THE National Constitutional Conference (NCC) democratic governance committee yesterday endorsed a clause of the draft Republican Constitution, which recommends that a winning presidential candidate must have not less than 50 per cent plus one vote.
The committee, chaired by Foundation for Democratic Process executive director, Stanley Mhango, recommended that clause 95 (1) be retained to enhance legitimacy, curb regionalism and integrate Zambians through a popularly elected leader.
Contributing to the debate, University of Zambia dean in the school of social sciences and humanities, Professor Bizeck Phiri, said the clause would help integrate the people in the country.
“This clause does not pose any serious problem. It will bring legitimacy to the people who aspire to be leaders in the country,” he said.
Article 95 (1) states that elections to the office of president shall be conducted on the basis of a majoritarian system, where the winning candidate receives not less than 50 per cent plus one of the valid votes cast and in accordance with article 125.
Mapatizya MP, Akson Sejani, said it would be morally wrong to strike out the article as the majority of the petitioners had recommended that the president should get not less than 50 per cent plus one vote.
Mr Sejani said the clause was one of the benchmarks on which the Constitution making exercise would be judged, as the people overwhelmingly petitioned that the clause be added in the new Constitution.
Press Association of Zambia president, Andrew Sakala, said there was need to add the clause in the new Constitution, arguing that it would enable political parties field credible candidates so that they could compete at national level.
Mr Sakala said the issue of re-runs should not be the reason for shunning the system, saying democracy was not a cheap exercise.
Bwalya Chiti and Chief Kashiba also supported the 50 per cent plus one vote.
Health Deputy Minister, Lwipa Puma, however, opposed the idea of enshrining the clause arguing that the exercise was costly.
Dr Puma said the money to be spent on the exercise could instead be channeled to other needy areas such as education and health sectors.
Dr Puma’s sentiments were also echoed by Luapula Province Minister, Crispin Musosha, who said there was no need to experiment ideas, which were costly.
[Times of Zambia]
I agree with the adoption of 50+1 presidential bid. I donot agree with those ministers who are saying it is costly. How much money do they steal from the government? Bukabolala ebene and today they want to reject what is clear!!!!!!! come on, be serious Musosha. What have you done Luapula? Until now the road from Samfya to Kasaba via Lubwe is not tarred and there is yet not 50+. Many people are jobless in Luapula and you are there only getting fat. Only words, words, words, day in day out. Only cheating us. We need clear win not cheating us like Sata was cheated. Wake up Musosha, do what is good for Zambians, donot be afraid of 50+
bravo! no more presidents with 29% votes. we need a majority.
we do not need to be getting crap from NCC members esp ministers. pliz give the pipo what they want, we have already spoken about 50+ several times. Step in the right direction bena mhango and others supporting us.
FINALLY! We can have a president that the majority votes for rather than one endorsed on us! BRAVO INDEED!
hey! Mr. Mhango, you know Zambia very well that in every election we dont have not less than 5 candidates, which makes it impossible to obtain a 50+1 majority vote result. this package i think should be accompanied by a suggestion that we field in two presidential candidates. this exercise which i very much know that in zambia it will be an automatic one is not only costly but a waste of production time. conducting two big events (normal en by-elections) in a year calls for teachers, agricultural feid officers, clinical officers and others to abondone their duties in order for them to serve as electro wateva.
chawama sana and lets prove the critics like pragmatist and the supporters of MMD. a big sancho
Well done thats what we vary much want.atlest we can have a president for the majority of the voters
VIVA 50+1!!
Quote: Professor Bizeck Phiri, said “the clause would help integrate the people in the country”
Question: Did the same clause help integrate the people of Zimbabwe and Kenya?
Answer: NO, it lead to polarization and more division in these countries, JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO
Lesson: Zambians are bad students of history and its bound to repeat itself
Note: Pf supporters don’t even celebrate, you must be ashamed of boycotting the NCC
Yakosa league nomba. One to be liked by the people for one to be president.
Mcd long time iwe monko where are u now abana pazed they need you? wlibelama sana? come tusunke ka bola boyi
#5 I totally agree with you.This clause is what brings confusion like in the case of Kenya & Zimbabwe,it’s costly for our developing nation especially with our case where we have more than 5 Presidential contestants in one election.It’s not about supporting the MMD party but it’s just logic,even top Zambian lawyers like Sangwa,Matibini,Mwanawasa etc have spoken out against that clause,Mwanawasa has nothing to lose coz he’s not gonna stand anyway so when he gives opinion as State Counsel then we have to trust him.This is a big mistake they are making and many people will regret anyway,it’s part of a learning process,people will learn from this mistake.
#12 & 5 if Liberia had a succesful run-off what cost are you talking about, if the Government can allocate ZMK700 billion for the NCC itself what can stop them from budgeting for a run-off. The confusion in zim is man made it has nothing to do with teh clause itself. And how does it work, first round, count the votes then pick the top two for the run off, what is expensive about that. Let us be progressive guys and give concrete examples, I have give you Liberia, straight out of war, in the bottom ten on the Human Development Index but they managed a run-off. VIVA 50+1 (true democracy and sanity in politics)
Mwamona nomba,the 50 + 1 clause has only been endorsed in the absence of LPM,he is the one who was warning his MPs against this clause.Does some else think what im thinking here?
Mwiinga,no one is talking about Mugabe’s atrocities,we are talking about having a second run off which usually is favourable to the incumbent.Any election is costly but with this clause,it means the cost of elections will probably double,that money can be used elsewhere,anyway,please yourselves,we will see how things turn up when we are faced with a situation where we have 10 Presidential candidates and each of them has a substantial amount of votes from electorates.African politics is full of ”political Engineering” the opposition in countries with this clause have always ended up being the losers.
This is rubbish.The mathematical outcome is the same. The candidate with the most vote wins. Why 50plus?
FINALLY we’got it!!!!
Chaps don’t compare Zambia to Mugabe’s Zimbo or Kibaki’ Masai!!
we are a mature nation.
Yakosa ligue nomba, MMD is worried.
#14 I think this proves that LPM did not predetermine the NCC outcome. His absent but his ministers and MMD cadres are present at the NCC and according to the article they opposed the clause, but it still went through. Meaning that, other independent members of the NCC have enough power to determine the outcome.
The 50+1 issue is the main thing. You reject it, then the constitution will be useless!!!!
I almost forgot about liberia, thanks #14. yah liberia just came out of civil war and they did it. why cant we did it also hey? talk of expenses, we are used. just see how many bye elections have been held under MMD from 1993 up to now? plenty and so the money will come. if we had a transition in 1991 that was peaceful, why doubt ourselves and try to compare our selves to zimbabwe’s atrocities or kenya’s kibakis brutality?
forget, we need a popular prezido who is properly representative of zambia.
This is good for the country keep up NCC
No minority government any more so let us be read for rerun and cost is worthy it for the country than having thieves our money for their pockets
I agree with you 17. LIEUTENANT we cant be compared and MMD is worried for sure
This is what we call the people constitution as the majority have spoken. Those who are calling for the status quo have nothing to offer as just want to protect their jobs.We know we have an obligation to support who ever will be elected.
VIVA 50+1 !!!!!!!!!!!
Zeddy #15, we can have 600 candidates for presidency at the end of the day, the top two are selected for a run off, that is what I understand about the 50+1 unless I do not have teh full picture of which I am open to being corrected. That was my understanding. Peace and life come at a price and no amount of money can be compared to a life, so if this is going to avoid the tension that always preceeds and proceeds an election in this country, people get hurt in every election because of this. In 2006 the result was different, even PF people that wanted to cause confusion accepted the result because there were 5 candidates not 11 as the case was in 2001, my point being I see more consensus.
And for you guys talking about expenses, forget about that, no Government that is well meaning can talk of expenses, and why don’t we talk about investing in the constitution as opposed to spending money on the constitution.
Can someone update us on what Dr Manda is saying about LPM, as a Doctor i think we have to take note of what he is saying.
#no 27 you are on the wrong blog, go and read today’s post
#25 Mwiinga.To a certain degree,i agree with your reasoning but what i am saying is,it doesn’t make much sense to have this clause because the candidate with more votes will always win anyway whether it’s 50+1 or someone winning by 2 votes but definately the cost of elections will go up even treble and we don’t need that because Zambia does not hold enough cash reserves,we don’t want to go back to the era of borrowing to supplement the budget.Anyway,let’s give it a go and see where it will take us,i am just worried because of the amount of political Engineering in africa,it will be difficult to unsit the ruling government.
#28 I am also interested in knowing what Dr Manda is saying but there is only a headline on The Post.The Post,a small tabloid is the only paper i know that charges for you to read full stories so those of us that are not in Zambia cannot get the hard copy from the streets to read full stories.
Zeddy #30 I give you respect in the first instance, you are a mature blogger. I also agree with you in as far as cost of election, look this is what I observed, I am not sure when you were last here, I saw the 2001 election, because the 27% with which LPM won was not accepted by many, there was tension in this country, a few teargases were sprayed, 2006 same story, so why don’t we seek consensus that way, I know the American election of 2000 was also highly questinable, but the 50+1 from where I am standing would install some form of confidence in the system. On Dr Manda, basically Dr Manda to start with is not a neurologist as the post quoted he is a urologist (downstairs), however he is…
cont 31… a well respected medical doctor who has seen it all. All he is saying is that we do not have the correct picture, he is saying we can have a stable LPM in as far as the vital organs are concerned. So the word STABLE is being discredited by a medical professional. Secondly he says a stroke at the back and front of the head have different effects, some strokes would even affect someone’s vision, or speech. So he is questioning stable. In addition Sata a few minutes ago suggested that cabinet would do well to constitute a medical board that can fly to Paris and do their assessment and then give feedback to the nation, that MB can be constitutional, so we shall wait and see.
50+1 is the best, this will make politics interesting. Some people always seem to be scared of change, even if it means well for them.
Results of elections whether free and fair have never been accepted in Africa. Apart from South Africa which is in transtiton and where the ANC is still popular. Tell me when country in Africa wyhose results were accepted by the opposition? Bemba in DRC said no, George Weah, Kenya, KK said no-where were the women, and on and on. My point is that the 50+1 will add to the confusion, I am not against it, but it will prolong the whole thing. I think what we should do is to be nore strict with presidential candidates so that only serious ones stand.
the way foward bane is just majority Presdo, the issue of money is definatley out, this can always be sort & sourced as already pointed out by #13 and others, remember quality is not cheap . Do u remember the national INDABA at mulungushi, how much was spent, what was the outcome & how many of those delegates left mulungushi smiling.
#Mwiinga,i voted in the 2001 elections and i must say that there was no vote rigging however the government is smart,they use rural areas to get votes just like Mugabe and other african leaders do.Just look at how Mwanawasa lost in urban areas in both 2001 & the last elections.African governments target the poor and give them temporary relief food.The ruling govt,is also fond of using parastatals like ZESCO to campaign for them indirectly,you can prove that when they are commisioning new electrification projects etc so the 50+1 will not make much of a difference as to who wins but will add more costs.
Thanx for the tip on Dr Manda,since he’s a urologist,i will not even listen to him.
# 30 the problem with you is Kaso!! Its either you dont live in Zambia to go and read the paper along Cairo road or you dont subscribe to the post on line. To help you, the gist of what Dr Manda said in the post is that he requested the Governmnt to give full extent of Levi s stroke and he criticized the use of the word “he is in stable condition” to describe his current status. Stable can be interpreted as Levy is neither getting better nor worse. Depending on the extent, the stroke can affect his sight and speech . He wants the doctors to give comprehensive details about Levy s conditon! Now you can move on!!
50+1 ili best.
Mwabeleka nobalombwanama abasimbi bajisi nchito yaku-NCC. “One Zambia, one Nation” as it is/were.
Done very very well. Please, make sure you finish that NCC Constitution review as soon as possible so that it can be enacted by Parliament.
This 50+1 % clause needs to be effected before the next Presidential elections if this is possible.
#34 Shidada,spot on!! The issue will add confusion on top of costs,electoral disputes and prolonging the announcement of who the final winner is just brings tensions due to uncertainty.
#37 Mugo: Firstly,Yes,i am not in Zambia at the moment and i would never pay The Post a penny.I don’t have akaso,i would rather spend my money on other things than subscribe to The Post which of crap criticism of the government of the day infact bigger international tabloids and other major news agencies like BBC etc don’t force readers to subscribe.
Secondly,Dr Manda is just expressing his opinion like the rest of us.The relevant people in government & the judiciary will do what they are supposed to do when it’s time to make a decision on what next regarding Levy & his presidency so a urologist like Manda will not push them because they know what they are doing as they are Zambians too.
Good, 50+1 is the way forward. This way we will have leaders voted by the majority of people. I’m sure if ba LPM was around, this clause would have been rejected. So when does this become law? Will it apply to the 90 days election (if we have one?) NCC needs to move fast on this.
Cost is not a problem, copper production has gone up in Zambia, we will have enough change to fund clean and fair elections whatever the cost. The 3% royalties that LPM introduced will cover some of the costs. Gov’t got about USD$400m dollars plus the reserve that gov’t has, cost is not an issue.
So Chaps what is the deal with LPM i mean we know he is unwell ,and wish him well soon, but there is no clarity in all this.
Did SATA travel to france to get first hand info or not ……anyone.
I do not support 50 + 1.
It cannot work in Africa.
#45 Iwe just go to Chainama hospital, just like you call youself, walipena (you are a crazy Zambian indeed).
My fellow Zambians, the presidency is a very serious institution which needs full support from from majority of us. While I have no full backing information, I am sure Zambia has been ruled by divide and rule for some time now – in what we have called regional politics that has brought in an evil known as tribalism.
This 50+1 % clause will give the incoming President confidence to govern effectively. It will allow the President to receive enough votes from atleast 5 of the 9 provinces of our Zed which will essentially strengthen the “One Zambia, one Nation” motto. 4now, let us give it a try. Time will tell how good or bad this will be for Zambia. Constitutions can be changed when necessary.
be carefull its this same 50 + 1 that zimbabwe and kenya went crazy
#47 We will give it a try but the slogan”One Zambia One Nation” is outdated,it should be ”One World One People”.It has no place for a christian more especially in a modern democratic world,Kaunda or whoever suggested that slogan had selfish thoughts.
Please, Zambia is not (like) Kenya or Zimbabwe in any form. Our democracy is far much advanced to compared to most countries in this world.
For once, let us learn to do what is best for ourselves and stop this behaviour of uplifting what is obtaining in other countries. We have been STABLE for 44 years now and some of us want to keep comparing ourselves to those who are still operating as if these are still colonial days.
Let us learn to move forward and do stuff that will work for us as Zambians, and not that which pleases a select few of minority selfish leaders bent on sticking to political power even when it is clear they have lost the elections.
Weldone guys who are behind the 50 + 1 presidential popular vote,those against it,well you are entitled to your own opinion. Its freedom of expression,isnt it but we just have to be objective at times.I mean,hmm,really how do you wind up with a minority president,where even the seat of Govt(Copperbelt inclussive) is controlled by the opposition?
We have not heard of problems with elections in Botswana, Namibia, Tanzania, Mozambiaque to name but a few. It is therefore not correct to say no opposition accepts election results in Africa. Never again should we accept a president being sworn in behind closed doors as in 2001 because he wasnt popularly elected. 51% + 1 ensures that no chancers will take part as candidates. Only those who are certain they are popular will dare stand. Candidates will now be obliged to campaign nationwide and not only on the line of rail. Well done ncc. This will make the back bone of our constitution.
Hooooooooooooooooray! These monirity presidents form useless cabinets
Nice thoughts #49, I will definately give them some consideration.
Continuing with #50 issues, the 50+1% clause reduces the number of candidates for Presidency to 2 in an event that one among the many fails to get such votes in the first round. This gives room for careful thougths by trimmed out candidates and their followers/cadres to make sound decisions on checking their manifestos and comparing them to the 2 candidates’ remaining ones. Hence, proper objectiveness follows and the emerging winner from the run-off has credible mandates from all nationals – Zambians in this case.
I agree with 45. Fine we know that democracy is expensive, thats why elections here in Zambia are mostly funded by donors.Are we going to transfer this extra burden on them or is someone telling me we’ve got extra sources of income.
Soemone said, “cheap is (actually) expensive.” There is no time to go for cheap stuff which you know will not be quality.
Let us go for QUALITY and not quantity. Two reamining presidential candidates when things go that way ensure quality (the cream remaining) at the end of it all.
So let us budget for an expensive election always to sift unserious politicians from the Plot 1 race so as to get the needed QUALITY at state house to run the affairs of our great nation.
50+1% is ok, if the DRC and Liberia could afford,how on earth could Zambia fail, we need a popularly elected leader not with 15% majority.
What confusion do you guys foresee. Someone said it cannot work in Africa, but Liberia it worked, I think Senegal, Sierra leone when Koroma was elected, please give us a counter view that is anchored on fact gentlemen. In Malawi Bingu Mutharika (I think) was also elected on the same clause. Zimbabwe have effected the same, the issue is not with the close, the issue is the electoral process itself, which is not part of this discussion, when the NCC has given us that part which deals with the electoral processes and the necessary institutional arrangements that will make this water tight. Someone said we shoulf manage the presidential candidates, but there is no law atleast at this stage…
contd 58… that regulates the political parties, so anyone who can raise 200 supporters can be nominated. This is a start gentlemen, we have in multiparty democracy for only 15-16 years and I can assure you 200 years from now, someone will be thanqking us for having done this for our country, I am very optimistic that come 2011 the political situation would have changed maybe 3 presidential candidates will be floated, HH, Sata (as he seems not to be giving up) and MMD candidate (Teta LOL). Like someone said this gives the eventual winner confidence that he is ruling 50+1 of the voting population unlike 29% as the case was with LPM in 2001, actually the MMD are now quoting the 46% for 2006.
#55, if we wanted and had the political will, these elections would be funded locally, Kenya, Nigeria and I think anothe african country haev 100% locally funded budgets, what is the difference with us. Kenya does not have oil, it depends on Tourism for its FOREX, so why can’t we do the same. This donor dependency is just an excuse, Government has the ability to raise money locally and fund this budget in full, unless you guys have another fact.
Why worry about the 50% + 1 formula? There has never a better formula than this one! As for expenses, all what the honourable members of parliament should do is to forego their hefty car loans which cost the taxpayers so much money. The resources wasted in acquiring latest models of the most expensives motor-vehicles can be utilised eleswhere for the betterment of the lot of the average Zedian.As for comparing Zambia to Kenya or Zimbabwe, folks you have to know something: let us not take our peace for granted. We must cherish it and priomote unity by integrating the population through a cohesive and reliable electoral system in which a President is legimately elected into office.
Continued from 61…Elected into offie via a majority vote and not through bullying one’s way into office contrary to the wish of the electorate.After all,the Romans said “VOX POPULI,VOX DEI” or the Voice of the People is God’s Voice. So let our politicians play with the people,their employer,as this is tantamount to insukting God, their Creator.
VIVA 50+1 Formula! only the guilty and Political Engineers need to be afraid1
#48, is fake go to school ” Someone should die so that we achieve 50+1″
If DRC can have conduct elections with 50 + 1 who are we not to. this 50 + 1 was there until FJT decided to remove it in 1996. Puma concentrate on your constituency and Ministry with medicies in the hospitals
What are you fearing you fellow Zambians, who told you that democracy is cheap? if you think 50 + 1 is expensive, why did u go for democracy? Muzikula!!! The problem is that you like cheap things, they compromise the quality of our leaders some without substance.
Now fellow Zambians look here, if we dont design our life plan as a Nation, chances are that we are likely to fall into other peoples plans. Guess what they would have planned for us.
Someone above is saying Liberia & Congo DR have managed with 50+1,is there real peace in both these nations you have mentioned and do you really know who funds elections in those countries.Liberia has vast resources like Rubber,Diamonds,Steel etc whilst Congo has diamonds and Coltan,these things are what the west yearn for and will do anything to help these countries so that they are stable,should another country poke its nose in Congo or Liberia or one leader do something,they will be dealt with by the west coz they have selfish interests to protect,why do you think Zimbabwe has not been helped much by the west,it’s coz Zim has nothing to warrant them acting quickly just like Zambia.
Zeddy #67 agreed, there are interets by western Governments and they have been behind the confusions in these states that is one of the reasons why they will never know real peace. This is an advantage for us we have nothing that could be of interest to the western powers, more the reason why we should actually entrench these provisions now than later, this is my opinion.
If you remeber in sub Saharan Africa we were the first to democratise and did it so well though the leadres that took over had undemocratic tendcise sso Forget Zimbabwe and lets Show them how it works
Great! Its what this country needs. Now, could we a vice-president who is a running mate for the president and one elected by the people? This will help us very much in a case where the incumbent fails to continue in office for one reason or another. The vice-president would be able to complete the term for the president to ensure continuity of policies.
Regards.
We deserve better than this bunch of bull.probably the 50+ will help us build a school in chawama.
I do not support the 50 plus 1 amendment.it will result in a worst of resources and bring alot of confusion in the country. The truth of the matter is what we have seen in the past elections, regional voting, with such, its almost impossible to apply the 50 plus one. What if we have a near three way tie, I know that you will say that its the top two, but suppose we have, three candidates with 29, 28, 29 percentages, I would support this amendment if we were to impose on the candidates that they have to show that they have representation in all the provinces
Remember also that candidates like Micheal sata completel do not have represation in other provinces like western, southern and North Western, he simply did not bother to campaign in some of these places instead relying on northern, Luapula copperbelt and Lusaka province
If we truly need a nationally elected president, then we need to have an Electoral college not a popular vote, that way, we will ensure that despite tribalism, the president that rules will have the mandate of the entire nation, i think that will be good for Mother zambia and Africa where we still have to identify ourselves whether you are bemba, Lozi or tonga etc. Pragmatist or Anonymous what do you guys
think?
VIVA NCCC and 50+1…wher art thou sata?
Presidential re-run should be held within 30 days
THE National Constitutional Conference (NCC) democratic governance committee yesterday agreed that a presidential election re-run should be held within 30 days in case the candidates fail to win 50 per cent plus one of the total votes cast.
Sound agreement #76. 30 days is not bad for an election re-run.
# 59-Mwiinga Lusaka Zambia, I have been following your contributions on this forum and am impressed. This 50 + 1 is a milestone for our infant democracy, it will surely bring out Presidential candidates worth their salt. We have been having too many jokers without any following hence their failure to even campaign in all provinces of Zambia. We need to reach a stage where we only have three maxi presidential candidates. Lt Gen. Tembo had a feel of 50 + 1 at the FDD convention where Edith Nawakwi thumped him. Bravo NCC on this. I missed out on Fred & Andy’s daughter, where can I get the whole story.
#73, Good point about representation in all provinces. The only problem with that is that Sata was not the only one who did not have representation in all the provinces. If my recollection serves me well neither did Mwanawasa or HH. So what happens then? The idea is a good one in theory but, I forsee a situation where the incumbent (who has a vast amount of resources) rigs the elections in such a way as to ensure that he/she has appears to have representation in all provinces thus ensuring the disqualification of the opposition presidential aspirants. The electoral college system in the U.S. is flawed in that candidates still campaign in specific regions and ignore several others.
the problem with our ministers is that whatever the president says to them is right or its the gospel truth. in 1991 its mwanawasa and the likes of the lewanikas who broght democracy and the knew exactly what would follow afterwards so for mwanawasa and his ministers to say the 50 + 1 percent is costly for the nation is deny the zambian people the free will to gorvern their country the way they want mind you its the gorvernment for poeple by the people so who is the people, mwanawasa and his carbinet no let the 50+1 go ahead. viva Ackson
Its just a stupid rule that costs poor countries like Zambia more money on elections instead of directing these monies to worthy service delivery to the poor people.I think the 50+1 rule is stupid and very unecessary.
#81 Effective service delivery can only be attained through electing leaders that will guarantee good governance. We cannot run away from spending on elections as these are are an integral part in our democratic dispensation. General elections are only held once every five years. With prudent management of public resources I don’t see us failing to meet this very important obligation.
Good to have new stuff at hand in Zed,is this practicable anyway?I think we need to have balls together guys, other wise we will be like Kenya, Zimbabwe to mention a few.We should not hide just for the sack of changing all this let us look onto the results for our children, relatives and neighbors.This is not to please the masters NO, those days are gone we have to do this just for our own and our children for the good future.
Does this country have enough resources to hold two elections? Is the electoral commission trust worthy? This clause won’t solve this country’s problems. I would rather there was a clause to sentence to death plunderers!
THAT IS A GOOD CLAUSE SO THAT WHOEVBER ELECTED WOULD HAVE BEING VOTED BY THE MAJORITY.
BUT BA PF YOU SURPRISE ME A LOT.YOU CONDEMNED NCC BUT NOW YOU ARE BUSY APPRECIATING THEIR DECISIONS. IF YOU HAVE SEEN THAT IT IS GOOD TELL YOUR PRESIDENT TO CHANGE HIS STANCE AND BE PART OF IT. HISTORY WILL JUDGE HIM HARSHLY.