for the country's development.
He said it was important for any government to embrace tolerance and avoid shooting down people's views.
Choongo said the government was expected take time to listen to whoever had opposing views concerning any issue.
"Government should not think that those with opposing views don't mean well for the country. They should give them space to speak out and bring out their own views. Government always has a choice whether to go by what someone is suggesting or not. But government should also be careful not to ignore people's views because those are the same people who would make them lose an election," he said.
Chongo said the PF had tried to give people space to express their opinions but had at times come out very strongly on certain issues.
"They should get used to it because people will continue giving suggestions to government. We are in a multiparty system. I remember when people accused the PF of failing to fulfil their campaign promises, President Sata said he needed evidence on what they had failed to do and asked people to give suggestions," said Choongo.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, JCTR
Read more...
Shamenda pledges improved conditions for journalists
By Allan Mulenga
Fri 16 Mar. 2012, 11:58 CAT
FACKSON Shamenda says the government will ensure that conditions of service for journalists are improved.
Speaking at the launch of the Zambia Election Media Monitoring Project final report at Lusaka's Golf View Hotel on Wednesday, Shamenda, who is information and labour minister, said journalists were able to report accurately when they are working in a good environment.
"I will be going round very shortly as I familiarise myself. I will be looking at your pay slips, I will be looking at your conditions of service, your leave days and a lot of other things, so that if you have got a good working environment where you are coming from, even when you are reporting you are not hungry. You are not looking forward to tea break as we are reporting as a result. What people do when they come and they are journalists, they are just waiting for the guest of honour to finish the talking and collect the speech instead of listening and then you digest as the guest of honour is speaking," he said.
Shamenda urged journalists to be factual in their reporting by avoiding misquoting news sources.
"That is what journalists of the olden days used to do. But now everybody is just looking around ‘when is the tea break' because they didn't have break. Then after the speech they run around, 'sir, where is the speech?' But you were there when I was speaking. I think previously people used to know even how to write shorthand so that as the speaker is speaking, you pick up your own points, so that you are able to cover the event as it is and I am in the habit of doing that myself. I can have a written speech, half of what I will be saying will be coming from my heart…," he said.
Shamenda said the government would ensure that there were decent employment opportunities for journalists.
"It is important that we have factual type of reporting, you have good conditions of service. We want to create decent employment, not justany form of employment," said Shamenda.
Labels: FACKSON SHAMENDA, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, JOURNALISM
Read more...
Don’t quit, stay there and continue doing it
By The Post
Tue 28 Dec. 2010, 04:00 CAT
Fr Richard Luonde, an Anglican priest in Kitwe, has both the right and duty to say what he is saying, to do what he is doing and to participate fully in building a just and peaceful society with all the means at his disposal.
Fr Luonde has every right to criticise and denounce that which he feels should be criticised and denounced, just as much Anglican Bishop David Njovu has every right to praise and defend that which he feels should be praised and defended in Rupiah Banda's government. Again, it is a matter of what is good for the goose being good for the gander.
If it is acceptable for an Anglican priest or bishop to praise and defend Rupiah and his government's deeds, it should equally be acceptable for an Anglican priest or bishop to criticise and denounce Rupiah and his government's deeds. If to criticise and denounce is an unacceptable involvement in politics by an Anglican clergyman, to praise and defend should also be seen to be unacceptable. Anyway, it is very easy to praise and defend the powerful than to criticise and denounce them; it is very easy to criticise and denounce the weak, the poor than to praise and defend them.
A good priest, a good bishop should value the democratic system in as much as it ensures the participation of citizens in making political choices, guarantees to the governed the possibility of electing and holding accountable those who govern them, and replacing them through peaceful means when appropriate. When a system ceases to promote the common good and favours corrupt interests, a good clergyman must not only denounce injustice but also break with the evil system. And must be prepared to work with another system that is more just, fair, humane and most suited to the needs of the day.
By his example, Christ taught us to live what he preached. Christ preached human solidarity and proclaimed that love should configure all our social structures. Even more importantly, he lived out his message of liberation to its ultimate consequences. He was condemned to death. The power brokers in his nation saw his message of liberation, and the real-life love to which he bore witness, as a serious threat to their economic, social, religious and political interests. Today, as always, the spirit of Christ is actively giving impetus to history.
It shows up in the works of priests like Fr Luonde, in solidarity, in unselfish commitment of those who struggle for liberty and evince authentic love for their suffering brothers and sisters. Truly, we must love everybody, but not everyone the same way; you love the oppressed by liberating them; you love the oppressors, the corrupt, the plunderers, the abusers by fighting them. Love has to be like a classifying device to become universal.
The Church has not only incarnated itself in the world of the poor, giving them hope; it has also firmly committed itself to their defence. The majority of the poor in our country are oppressed and repressed daily by economic and political structures. The terrible words spoken by the prophets of Israel continue to be verified among us. Among us there are those who sell others for money, who sell a poor person for a pair of sandals; those who, in their mansions, pile up violence and plunder, those who crush the poor; those who make the kingdom of violence come closer as they lie on their beds of ivory.
In this situation in which just a few persons control economic and political power, the Church and its priests has no other sensible alternative but to place itself at the side of the poor and undertake their defence. The Church cannot do otherwise, for it remembers that Jesus had pity on the multitude. But by defending the poor it has entered into serious conflict with the politically and financially powerful. And that part of the Church that has put itself on the side of the people and the people's defence has been the target of all sorts of attacks, persecution. Here again we find the same key to understanding the persecution of priests like Fr Luonde: the poor. Once again it is the poor who bring us to understand what has really happened. That is why the Church has understood the persecution from the perspective of the poor.
The persecution has been occasioned by the defence of the poor. It amounts to nothing other than the Church and its priests' taking upon itself the lot of the poor. Real persecution has been directed against the poor, the body of Christ in history today. They, like Jesus, are the crucified, the persecuted servants of God. They are the ones who make up in their own bodies that which is lacking in the passion of Christ. And for this reason when the Church and its priests has organised and united itself around the hopes and anxieties of the poor, it has incurred the same fate as that of Jesus and of the poor: persecution.
The political dimension of the faith is nothing other than the Church's response to the demands made upon it by the de facto socio-political situation in which it exists. What we have discovered is that this demand is a fundamental one for the faith, and that the Church cannot ignore it. That is not to say that the Church should regard itself as a political institution entering into competition with other political institutions, or that it has its own political processes. Nor, much less, is it to say that the Church seeks political leadership. We are talking of something more profound, something more in keeping with the gospel. We are talking about an authentic option for the poor, of becoming incarnate in their world, of proclaiming the good news to them, of giving them hope, of encouraging them to engage in a liberating praxis, of defending their cause and of sharing their fate.
The Church's option for the poor explains the political dimension of the faith in its fundamentals and in its basic outline. And because the Church has opted for the truly poor, not for the fictitiously poor, because it has opted for those who really are oppressed and repressed, the Church lives in a political world, and it fulfils itself as Church also through politics. It cannot be otherwise if the church, like Jesus, is to turn itself toward the poor.
The course taken by Fr Luonde has clearly issued from his faith and conviction. The transcendence of the gospel has guided him in his judgement and in his action. He has judged the social and political situation from the standpoint of the faith. But it is also true, to look at it in another way, that the faith itself has been deepened, that hidden riches of the gospel have been opened, precisely taking up this stance toward socio-political reality such as it is. We are told in Proverbs 31:8-9 : "Speak up for people who cannot speak for themselves. Protect the rights of all those who are helpless. Speak for them and be a righteous judge. Protect the rights of the poor and needy." Who between Fr Luonde and Bishop Njovu is speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves, the helpless and the needy? Certainly Rupiah and his government have immense capacity, almost unlimited capacity, to speak for themselves. It is the people Fr Luonde is speaking for that have very limited capacity to speak for themselves, to protect their rights.
We see, with great clarity, that here neutrality is impossible. Either we save the lives of Zambians, or we are accomplices in their death. And here what is most fundamental about the faith is given expression in history: either we believe in a God of life, or we serve the idols of death. When the Church inserts itself into the socio-political world, it does so in order to work with it so that from such cooperation life may be given to the poor.
In doing so, therefore, it is not distancing itself from its mission, nor is it doing something of secondary importance or something incidental to its mission. It is giving testimony to its faith in God; it is being instrument of the Spirit, the Lord and giver of life. This faith in the God of life is the explanation of what lies deepest in the Christian history. To give life to the poor, one has to give one's own life, even to give one's life itself. The greatest sign of faith in the God of life is the witness of those who are ready to give up their own life. "A man can have no greater love than to lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13).
It is the faith that provides the first impulse to incarnate oneself in the socio-political world of the poor, and gives encouragement to actions that lead to liberation and are also socio-political. And in their own turn that praxis and that incarnation make concrete the basic aspects of the faith.
So the Church has to go on making judgements about politics from within a changing scene. This is the way Fr Luonde's actions should be looked at. There's nothing wrong or unchristian or indeed unpriestly that he has done to justify him being hounded out of priesthood. And to Fr Luonde we say: don't quit, stay there and continue doing what you are doing with the same commitment, vigour, courage and tenacity!
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, POLITICS, RICHARD LUONDE, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
Slander, libel and Zimbabwean online media
By: Basil Mutoti
Posted: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:07 am
ZIMBABWEAN young people in the Diaspora have been sucked into political debates they do not comprehend fully and many of them now live in fear of returning home lest they face civil and criminal cases involving slander, libel and a range of other lawsuits. In hindsight, I am sure many of them wish they had been more responsible in their expression of dissent.
Many of these young people today remain in the West where they are treated like second class citizens for fear of returning home to face the music for some of their slanderous utterances and libellous and defamatory publications.
They have no hope for the future as they wait for immigration officials to determine their fate or as they face an uncertain jobless future.
Take an example of a young man who ran a fervently anti Zanu-PF website called Zimdaily.com, Munamato Maiswa, who spearheaded a campaign to have children of Zanu-PF officials returned home, and called various politicians murderers, rapists and child molesters. While this young man has disappeared from the limelight, for reasons best known to himself, the damage he has caused cannot be easily forgotten.
Many of us could not believe what this young man was getting away with at law. He would publish a litarny of libellous, unverified, ill-researched and half-baked allegations. The internet is full of these stories.
Many other young people who had promising careers have put themselves in the limelight for the wrong reasons denigrating their country and defaming a lot of people in the process.
This is the tragedy of Zimbabwe. Many young people who had promising careers did not take time to understand the political processes in the country. They took it upon themselves to slander politicians whom they disagreed with.
Freedom of expression should never be misinterpreted as a right to slander and defame other people.
The news of Munyaradzi "Munya" Chidzonga, who came second in Africa's Big Brother All Stars reality show, should be an inspiration to many young people. Today, his career is on track having pocketed US$300 000 for merely supporting and representing his country well.
Zimbabwe belongs to all of us and it does not hurt to remain patriotic, and try and influence change in your country, through responsible means.
There is always a way to express dissent without hurting others.
I am sure there are some things that Munya would like to see changed in Zimbabwe; but he is not being irresponsible about it.
We all have our concerns and our insecurities, but we should always strive to approach problems in a mature and informed manner.
Mutumwa Mawere's return to Zimbabwe is also symbolic.
Although he ran an online media campaign to be despecified and for criminal charges to be dropped, he never overstepped the boundaries calling people murderers and all sorts. Today he can return home without any fear, and can sit on the same table with former rivals and chart the way forward.
Unfortunately, there are many young people who cannot enjoy that luxury, having overstepped the legal boundary.
A range of civil suits and criminal cases await these homesick young people when they get home. They would have to prove many of their allegations if the accussed decide to sue them.
In this information world, not much that's said in public remains private for long.
_______________
Basil Mutoti writes from Quebec, Canada. He can be reached via basilmutoti *** yahoo.com.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Read more...
Malela, Kitwe Boys school authorities punish pupils for flashing red cards
By Kabanda Chulu and Misheck Wangwe in Kitwe
Fri 19 Mar. 2010, 07:30 CAT
SCHOOL authorities at Malela and Kitwe Boys high schools have punished more than 11 pupils for flashing red cards and raising the PF’s clenched fist during Youth Day commemorations last week.
A check at Malela High School on Tuesday found the 11 pupils - seven girls and four boys - digging two rubbish pits as punishment that was slapped on them by the school authorities for allegedly supporting Change Life Zambia Fr Frank Bwalya’s red card campaign and being members of the PF.
One of the affected pupils talked to revealed that they were sent away from class by the school authorities around 08:00 hours and were given a case of misconduct after they flashed red cards and raised a PF symbol during a march past at Kitwe’s City Square during the commemoration of Youth Day that was graced by Kitwe District commissioner McDonald Mtine.
“We’re digging these two pits because the school authorities suspect we are supporters of PF and that we were supporting Fr Bwalya’s message and his red card campaign during Youth Day commemorations at City Square. Am disappointed with these people because despite being a pupil here, I have a right to support a grouping of my choice. Am 18 and am completing grade 12 this year, so supporting PF or the red card campaign is none of their business,” said one of the pupils.
And at Kitwe Boys High School, reliable sources revealed that the pupils who were suspected to have raised the PF symbol during the youth day march past were given ‘Call Your Parents’ (CP) notes and were later punished for misbehaving.
Kitwe Boys High School head teacher a Mr Mulandu refused to comment on the matter and referred all queries to the office of the District Education Board Secretary (DEBS), who also referred queries to Mtine.
When contacted, Mtine initially said he was not aware of the punishments being meted on the pupils.
“The DEBS has not gotten back to me over those issues, so I am not aware of what is happening in education circles here.
What I know is that the pupils were made to do what they were not supposed to do by some people but I made it clear even in my speech which you The Post covered adequately, and I am grateful for that, that young people should not be used by politicians as tools of violence,” said Mtine.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RED CARD CAMPAIGN, STUDENTS
Read more...
COMMENT - Not a good day for the NCC. First they wanted to exclude Michael Sata from running for president by including an education clause, Clive Chirwa for requiring a residency clause, then they want to specifically ban gay marriage, and now they want to stifle freedom of information. I detect a trend. :) The NCC is all about limiting and taking away the rights and opportunities of citizens, rather than protecting their rights. What a waste of money. Let's just implement the Dean Mung'omba draft constitution and send the NCC home.
NCC rejects clause guaranteeing citizens the right of access to information held by Government.
Thursday, February 18, 2010, 8:21
THE National Constitutional Conference (NCC) has rejected a clause which could have guaranteed citizens the right of access to information held by Government.
Article 56 (1) (a) of the Willa Mung’omba draft Constitution states that every citizen has the right of access to information held by the State.
Contributing to the debate on the article, commissioner Divo Katete said he did not support the article because there was no need to release State information to the public.
Mr Katete said the State held information that was classified and could not be released to the public anyhow.
Another delegate, Japhet Moyo said the article was wrong because people would even be asking for reasons why the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) entered a nolle prosequi.
Foreign Affairs Deputy Minister Fashion Phiri said he did not agree with the article because even in the United States of America, information was kept secret even to researchers until after a certain period of time.
The NCC plenary, however, adopted article 55 (1) (a) which gives citizens freedom to hold an opinion and the freedom to receive or impart information or ideas.
Press Association of Zambia president Andrew Sakala and lawyer Patrick Matibini supported the clause, saying it should include the freedom of artistic creativity and academic freedom which were not covered in the current Constitution.
Bahati Member of Parliament Besa Chimbaka and Independent Churches of Zambia president David Masupa supported the clause while Anti-Voter Apathy director Bonnie Tembo said the article should not state that there would be no interference to receiving some information.
Article 55 (2) which was also adopted said the freedom did not extend to propaganda for war, incitement to violence and advocacy of hatred.
[Times of Zambia]
Labels: CONSTITUTION, DIVO KATETE, FASHION PHIRI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, JAPHET MOYO, NCC
Read more...
Fr Mwewa warns govt of more criticism from clergy
By Misheck Wangwe, Kabanda Chulu and Abigail Chaponda
Mon 15 Feb. 2010, 04:00 CAT
CATHOLIC Diocese of Ndola Treasurer General Fr Augustine Mwewa has said President Rupiah Banda’s government should expect more criticism from the clergy if his government continues to be inept and failing to promote common good.
Reacting to President Rupiah Banda’s comments at the installation ceremony of the new Catholic Diocese of Ndola Bishop Alick Banda on Saturday, that young priests have been issuing unwarranted attacks and insults on his government, Fr Mwewa said the Republican President should expect more criticism as long as his government continues to exhibit bad governance.
Fr Mwewa said the young priests President Banda accused of insulting his government were in close contact with the majority poor people who face harsh living conditions caused by inept governance.
“I want to put it on record that nobody deserves to be insulted and the president was right when he said elders must be respected but I have never heard any insults coming from a priest’s mouth or a priest quoted in the media insulting. We are religious men. We don’t insult; what we merely do is to bring to the fore the challenges facing God’s people due to inequalities in the distribution of this country’s resources by those holding government power,” he said.
Fr Mwewa noted that in a democratic dispensation like Zambia, President Banda as the head of state must be ready to face criticism and was expected to act on the failures of his government.
Fr Mwewa added that any well-meaning Zambian would only take pride in a government that responds to people’s concerns and not an adamant one.
He said President Banda should not expect the religious to be smiling and showering praises on him when the people they are called to serve are wallowing in abject poverty due to lack of good leadership.
“President Rupiah must start reflecting on these issues. His government must priorities the plight of the poor, he should not politicise every issue. Appreciation is given where it’s due not in a situation were innocent souls are living in misery due to politics of tyranny and lack of good governance,” Fr Mwewa said.
Fr Mwewa said every well-meaning Zambian is looking forward to seeing a government that would devote its efforts to uplifting the living standards of the people and addressing issues of mutual concern.
He said while it was the role of the clergy to offer moral guidance in the society and the nation at large, they also had a divine obligation to comment on issues that affect the people, to denounce injustice and to ensure that there was a fair distribution of the country’s created wealth.
“Nobody owns Zambia. This country is for us all and everyone has a role to play for this country to attain the much-needed development. That is why it is important to listen to each other and divergent views must be embraced by those in authority,” he said.
And Fr Mwewa advised President Banda to detach himself from former president Fredrick Chiluba if he wanted Zambians to respect him and his government.
He said President Banda was insulting the intelligence of Zambians by associating with a person who had cases in a shameful and immoral alliance.
“President Banda would only gain the respect he desperately needs from the Zambian people if he begins to interact with individuals who are morally upright and not people who have brought misery to this country,” he said.
He said the general citizenry expects the president to be exemplary and to prioritise moral governance in the execution of his executive duties adding that his alliance with Chiluba was unacceptable and must be resisted.
On Saturday, President Banda said it was disturbing to see young priests in the forefront of insulting or using derogatory language when addressing elders.
President Banda has urged the Church to actively get involved in promoting political dialogue and reconciliation at both national and local levels as the country approaches the 2011 elections.
Speaking at the installation of Alick Banda as Bishop for Ndola Diocese at the Cathedral of Christ the King in Ndola , President Banda said Catholic bishops as shepherds of the people had a divine obligation to comment on issues of national importance.
Meanwhile, Zambia Episcopal Conference (ZEC) president Bishop George Lungu has said the Church will continue having dialogue with government and any political party on issues affecting the people.
Bishop Lungu said the Catholic Church would continue to partner with government on issues that promote human dignity.
Vatican Ambassador to Zambia Apostolic Nuncio Girasoli said the church was looking forward to seeing the new Bishop overcoming the challenges facing Ndola Diocese.
Labels: AUGUSTINE MWEWA, CATHOLIC CHURCH, FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Read more...
‘Do what needs to be done’
By Editor
Tue 02 Feb. 2010, 04:01 CAT
MANKIND’S ability to speak up, to speak out has been the bedrock of civilisation.
Docility has never improved anything. If something is wrong, there is need to speak out against it, to denounce it and demand change. It is as a result of this realisation that tyrannical regimes the world over and throughout the centuries have tried to silence, to suppress those who attempt to speak out.
There are so many things that are not right in our country; that are wrong in the way the affairs of our country are managed. But very few citizens are rising up to denounce that which is wrong and seek for that which is right to be done. You switch on the radio every day, you only hear the same voices speaking out – Proud, Konoso and so on and so forth. The same voices every day. It is the same George Mpombo, Michael Sata, Hakainde Hichilema, Lee Habasonda, Reuben Lifuka, Fr Frank Bwalya, Bishop Paul Duffy, among a few others, speaking out every day in a population of about 12 million when there could be 12 million voices.
Life is often unfair. The world in which we live is not always just. The parable of the African boy tells it all. Walking along the bank of a river one day, he was distracted by the cry of a crocodile in distress. The crocodile told the boy that it had come out in search of food for its little ones and was caught in the hunter’s net. It did not mind dying, but for the sake of the hungry young ones, it asked the boy to set it free. The hesitant boy was reassured by the reptile that it would never harm a boy that came to its rescue. Just as the boy released the reptile from the last string of the net, it caught the boy between its jaws. The boy accused the crocodile of perfidy. It replied that, when hungry, crocodiles eat whatever they could get hold of and that the boy was a fool to believe it. “This, my dear boy, is life,” concluded the reptile.
The crocodile asked the boy to check with the crow that was sitting on a tree nearby if it was unjust. The crow agreed with the crocodile saying that it had on a tree a nest with two young ones which a snake swallowed, just two days earlier. All the pleas of the crow not to harm the young ones did not stop the snake. That, the crow said, was the world! It was a donkey that the boy consulted next at the suggestion of the crocodile. The donkey told the boy how it had worked for its master for 10 years and, now that it was too old to work, the master had just turned it out to feed on scraps of paper and scarce grass. That was the law of the world, concluded the donkey.
Then came a fox whom the crocodile was happy to let the boy consult. His first condition before any discussion was that no dialogue was fair under duress and so the crocodile had to release its hold on the boy’s leg. The fox added that if at all the boy showed the slightest sign of running away, the crocodile could knock him down with its powerful tail. As soon as the crocodile released the boy’s leg, the fox shouted to the boy to run for his life. To the surprised crocodile, the fox said, “This is life, my dear, as you told the boy”.
It is clear that we are not always free and responsible as regards the situations we are put in, but we are free and responsible as to what we do about them. Holiness often consists in the way we face these situations. The holy person finds the ‘kingdom of God’ where he is and finds his peace doing God’s will there. This is the distinction between Christians and the disciples of Christ. Christians see in Christ a prophet (Matt. 16:13-16) and they go to him in fear and when in need, whereas the disciples accept Christ as their way, truth and life, that is, they seek only his will and do it.
The mature person while accepting serenely the things that cannot be changed, puts his heart and soul in transforming whatever can be changed into situations more worthy of the kingdom. Hence the saying: “I do not believe in a fate that falls on men and women however they act; but I do believe in a fate that falls on them unless they act”. A mature person, a responsible person takes responsibility for his life and acts with the power God has given him.
He does not wait for a miracle in situations where human effort can find the solutions. While going through a forest once, two pious people saw a lion at a distance. One of them said: “There is no reason why we should flee; the Almighty God will certainly protect us.” And the other replied: “No, brother, come, let us run away. Why should we trouble God for what can be accomplished by our own effort?” The formula of St Ignatius of Loyola fits here: “Let this be the first rule of action: so trust in God, as if successful results depended entirely on yourself and not at all on God; nevertheless make each effort as if the result depended entirely on God and not yourself”. This is the mystery and challenge of God’s presence within us. Moses had to do the “dirty job” and get all the knocks; yet it was with the power he had from God that he accomplished the wonderful things he did. “Do what needs to be done,” is the secret of holiness. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven” (Matt. 7:21).
The quitter, the pious martyr, will find the problem too hard, the challenge too demanding. He forgets that “God is faithful, and will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (ICor. 10:13).
It often happens that we are hurt by the behaviour of others. So many put up with such situations helplessly and suffer. Some even consider such suffering as participation in the cross of Christ. But Christ did not go in search of the cross. He accepted the cross in order to be faithful to his mission. We are invited by the Lord, who made us in his image, to confront assertively and lovingly those who hurt us, in order to establish better relationships.
To give up even an attempt to bring this hurt and pain in the world, including our own, is defeatism and not taking up the cross to build the Kingdom. There was the bossy superior who had the habit of scolding and correcting his subjects in public and in anger. There was heartache in the community on this account. One subject, when treated that way, told him politely and firmly in private: “I would like to work here without fear. I would like to relate with you with mutual love and respect. If I make a mistake, you have the right to point it out, but not in public or in anger. I have the right to my self-respect. If you shout at me again, I will have to tell you then and there what I am telling you now.” The subject was never again shouted at. She did not go about as a helpless wimp, nor was she treated as one.
Experience shows that this type of confrontation, this kind of assertive confrontation which neither blames the other, nor goes beyond clear verifiable facts, along with the expression of one’s feelings, helps the other person see your point of view, especially your pain. It takes practice to use this approach properly. Our culture tends to make us blame others or attribute to others more than what they have actually done and at the same time omit the expression of feelings. Often it is enough to tell people how their behaviour hurts us and they usually make a serious effort to stop such behaviour, for most people are good at heart. They behave badly because they do not know that their behaviour hurts us. Hence the need to speak out, to speak up, to denounce that which is wrong.
In our hurt and anxiety that this method may not work, we escape saying that it won’t work, nothing will change. The result is that we get hurt again and again and feel victimised. To face courageously the realities of life means not to accept a victim’s position. Another escape we use to avoid confronting issues maturely and responsibly when needed is to say, “But people should know”. The fact is that people often do not know how or how much they hurt us. Have we not ourselves been surprised when told that such and such an act or word of ours hurt someone?
What is important about a mature and responsible person is that he is willing to speak out, speak up, to act, to take the initiative to improve the situation, in contrast to the immature and irresponsible person who just waits for things to happen. If a situation bothers you, the best thing to do is to make the changes necessary for your own comfort. Insisting that the blame be placed where it belongs and that the person at fault must be the one to change, may only lead to further suffering, misery and unhappiness and impoverishment.
Speaking out, speaking up, taking action is not easy. But it is worth the effort. “Enter by the narrow gate…for the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few” (Matt. 7:13-14). “From the days of John the Baptist until now the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force” (Matt. 11:12).
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Read more...
‘We all have a role to play’
By Editor
Tue 19 Jan. 2010, 04:00 CAT
For as long as some of our people feel they are not allowed democratic participation in decision-making processes, and cannot elect their leaders in truly free and fair elections, there will always be tension and conflict.
And as Bishop Paul Mususu has aptly put it, “Zambia cannot be democratic if certain sections of society feel their freedom is being stepped upon”. It is not going to help to stifle anyone and “the noble thing that leaders could do is to listen and not to be vindictive”.
And there is need to heed Bishop Mususu’s advice on this score: “We are all stakeholders and it is only fair to listen to one another. We all have a role to play in the country, in a democracy in educating and sensitising people on what is happening. If the people left politicians to do whatever they wanted, they would just concentrate to please what puts bread and butter on their plate.”
The great lesson of our time is that no regime can survive if it acts above the heads of the ordinary citizens of the country.
And those in our government, and all those in our politics should know that this country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless it’s a good place for all of us to live in.
Throughout the world, thugs and despots – some democratically elected, and some not – solemnly give lip service to “democracy” and “freedom”, while doing everything in their power to destroy them. We are seeing this in this country. Rupiah Banda and his friends are doing everything they can to destroy democracy and freedom in this country while giving lip service to them.
To have a free and peaceful nation, we must create a society in which the inalienable rights of the individual are again respected, and the powers of government are strictly limited. We must make sure that the exercise of power must be the constant practice of self-limitation and modesty.
This means abolishing most of our immunity roles and the abuse of our judicial process and ensure that friends and agents of those in power are not freed from legal responsibility when they steal public funds, torture or murder. It means creating truly independent judicial institutions with the power to investigate and indict corrupt government officials whatever their rank or connections. We should not allow the destruction of freedom under the guise of building and protecting democracy.
Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democratic rights and freedoms. Freedom of expression is essential in enabling democracy to work and public participation in decision making. Citizens cannot exercise their right to vote effectively or take part in public decision making if they do not have free access to information and ideas and are not able to express their views freely. Freedom of expression is thus not only important for individual dignity but also to participation, accountability and democracy. Violations of freedom of expression often go hand in hand with other violations, in particular the right to freedom of association and assembly.
The right to freedom of expression upholds rights of all to express their views and opinions freely. It is essentially a right which should be promoted to the maximum extent possible given its critical role in democracy and public participation in political life.
There may be certain extreme forms of expression which need to be curtailed for the protection of other human rights. Limiting freedom of expression in such situations is always a fine balancing act. One particular form of expression which is banned in some countries is “hate speech”.
There is a fine balance between holding the right to freedom of expression and protecting other human rights. The success of such laws has often been questionable and one of the consequences has been to drive hate speech underground.
In the present situation of our country where poverty, ignorance, disease, among other problems, dominate, all Zambians should give the fullest expression to their initiative which alone can ensure the overcoming of these problems. This initiative must be demonstrated in their courage and ability to raise questions, voice opinions and criticise defects.
Otherwise, very little, if not nothing, will come from our efforts. But the exercise of such initiative depends of the spread of democracy in our country. It cannot be brought into play if there is not enough democracy in our country. Only in an atmosphere of democracy can large numbers of people be brought forward.
Anyone should be allowed to speak out, whoever he may be. And it does not matter if he says something wrong. Leaders at all levels have a duty to listen to others. And here, two principles must be observed:
Say all you know and say it without reserve; Don’t blame the speaker but take his words as a warning. Unless the principle of “Don’t blame the speaker” is observed genuinely and not falsely, the result will not be “Say all you know and say it without reserve”.
As Bishop Mususu has correctly suggested, education in democracy must be carried on in our country so that our people can understand the meaning of democratic life and the way it should be put into practice.
Only in this way can we really extend democracy in our country and at the same time avoid ultra-democracy and laissez-faire which destroys discipline. Democracy is meant to strengthen discipline, efficiency, effectiveness and orderliness in the nation, not to weaken them.
The most fundamental goals of democracy, in our view, are to make rulers accountable and answerable for their actions and policies; to make the citizens effective participants in choosing those rulers and regulating their actions; to make the society as open and the economy as transparent as possible; and to make the social order fundamentally just and equitable to the greatest number possible.
Accountable rulers, actively participating citizens, open society and social justice – appear to be the fundamental ends of democracy. There is need to make those in government more accountable and answerable in their use of power. For most of the time, our politicians have their say.
There is need to find time for the people also to have their day. For most of the time, our politicians are speaking to each other, at each other and past each other. They have parliamentary sessions and they have sittings of the National Constitutional Conference. But beyond the walls of Parliament Building and Mulungushi International Conference Centre, there is growing impatience with their speechifying. Our people see it as the responsibility and task of their politicians to give each Zambian an essential piece of dignity in their lives – the dignity that comes from having a solid roof over your head, running water and other services in an established community.
For this reason, we see democracy as a growth in the confidence, in the power of ordinary people to transform their country, and thus transform themselves. We see democracy as a growth in the appreciation of people organising, deciding, creating together. And in the final analysis, we see democracy as a growth of fraternal love. This is why in democratic states, authority comes from people who have power to elect their leaders.
We value the democratic system in as much as it ensures the participation of all citizens in making political choices, guarantees to the governed the possibility of electing and holding accountable those who govern them, and of replacing them through peaceful means when appropriate. We see the value of democracy in enabling people to come together with different interests to work for the common good. All citizens are called to participate actively and responsibly in the governance of their country. Individual citizens are obliged to make their specific contributions to the common good – government and the people should co-operate together.
And for all we have said, democracy itself guarantees nothing. It offers instead the opportunity to succeed as well as the risk of failure. In Thomas Jefferson’s ringing but shrewd phrase, the promise of democracy is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.
Democracy is then both a promise and a challenge. It is a promise that free human beings, working together, can govern themselves in a manner that will serve their aspirations for personal freedom, economic opportunity and social justice. It is a challenge because the success of the democratic enterprise rests upon the shoulders of its citizens and no one else.
Government of and by the people means that the citizens of a democratic society share in its benefits and its burdens.
Josef Brodsky, Russian-born poet and Nobel Prize winner, once wrote, “A free man, when he fails, blames nobody.” It is true as well for the citizens of a democracy who, finally, must take responsibility for the fate of society in which they themselves have chosen to live. In the end, we get the government we deserve.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PAUL MUSUSU, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
‘We all have a role to play’
By Editor
Tue 19 Jan. 2010, 04:00 CAT
For as long as some of our people feel they are not allowed democratic participation in decision-making processes, and cannot elect their leaders in truly free and fair elections, there will always be tension and conflict.
And as Bishop Paul Mususu has aptly put it, “Zambia cannot be democratic if certain sections of society feel their freedom is being stepped upon”. It is not going to help to stifle anyone and “the noble thing that leaders could do is to listen and not to be vindictive”.
And there is need to heed Bishop Mususu’s advice on this score: “We are all stakeholders and it is only fair to listen to one another. We all have a role to play in the country, in a democracy in educating and sensitising people on what is happening. If the people left politicians to do whatever they wanted, they would just concentrate to please what puts bread and butter on their plate.”
The great lesson of our time is that no regime can survive if it acts above the heads of the ordinary citizens of the country.
And those in our government, and all those in our politics should know that this country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless it’s a good place for all of us to live in.
Throughout the world, thugs and despots – some democratically elected, and some not – solemnly give lip service to “democracy” and “freedom”, while doing everything in their power to destroy them. We are seeing this in this country. Rupiah Banda and his friends are doing everything they can to destroy democracy and freedom in this country while giving lip service to them.
To have a free and peaceful nation, we must create a society in which the inalienable rights of the individual are again respected, and the powers of government are strictly limited. We must make sure that the exercise of power must be the constant practice of self-limitation and modesty.
This means abolishing most of our immunity roles and the abuse of our judicial process and ensure that friends and agents of those in power are not freed from legal responsibility when they steal public funds, torture or murder. It means creating truly independent judicial institutions with the power to investigate and indict corrupt government officials whatever their rank or connections. We should not allow the destruction of freedom under the guise of building and protecting democracy.
Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democratic rights and freedoms. Freedom of expression is essential in enabling democracy to work and public participation in decision making. Citizens cannot exercise their right to vote effectively or take part in public decision making if they do not have free access to information and ideas and are not able to express their views freely. Freedom of expression is thus not only important for individual dignity but also to participation, accountability and democracy. Violations of freedom of expression often go hand in hand with other violations, in particular the right to freedom of association and assembly.
The right to freedom of expression upholds rights of all to express their views and opinions freely. It is essentially a right which should be promoted to the maximum extent possible given its critical role in democracy and public participation in political life.
There may be certain extreme forms of expression which need to be curtailed for the protection of other human rights. Limiting freedom of expression in such situations is always a fine balancing act. One particular form of expression which is banned in some countries is “hate speech”.
There is a fine balance between holding the right to freedom of expression and protecting other human rights. The success of such laws has often been questionable and one of the consequences has been to drive hate speech underground.
In the present situation of our country where poverty, ignorance, disease, among other problems, dominate, all Zambians should give the fullest expression to their initiative which alone can ensure the overcoming of these problems. This initiative must be demonstrated in their courage and ability to raise questions, voice opinions and criticise defects.
Otherwise, very little, if not nothing, will come from our efforts. But the exercise of such initiative depends of the spread of democracy in our country. It cannot be brought into play if there is not enough democracy in our country. Only in an atmosphere of democracy can large numbers of people be brought forward.
Anyone should be allowed to speak out, whoever he may be. And it does not matter if he says something wrong. Leaders at all levels have a duty to listen to others. And here, two principles must be observed:
Say all you know and say it without reserve; Don’t blame the speaker but take his words as a warning. Unless the principle of “Don’t blame the speaker” is observed genuinely and not falsely, the result will not be “Say all you know and say it without reserve”.
As Bishop Mususu has correctly suggested, education in democracy must be carried on in our country so that our people can understand the meaning of democratic life and the way it should be put into practice.
Only in this way can we really extend democracy in our country and at the same time avoid ultra-democracy and laissez-faire which destroys discipline. Democracy is meant to strengthen discipline, efficiency, effectiveness and orderliness in the nation, not to weaken them.
The most fundamental goals of democracy, in our view, are to make rulers accountable and answerable for their actions and policies; to make the citizens effective participants in choosing those rulers and regulating their actions; to make the society as open and the economy as transparent as possible; and to make the social order fundamentally just and equitable to the greatest number possible.
Accountable rulers, actively participating citizens, open society and social justice – appear to be the fundamental ends of democracy. There is need to make those in government more accountable and answerable in their use of power. For most of the time, our politicians have their say.
There is need to find time for the people also to have their day. For most of the time, our politicians are speaking to each other, at each other and past each other. They have parliamentary sessions and they have sittings of the National Constitutional Conference. But beyond the walls of Parliament Building and Mulungushi International Conference Centre, there is growing impatience with their speechifying. Our people see it as the responsibility and task of their politicians to give each Zambian an essential piece of dignity in their lives – the dignity that comes from having a solid roof over your head, running water and other services in an established community.
For this reason, we see democracy as a growth in the confidence, in the power of ordinary people to transform their country, and thus transform themselves. We see democracy as a growth in the appreciation of people organising, deciding, creating together. And in the final analysis, we see democracy as a growth of fraternal love. This is why in democratic states, authority comes from people who have power to elect their leaders.
We value the democratic system in as much as it ensures the participation of all citizens in making political choices, guarantees to the governed the possibility of electing and holding accountable those who govern them, and of replacing them through peaceful means when appropriate. We see the value of democracy in enabling people to come together with different interests to work for the common good. All citizens are called to participate actively and responsibly in the governance of their country. Individual citizens are obliged to make their specific contributions to the common good – government and the people should co-operate together.
And for all we have said, democracy itself guarantees nothing. It offers instead the opportunity to succeed as well as the risk of failure. In Thomas Jefferson’s ringing but shrewd phrase, the promise of democracy is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.
Democracy is then both a promise and a challenge. It is a promise that free human beings, working together, can govern themselves in a manner that will serve their aspirations for personal freedom, economic opportunity and social justice. It is a challenge because the success of the democratic enterprise rests upon the shoulders of its citizens and no one else.
Government of and by the people means that the citizens of a democratic society share in its benefits and its burdens.
Josef Brodsky, Russian-born poet and Nobel Prize winner, once wrote, “A free man, when he fails, blames nobody.” It is true as well for the citizens of a democracy who, finally, must take responsibility for the fate of society in which they themselves have chosen to live. In the end, we get the government we deserve.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PAUL MUSUSU
Read more...
Words of wisdom from Sindamisale
Written by Editor
For all his problems, there is something very noble about Col Panji Kaunda. Apart from being noble and humble, Col Panji is politically very honest. Relationships, alliances and other engagements don’t seem to deter him from speaking the truth on matters that affect the masses of our people. The other thing is that he is a very practical man. The problems he brings out are ones born out of personal experiences, out of his humble life in the rural areas of Chadiza, in Sindamisale.
Col Panji doesn’t have complicated theories about politics or about the economy. When he speaks, it’s out of experience, out of his daily interactions with people. He is part of the people of Sindamisale and he faces and shares in all their problems. And when a person of his type speaks, there is need to pay attention to what he says. He may not have all the explanations for what is happening and why things are that way, but he will certainly give us a correct picture of what is happening without any exaggeration or bias.
Col Panji says those in government are spending much of their time fighting the opposition and the press, especially The Post. This cannot be disputed because it is true. Rupiah Banda’s government has been guided by the wish to destroy The Post; and by the determination to be re-elected in 2011 for another term. That is not a recipe for governing well. One cannot run an administration forever on such a narrow agenda. With the passage of time, such an agenda can start to prove disastrous. The signs of failure on the part of Rupiah and his government may today not be so visible, but they will soon grow and glow.
Rupiah and his government are too bossy, too arrogant, too contemptuous of other citizens who don’t belong to them, who don’t shower them with praises. They are too little criticised by those close to them.
But the wheel of fortune turns and that which once appeared fresh, good, with the passing of time goes to seed.
Rupiah himself appears to be out of touch. And many people today see him as an inept, arrogant and out of touch old man who is there just to enjoy himself and to get on with very little work. And his personal mannerism, and of those around him, are starting to grate on the public. And some of it is insensitivity – using language that is out of touch with the people’s views when their jobs and self-esteem are at stake.
Corruption has also disgraced Rupiah’s government in the eyes of the public. Their perception is of corruption and unfitness for public service. And this distasteful perception can endure and do him and the MMD damage for a long time.
There is need for Rupiah and his friends to face these issues head on and deal with them. Certainly, Rupiah and his friends need to do a lot about themselves. Today they may look very strong and confident. But many problems lie ahead. They don’t seem to know where they are headed, and that is very dangerous. Rupiah’s leadership appears directionless: he appears to be in control, but no one knows where he is heading. We all make mistakes in our various undertakings, in our careers.
But few people have been consistently wrong on all the great issues that faced our nation over the last 10 months, as Rupiah has been. Rupiah seems to have serious difficulties defining the purpose of his government. Everyone can detect no sense of direction. There is a lot of rhetoric on Rupiah’s part. But he will in the end be judged not on what he says but on what he will do.
There is need for Rupiah and his friends to start recognising the magnitude of their problems. And this is where honest people like Col Panji come in. An obsession to destroy The Post will not help them in any way. It may even end up as their undoing. We don’t understand why the genuinely good intentions of The Post’s criticism of their deeds, of their ways are sneered at, while they appear to be a permanent quest on their behalf to bring The Post down. It is baffling.
Again, our own and only explanation is that genuine goodness is threatening to those at the opposite end of the moral spectrum. The destruction of The Post and the triumph that may accompany it will mean nothing to them and this country. What they should triumph in is the effort to implant hope in the breasts of the millions of our suffering people.
As Col Panji has correctly observed, they are spending so much time fighting us and there is nothing on the ground they are doing to improve the lot of our people who live in rural areas. There is nothing which makes people more appreciative of a government than that it should be able deliver services; than that it practically cares about them all the time.
Caring for the people is the best way to show political strength and not through arrogance and abuse of power. After all, caring for the people, especially the poor, is the essence of strength. We say this because strength, power, authority without care is savage, brutal and selfish. Political strength, political power with care is compassion – the practical action that is needed to help our poor people lift themselves to their full stature. That’s real care. And our people don’t need to wait for some stroke of good fortune, some benign giant, some socially conscious Tarzan or Samson to come along and pick the wretched of the earth.
What we need is a government that brings people together, that with humility coordinates so that every one of us, in our own way, can contribute and every one can benefit, and every one can have some responsibilities and rights. This is how the strong, the politically strong can help to lift those who are weak, the poor, the needy; that is how we can make the sick whole, that’s how we can give talent the chance to flourish and make every one contribute to the progress of our country.
And this is the whole purpose of our defence of the rights and dignity of every one of our citizens because only through collective strength and care can we move this country forward. And when we speak of all these things, we are not in any way trying to fulfill that nightmare that Rupiah and his friends try to paint, try to saddle us with. Ours is a multi-party democracy, a plural nation and as such, we are not talking about uniformity of views and so on and so forth; we are not talking about regimentation where every one of us kneels before Rupiah for favours or jobs; we are not talking about conformity where every one of us queues to take orders from Rupiah because of mass unemployment.
What we are seeking is a state of affairs where our people can speak freely and critically of everything like the way Col Panji is doing without fearing to lose their jobs, their contracts with the government; without fearing to be harassed by Rupiah’s cadres in this way or that way.
We can’t continue to have a government that runs on the basis of personal gain for those who run it and their associates. This is what Rupiah seems to have brought to this country. How many things would have been accomplished by Dr Kenneth Kaunda and his comrades if everything they did was driven by personal gain as it seems to be the case under Rupiah’s government? Yes, KK and his comrades made many mistakes. But for personal gain, never. They did what they honestly believed in to be in the best interest of our people and of their country. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong. But never for personal gain.
We ask our politicians in government to look into their hearts and ask themselves where they are taking this country and if they are comfortable with what they are doing. And let them look down into the faces of their children and ask themselves if they are comfortable with the Zambia they are building for them, if they truly think and are happy that this is a land in which their children can bring up them with a future to look forward to. They should ask themselves if what they are building is a nation with pride in itself, a thriving community, rich in economic prosperity and secure in social justice; a nation of tolerance with an innate sense of fair play.
As we have stated before, this country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless it’s a good place for all of us to live in. Any policy that departs from this will not do. If this country is not a good place for the poor people of Sindamisale, it will not be a good place for Rupiah and his friends, for all of us to live in.
Col Panji has made very good observations, for a man who spends most of his time in rural Sindamisale, on our government’s approach to the problems facing the agricultural sector, the privatisation of Zamtel and the general governance of this country. Col Panji is not their enemy; he is not in a fight, political or otherwise, with Rupiah. It must therefore be easy for them to listen to him and deeply meditate over what he has said. Sometimes it’s important for those in power to mull over things and consider the feelings and views of others – even those they most detest.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PANJI KAUNDA
Read more...
Judiciary has challenges, says Lungu
Written by George Chellah
Friday, June 26, 2009 4:04:33 PM
LAW Association of Zambia (LAZ) president Stephen Lungu yesterday said the Judiciary has challenges that are neither peculiar nor insurmountable. And Lungu said constant attacks on the Judiciary tend to go to the very fabric of its independence.
During a press conference held at the LAZ secretariat, Lungu said the association had noted with great concern that it had become common practice for lawyers to speak off the cuff.
"...And express their opinions publicly without due regard to the effect of their statements on those they comment on, their clients and the members of the public in general," Lungu said.
"As an association, we therefore wish to make the following statement that whereas we recognise that the Constitution has given every citizen of this country the freedom of speech, it is mandatory that all legal practitioners must adhere to the legal practitioner's Act and the rules promulgated there-under."
He warned that every legal practitioner should not engage in conduct likely to bring the profession into disrepute.
"Every legal practitioner being a learned member of the bar and an officer of the court shall not engage in conduct whether in pursuit of their profession or otherwise, which is prejudicial to the pursuit of the administration of justice or which is likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or which conduct is likely to bring the profession into disrepute," Lungu said.
"As an association we are alive to the fact that the Judiciary has challenges, which challenges are neither peculiar nor insurmountable. "
He said the media was certainly not a forum for lawyers to attack the Judiciary.
"The council of the Law Association of Zambia wishes to strongly urge our members to forthwith refrain from using the media as the mode of communicating their grievances against the Judiciary," Lungu said.
"And any lawyer whose conduct will be found to be in contravention of the provisions of the legal practitioner's Act and its rules will be subjected to the necessary administrative sanctions. As council and as an association, we will defend the integrity of the Judiciary against unwarranted attacks."
He said the association could not comment on the case involving newly appointed education minister Dora Siliya because it was currently in court. He said the association would at an appropriate time issue an appropriate statement when the matter was concluded.
"As an association we were preparing to come up with a statement and an appeal was lodged on Friday last week," he said.
Lungu said lawyers had mechanisms through which they could express their grievances.
"Tomorrow [today] we are having what we call a bar bench conference where all lawyers and judges meet to discuss matters that affect the profession. At this gathering all grievances which lawyers have are tabled and all grievances that the Judiciary has got against lawyers are tabled and discussed," he said.
He said the constant attacks on the Judiciary were not good.
"... If we continuously attack the Judiciary on every decision that it makes, it brings the aspect of independence of the Judiciary into question because at the end of the day we will all stop having the confidence we are supposed to have in the Judiciary for the purpose of the dispensation of justice," he said.
Lungu explained that if everyone went to court and complained after that in public, it goes to show that the independence of the Judiciary was beginning to be questioned.
"We should not isolate one matter or two matters and judge the Judiciary as to whether it is independent or not," said Lungu.
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, LAWYERS, LAZ, STEPHEN LUNGU
Read more...
Kibaki backs down on repressive media law
Written by Constance Matongo
Friday, January 09, 2009 5:20:04 AM
KENYAN President Mwai Kibaki has backed down on the repressive media law a few days after he signed the Bill.
And Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) vice-president Amos Chanda has welcomed Kibaki's decision to back down on the recently signed law, raising hopes of possible amendment to the piece of legislation.
According to AllAfrica.com, President Kibaki had directed the country's chief legal advisor and the minister for communications to study amendments proposed by the media fraternity to the Kenyan Communications (Amendment) Act 2008 and the Kenya Communications Act 2008.
President Kibaki also directed Attorney General Amos Wako and information minister Samuel Poghisio to present appropriate recommendations on the proposed amendments to Cabinet.
The new legislation provides for heavy fines and prison sentences for press offences. It also gives the government, above all the information and interior ministries, authority over the issuing of broadcast licences and the production and content of news programmes.
According to the website, President Kibaki stated that he had noted the concerns by the media regarding the two Acts and asked the Attorney General and the communications minister to study the proposed amendments and consult with the media representatives.
President Kibaki's move comes in the wake of intense public pressure on him to protect the constitutional right to freedom of expression and the press.
And Chanda said the media in Zambia hoped that President Kibaki's decision to send back the law was for the right reasons.
“The fact that the President [Kibaki] has responded to pressure in a positive way is a positive step, As PAZA we welcome it and we hope it has been sent back for the right reasons,” said Chanda.
Yesterday, three Zambian media bodies petitioned the Kenyan government through its High Commission in Zambia.
PAZA, the Press Freedom Committee (PFC) of The Post and MISA Zambia condemned the decision by President Kibaki to assent to the bill in spite of heightened protests and appeals not to go ahead.
Labels: AMOS CHANDA, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, MWAI KIBAKI, PAZ
Read more...
Zambia media bodies petition Kenyan govt
Written by Constance Matongo
Wednesday, January 07, 2009 3:07:03 PM
THREE media bodies in Zambia have petitioned the Kenyan government for signing the new retrogressive media legislation.
The Press Freedom Committee (PFC) of the Post, Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) and Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) signed a petition through the Kenyan High Commission.
“We strongly condemn the decision by President Mwai Kibaki to assent to the bill inspite the heightened protests and appeals not to go ahead. This piece of legislation we believe is retrogressive and ill-conceived in nature as it threatens the fundamentals of freedom of expression including freedom of the press,” the statement read. “As media practioners in Africa, particularly, Zambia, we are concerned that Kenyan authorities are setting a bad precedent to other African countries.”
The media bodies stated that it was shocking that Kenyan authorities were working towards stifling the media when most countries in the world were ensuring that press freedom was upheld as one of the fundamental human rights.
In addition, the media bodies stated that the power given to the security minister to restrict media operations in a state of emergency was undemocratic given that a state of emergency was bad enough in a democracy.
“We also believe that discretionary power given to the security minister to switch off broadcasting stations at will is not only excessive but also a serious violation of fundamental freedom of expression of citizens,” read the statement. “The power to seize equipment from ‘erring’ broadcasting stations without court order undermines not only media freedom but property rights of media owners.”
The three media bodies also stated that the new law violated the East African Community Treaty and several other international instruments to which Kenya was a signatory.
The further called on the Kenyan government and other progressive citizens to individually and collectively safeguard democratic practice by upholding press freedom in the interest of good governance and accountability.
They also called on the Kenyan government to avert a possible crisis arising from lack of consensus by all stake holders on the enactment of the controversial bill.
“We note that major stakeholders such as media practitioners, media associations and even Kenyan Coalition partners –orange democratic Movement led by Prime minister Raila Odinga, the general citizenry have not been adequately consulted in this matter,” the statement read in part.
The media bodies also said the Kenyan government should suspend the law and create an enabling environment for further inclusive consultations with all stakeholders.
“We further appeal to the UN, the African Union and other watchdog media organisations to step up the responses to the Kenyan situation,” stated the media bodies./JC
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, KENYA, MEDIA, MWAI KIBAKI, PFC, THE POST
Read more...
Rupiah and the truth
Written by Editor
It’s good to know that President Rupiah Banda does not favour the idea of statutory regulation of the media. And we agree with his view that the media should regulate themselves in order to enhance professionalism as they endeavour to promote democracy in the country. President Banda also says the media should at all times be fair, objective and report only the truth. This is good and all responsible media houses should endeavour to uphold these professional requirements.
This is what we, together with various stakeholders, have been advocating for a long time. Responsible media will always endeavour to report the truth, to be fair and objective. In short, responsible media will always be professional.
And we hope President Banda is being sincere in making these observations. We say this because our experience with politicians is that they are never sincere in most of their public statements. They usually say things which they think members of the public want to hear at that particular time. They don’t say things out of conviction, out of principle. Most of the time, they make pronouncements for political expedience.
It’s interesting to hear President Banda urging the media to report only the truth. Whilst we know what the truth is, we do not know what truth President Banda is referring to. It appears to us that politicians have their own definition of the truth. The truth is that which they want to hear. Anything short of that are malicious lies against them.
The other day, on Monday to be specific, information minister Lt Gen Ronnie Shikapwasha refused to give an interview to our journalist who phoned him for a reaction to Chisamba MMD member of parliament Moses Muteteka who said President Banda’s statement that he was the only President facing the kind of problems he is facing in the history of the country was a sign of failure in his leadership, Lt Gen Shikapwasha refused to speak to our journalist, saying he first needed to speak to Muteteka because “youThe Post like writing a lot of lies”. Muteteka stood his ground and reiterated his earlier statement. And Lt Gen Shikapwasha never came back to us to apologise for accusing us of being liars.
This is how we are abused every day by the enemies of the truth, the liars. If we quoted Muteteka eulogising President Banda, Lt Gen Shikapwasha would have been the first one to praise The Post.
And Muteteka today is facing disciplinary action from the MMD leadership for advising or objectively criticising President Banda on a number of national issues. MMD spokesperson Benny Tetamashimba is up in arms against Muteteka, accusing him of having insulted President Banda.
But Muteteka is not raising such issues for the first time. We remember that a few months before president Levy Mwanawasa died, Muteteka had issued a press statement which we carried in our newspaper urging some ministers to pull up their socks because they were not performing to our people’s expectations. He stated that Mwanawasa was being overworked because some of his ministers were not effective in their jobs. Muteteka further said such ministers were giving Mwanawasa a bad image and that something needed to be done because the buck stopped at the appointing authority.
Indirectly, Muteteka was questioning why Mwanawasa was keeping dead wood in his Cabinet, or government in general. This he did knowing fully well that Mwanawasa was the appointing authority who used his prerogative to appoint. But the fact that one has the prerogative to appoint does not mean his decisions cannot be questioned or criticised in public interest.
And when Muteteka said this, no one to the best of our recollection, including Tetamashimba, threatened disciplinary action against him for insulting Mwanawasa. What has changed today? Why is it that the words which did not constitute insults against Mwanawasa are today very insulting to President Banda?
This is what we mean when we say politicians have their own definition of the truth. The truth is that which they want to hear, a statement in their favour. And because they cannot achieve this all the time in an environment where vibrant and independent media operate or thrive, these politicians want to control such media through statutory regulation. That is why they are trying to justify their wicked and greedy manoeuvres to regulate the media by claiming that the media are irresponsible and therefore should be checked or controlled.
There is no truth in such cheap claims. This is not to say media operations in Zambia are perfect. We have stated before that like in every profession, there are those who practice journalism with honour and integrity while others don’t. But this should not be used as an excuse to legislate against the media. We have sufficient laws in the country to deal with media houses or journalists who want to libel others with impunity. And these laws are there to protect everyone, journalists included. The editor of this newspaper was libeled by one of the state-owned and government-controlled newspapers and he went to court where he was awarded damages which he has already collected. Today as we write, there are other pending libel cases started by us against other newspapers. This is how it should be. Those who are aggrieved at the unprofessional conduct of the media should seek protection from the law because no one has the right to libel others.
But our politicians do not want to hear this language because their worry does not lie in the libel against them, but the criticism from the independent media which in most cases threatens their grip on power or frustrates their efforts to ascend to power. That is why they are not resting until they regulate the media in the manner they deem fit.
However, it is interesting to see how members from the ruling party and government are slowly withdrawing from this position due to pressure from members of the public who want to protect the media, their voice, from being gagged. We are waiting to see how members of parliament from UPND are going to deal with this matter because they strongly came out exposing themselves as an anti media freedom party.
This is the danger of allowing oneself to be used. UPND accepted to be used by the MMD. They went to Parliament and spoke against media freedom, against The Post to be specific. As these UPND members and others from the opposition took turns denouncing The Post, urging the government to sort us out, the MMD members cheered on and responded that plans were underway to sort out the newspaper.
Today, Lt Gen Shikapwasha and President Banda are saying that they are against the statutory regulation of the media. We don’t know what the UPND, the party that craves the leadership of the country, will now say on this matter
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
It’s a good thing to have a free press – Rupiah
Written by Patson Chilemba in Lusaka and Christopher Miti in Chipata
Thursday, December 18, 2008 9:40:42 AM
IT is a good thing for Zambia to have a free press, President Rupiah Banda said on Tuesday. And Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) vice-president Amos Chanda has asked the government not to U-turn on its new position regarding self-regulation of the media.
During a live special programme on Breeze FM in Chipata on Tuesday evening, President Banda however said the media needed to take into account the fact that they had a responsibility to be fair and to publish the truth all the time.
“My personal view is that there is no need for media regulation but if you have seen what happened in the last election, instead of the media regulating themselves saying we are going too far, we are being personal, we are being rude, we are insulting; they thought they had a field day and that’s why there are people out there who are calling for the regulation of the media because of the behaviour of some of you during the last election,” said President Banda.
“What I personally think is that it’s up to how we behave. If the media behaves itself in the manner it should with due respect in the case of men to women, in the case of women to men, in the case of youths to the older people, in the case of the people to their leaders etcetera, we will have a good community making a good use of the media for the benefit of giving the people the information that they need.
I think it’s a good thing that we should have a free press but like all other freedoms, even in your home you love your children to be free but there is a time when you feel that your child has started using the abusive language that they picked up in the street and you would like to advise them not to do it, so I personally I feel that it’s good to have a free press but I would like to ask the press also to take into account the fact that they have a responsibility to be fair and to publish the truth all the time.”
And commenting on President Banda’s statement, Chanda said the statement was a logical conclusion to the debate on the merits of self-regulation as opposed to statutory regulation.
“I hope it brings to an end this debate on the merits of self-regulation as opposed to the demerits of statutory regulation. In fact, that’s why I was saying this is a definitive conclusion to the debate because it has come from the Head of State. We are appealing to the rest of the government bureaucracy and ministers to stick to this and not to U-turn,” said Chanda. “We were actually surprised that it came from the opposition [UPND].”
And Lusaka lawyer Patrick Matibini said the ideal situation was for the media to regulate itself.
However, Matibini urged the media to observe high professional standards in order to ensure successful self-regulation. He said his understanding of President Banda’s statement was that there were no immediate steps to put in place statutory regulating systems.
“I also undertstand the statement to mean that journalists should put in place a working system of self-regulation,” said Matibini. “The onus of ensuring we have a successful regulating system is on the journalists. One of the primary goals of self-regulation is to put into place a mechanism for addressing grievances between journalists and members of the public.”
Labels: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PRESS, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
PAZA welcomes government decision not to regulate media
Written by Margaret Mtonga
Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:48:05 AM
MEMBERS of parliament calling for statutory regulation of the media should now reflect objectively on the issue, Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) vice-president Amos Chanda advised yesterday.
In an interview, Chanda welcomed the government’s decision not to come up with statutory regulation for the media.
He was commenting on information minister Lt Gen Ronnie Shikapwasha’s statement during a Radio Phoenix’s Let the People Talk programme on Friday that the government was not advocating statutory media control. Lt Gen Shikapwasha said it was some members of parliament that complained during debates in Parliament last month and felt that the private media was exceedingly unethical before and during the October 30 election. He said it had never been government’s position to regulate the media, but only noted that since 1999, the media had lamentably failed to come up with a generally accepted self-regulation mechanism.
And Chanda said the position taken by the government not to come up with statutory regulation of the media was a positive step in enhancing the growth of Zambia’s young democracy.
“On behalf of Press Association of Zambia and other media bodies, we are happy that the government has taken our submissions of self-regulation,” Chanda said. “The media bodies have always advocated for self-regulation and this is a positive move in the progression of freedom of expression in the country.”
He said even if the government had delayed in responding to calls by the media to regulate themselves, its decision was gratifying.
“The government has taken a commendable step of not regulating the media through statutory means,” Chanda said. “The government has really taken time to respond to media submissions of self-regulation, but we are happy because the decision has not been done in a hurry.”
Chanda said the move would give an opportunity to members of parliament to reflect objectively on the demerits and merits of the media being regulated through statutory means.
“In this case, I mean the opposition United Party for National Development [UPND] members of parliament who strongly called on the government to regulate the media through statutory means,” Chanda said.
He said media organisations would soon be having a stakeholders’ conference whose aim will be to discuss issues of self-regulation.
“We agree with Ronnie Shikapwasha that the media should come up with a mechanism to solidify self-regulation,” said Chanda. “The conference is meant to strengthen the Media Council of Zambia or even change the present council.”
Labels: AMOS CHANDA, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, MEDIA, PAZ, REGULATION
Read more...
