By Henry Kyambalesa
It is encouraging that some of the suggestions made by Zambians regarding the contemplated new Republican constitution are incorporated into the just-released Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2010. We are clearly getting closer to the enactment of a Republican constitution that will stand the test of time!
I, however, wish to make a few comments and suggestions (relating to a sample of Articles in the Bill cited above), which are designed to make the Bill more acceptable to the majority of Zambians, and more credible in the eyes of the international community.
The Preamble:
The first three paragraphs of the Preamble should read as follows:
“We, the people of Zambia, by our representatives assembled in our Parliament,
ACKNOWLEDGE the supremacy of God Almighty;
UPHOLD the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion; …”
There is no country in the world today that can claim to be a Christian nation in its national constitution other than the State of Israel. But, unfortunately, the Holy Land DOES NOT even have an official religion! And only 2.1% of Israelis are designated as being Christian, while 76.3% are designated as being Jewish, 16% as being Moslems, and so forth.
What is really driving us to this level of religious fanaticism? Is it not enough to acknowledge the supremacy of God Almighty in the constitution?
Anyway, the Republican constitution should be a neutral document that should not appear to discriminate against atheists or pagans, or those who believe in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism. All these segments of Zambian society have a genuine stake in the Republican constitution and, therefore, deserve to be respected in spite of the fact that they are currently not as large as their Christian counterparts.
Christian Values and Principles:
Article 144 of the Bill, which is about Christian Values and Principles, should be removed because “directing the policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values” or beliefs which it espouses would be inconsistent with “upholding the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of conscience or religion” that is enshrined in the Preamble.
It is also not consistent with what is enshrined in Article 201(2)(a) of the Bill, which states that a political party shall not be founded on a religious basis, among other things. If it would be permissible for the national government to generate “policies and laws towards securing and promoting Christian values …,” why would it be wrong for a political party to fashion its existence and contemplated policies and laws that would have a religious bearing?
There is also a contradiction between Article 201(2)(a) cited above and Article 201(1)(g), which states that “A political party shall promote the objectives and principles of this Constitution and the rule of law,” which would essentially include the promotion of Christian values and principles!
By the way, there are no such things as “Christian values” or “Christian principles.” I know this because am actually a devout Christian! It is, therefore, not a good idea to load the Republican constitution with such unconventional terms.
Qualifications of Presidential Candidates:
The requirement in Article 34(1)(c) of the Bill that presidential candidates should have been resident in Zambia for 10 consecutive years preceding any given presidential election are clearly designed to exclude certain individuals from contesting the Republican presidency. It is obvious that this Clause could not have been included in the Bill if the MMD presidential candidate in the 2011 general elections—that is, Mr. Rupiah Banda—had been working or studying in a foreign country over the last 5 or so years.
What is really the rationale for such a Clause? Apart from mimicking other countries which have a similar requirement in their national constitutions, what is it supposed to achieve?
There are many reasons why Zambians temporarily reside in foreign countries, such as to pursue studies, to work for the Zambian government in foreign missions, to work at foreign-based branches of companies registered in Zambia, to pursue investment opportunities, to seek employment due to the widespread unemployment currently obtaining in the country, or to serve the country at the African Union, SADC and COMESA regional offices.
These are all good reasons why some Zambian citizens have, now and again, found themselves temporarily residing in foreign countries. Why, then, should their native country’s constitution deny them the opportunity to vie for the Republican presidency?
Besides, there is really nothing sinister about Zambians who may happen to reside in foreign countries for 10 years prior to any given presidential election. In fact, we should consider it a blessing to have citizens who have lived in foreign countries to contest the Republican presidency because of their wide exposure, as bystanders, to the strengths and weaknesses of different modes of governance applied in different national settings.
Technically, the requirement affects even citizens who are currently serving our beloved country in foreign countries, such as Dr. Nevers Mumba and Dr. Inonge Mbikusita-Lewanika, and politicians like Mr. Tilyenji Kaunda who, I believe, conducts a business in neighboring Zimbabwe. Or is there going to be subsidiary legislation designed to exempt such people from the requirement?
No Amendments, Please!
From the beginning of the on-going constitutional process, there has been a general clamor by Zambians for a completely new Republican constitution. Any deviation from this expectation is, therefore, autocratic and a reflection of the political malfeasance which has become ingrained in our beloved country over the years. And, by and large, Zambians expect the new Republican constitution to include the following:
(a) Provision for the appointment of ministers by the Republican President from among persons qualified to be elected as members of parliament, but who are not members of parliament;
(b) Provision for the election of the Republican President under a system where the winning candidate should receive not less than 50 percent plus one vote of the valid votes cast;
(c) Provision for the Republican Vice President to be elected as a running mate to any citizen seeking to be elected as Republican President;
(d) Provision for a consultative, transparent and accountable debt contraction law designed to give power to Parliament to oversee and approve all loans to be contracted by the government on behalf of Zambians; and
(e) Provision for religious neutrality by removing the declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation and any related Articles and Clauses.
If these concerns cannot be addressed now, we should hold the forthcoming tripartite elections under the 1996 constitution in its current form. There is really no wisdom in trying to push through a constitutional Bill which has so many contentious issues and inconsistencies—the kinds of issues and inconsistencies which are predictably going to elicit nationwide demonstrations and potentially culminate in losses of property and human life.
HAVENT READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE BUT I SEE SENSE IN WHAT YOU TRYING TO SAY. ON 10 YEARS DOMICILED IN ZAMBIA FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IT IS NECESSARY OTHERWISE YOU HAVE JOURNEYMEN LIKE CLIVE CHIRWA, HENRY KYAMBALESA WHO ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY IN ZAMBIA RULING US. LOOK AT FAZ THEY HAVE PROBLEMS BCOS THE pRESIDENT IS IN DIASPORA AND OUT OF TOUCH OF FOOTBALL MATTERS IN ZAMBIA. MR KYAMBALEASA COME BACK TO ZAMBIA AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE WELBEING OF THE NATION. YOU HAVE BEEN AWAY FOR A LONG TIME MAYBE YOU EVEN CANADIAN NOW
Zambian’s have ears but cant see,they have eyes but cant see.
Henry an analysis befitting of you. I can only say I concur with your conclusion that holding the 2011 tripartite elections under a piece-meal amended constitution is unacceptable. It is preferable to hold the 2011 elections under the 1996 constitution and allow the Zambians to define their future leaders and then see if these will be willing to listen to them. It is very disheartening to see the administration of RB squander an opprtunity to have created a legacy that would have been unbeatable for generations by giving Zambians a constitution that they have desired since October 1964. It is actually without doubt that the notion of ‘christian nation’ has been manipulated by the administrators to keep the divergent views of critiques under control.
The biggest problem with this article is that it is not very informative. We know what needs to be in the constitution, what we would appreciate here is an analysis of what is in the just released bill and what is not. Get it? Or maybe post the bill here so we read it ourselves.
on the 10 year clause….pipo working for our embassy are considered to be in zambia during that period…secondly the person need to have migrated away from the country goin to study is not migration goin to do business in another country is not migration………..all these issue where covered in the NCC………
Even the countries that introduced Christianity to us do not call their countries Christian Nations. They are actually moreChristian in their deeds than, Iam sorry to say this, the crooks who inserted this thing in our constitution.
declaring zambia a christian nation was a political ploy to woo hungary stomach pentacostal pastor’s.U shd have seen how they fllocked 2 state house everyday for some cooking oil.just selfish ploy..we dont need this kind of kafupi thinking.its criminal!
Iyee mwebantu nafuluka ku Zambia mwe!! Ubwali na kapenta nangu isabi, cilemba, räpe, impwa!! (really tasty! nam nam). Inswa!! Umulembwe (ocra?)!! Chapanswa iya kocha! 100% beef sausage!!! Mosi (truly Zambian)!! Iyee mwebantu!
Those who are not able to watch ZNBC TV. MMD have now sponsored Chanda Chimba III on Dstv African Magic hoping to catch a wider audience. How desperate.
What a waste of our time, who the hell is Henry Kyambalesa, it is better to write about why RB ordered his workers to slaughter all monkeys at state house. What is constitution has to do with any normal Zambian?
#8 in which country and town are you? I think the only thing you may not get is Inswa, all the rest of food you can buy, unless WALISHISHITA FYE.
“…There is really no wisdom in trying to push through a constitutional Bill ……culminate in losses of property and human life….”
When Kyambalesa writes, there is always an agenda that he is trying to push. This time it is to conclude with “loss of life”. Bloody thirsty indeed, but forget it no Zambian will lay his life down for your version of the constitution. It was done by an all inclusive conference. If you did not attend NCC because of your failure to think properly, Zambians know that you cannot blame those who found themselves in the majority purely because of your benevolence.
First of all I think that the issue of the constitution is too big to be discussed meaningfully on this blog.
However the following can be mentioned in brief:
(1) The author does not seem to know the interpretation of “resident” in relation to the law in question.
(2) The declaration of “Christian Nation” is not wrong in itself – it is how we interpret and apply it that matters.
(3) Constitutions in themselves do not guarantee good governance. There must be political will.
I am personally very happy with Zambia being called a Christian nation. Some countries say they are Moslem nations. What is wrong with Zambia saying it is a Christian nation? No one is perfect they are saved by the grace of God. No country is perfect and are saved by the grace of God. Most Zambian people are caring, friendly and good people. There is evidence the population have Christian characteristics. Wisdom starts wih the fear of God. A majority of Zambians were educated from Christian schools, Christianity contributed alot to zambia’s through education, values and hospitals etc. Zambia is a Christian nation and the people’s hearts love God. Leave the Christian part in the constitution.
If Henry Kyambalesa puts Christianity on the ballot. He will be shocked how many people would vote for Zambia to be called a Christian nation. Why does he want to remove Christianity from the constitution when a majority of Zambians are Christians? Zambia allows other religions to freely practice their faith so it does not affect them.
#4 mwine, search for “related news” you’ll find it I had a glimpse at it, aii..
#15, so much for brainwashing bizz, in’it?
this issue outlined can not included in the constitution before the next years elections specially 50% pus one because mmd knows if allow that then is gone. ministers outside mp cannot because current govt get bootlickers out of that.
Ba Kyambalesa, the only mistake you made was to state that the declaration of this country as a Christian nation must be removed. There is no life without Christ. May the good Lord deliver you deliver us from such thoughts. Actually this is what we need most as a nation.