NOT so long ago, the Zambian government invited Irene Khan, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, to undertake a fact-finding mission to our nation on the alleged human rights violations. Ms. Khan was in the country for 10 days. During her sojourn, the UN rapporteur had an opportunity to interact with inter alia, cabinet ministers, members of parliament, the judiciary, civil society organisations, and the fourth estate – the press and news media. Of course, she also engaged the Republican President, His Excellency Hakainde Hichilema at the end of her tour of duty.
If we may put it in her own words; she is the first United Nations Special Procedures mandate holder to visit the country in the last 8 years, and the first-ever civil and political rights mandate holder to be invited to Zambia.
What does this entail?
The New Dawn Administration has got nothing to hide as far as protecting and upholding human rights is concerned otherwise doors would’ve been slammed on her!
We are however perturbed by the assessment of her visit. “My overall observation is stark. Human rights stand at the crossroads in Zambia as the country prepares for general elections in 2026 amid major economic challenges, rising political tensions, and polarisation along ethnic and regional lines…..Laws on criminal libel, seditious practices, insults, hate speech, and cybercrimes are being used to prosecute, punish and silence critical voices and must be repealed or revised,” reads part of her preliminary report.
The UN rapporteur has her facts wrong. We are hopeful she won’t even bother to include this particular segment in her final report as it is totally misleading. If we may summon the words of United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres in June 2019: “Over the past 75 years, hate speech has been a precursor to atrocity crimes, including genocide, from Rwanda to Bosnia to Cambodia.”
Guterres was on the right track….hate speech has always been a precursor of the madness of ethnic cleansing wherever it has reared its ugly head. The Holocaust did not start with the gas chambers; it had to take somebody to apportion the blame for Germany’s economic woes on the Jews – hate speech. The genocide against the minority Tutsi in Rwanda was precipitated by decades of hate speech exacerbated by ethnic tensions. The Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina was triggered by constant nationalist propaganda throughout party-controlled media channels demonising the Bosnian Muslim population. To give a better context of the repercussions of “hate speech,” though, we shall restrict ourselves to the genocide in Rwanda.
Although the 1994 genocide in Rwanda was ignited by several factors, “propaganda and hate speech” definitely played a significant role. Extremist Hutu groups, particularly the Interahamwe militia, spread hate speech and propaganda using the radio, newspapers, and public rallies to demonise the Tutsi population while calling for their extermination. One particular radio station, RTLM, constantly bombarded listeners with a barrage of hateful propaganda and frequently incited extremist Hutu violence against Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Kantano Habimana, a radio announcer, encouraged “those who have guns [to] immediately go to these cockroaches [and] encircle them and kill them…” while his counterpart, Valérie Bemeriki, urged her audience to “not [only] kill those cockroaches with a bullet — [but also] cut them to pieces with a machete”.
Given its considerable influence and massive following, the radio station succeeded in stirring up emotions and fueling enormous hatred against Tutsis and moderate Hutus. In the fullness of time, the animosity and tension that had been simmering like a volcano over the years finally erupted like a volcano! During the next 100 days, the streets were littered with corpses – children, the aged, youth, women, and men as voluminous amounts of blood spilled before finding its way to the rivers and turning them red! A record 800, 000 people were exterminated using guns and grenades, and such primitive weapons as machetes, clubs, knives, and spears! These large-scale killings occurred not on the battlefield but in public places such as schools, churches, and markets. In certain instances, homes and buildings were set on fire with several people trapped inside while widespread sexual violence was used as a weapon of war!
This remains a painful reminder to those of us who dwell in Africa of what hate speech can do to a nation if the media or indeed certain individuals are given a ‘blank check’ to say whatever they want; we would be fast drifting towards the Rwanda of the 1990s.
Take for instance, a seemingly inebriated member of parliament who has no qualms making disparaging remarks such as “the villagers of this village are more intelligent than the villagers of that village,” what sort of reaction do you anticipate from common people on the streets? What about an emotional MP who boldly looks into the camera and declares that she belongs to a big tribe that can easily outnumber the police and the military if they took to the streets to protest; isn’t that psyching or inciting members of the public to resort to violence?
The government is in no way ‘weaponising’ any parts of the law to fix perceived opponents; it is a question of maintaining law and order in the land. We shall cite three examples of individuals who have somehow come into conflict with the law in the recent past: a member of parliament, a self-acclaimed civil rights activist, and a journalist.
Independent Member of Parliament for Lumezi, Munir Zulu was arrested and charged for expressing hatred, ridicule or contempt towards persons because of race, tribe, place of origin or colour. The charges came after alleged utterances he made on March 28, 2023, at Longacres Police Post car park, Lusaka after his release from police custody. He asserted as follows, “The villagers of Lumezi, are more intelligent than the villagers of Bweengwa!” This is purely hate speech likely to evoke ill feelings in the affected tribe.
Civil rights activist, Brebnar Changala was arrested and charged by the police for some crude remarks he made concerning the alleged abduction of Emmanuel ‘Jay Jay’ Banda which were considered to be seditious and inciting dissatisfaction against a duly elected government. During his testimony in the Lusaka Magistrates court, a witness adduced that he had watched Changala claim that he had information that the State was recruiting criminals to abduct its citizens. Wouldn’t such remarks make citizens conclude that those in government are indeed terrorists who don’t deserve to continue enjoying power?
Thomas Zgambo fashions himself as a consultant for the online media publication, the Zambian Whistleblower. He was arrested for alleging that the Zambia National Service, an arm of the defense force, was importing “substandard” genetically modified maize from South Africa without informing consumers of any potential harm. Of course, this turned out to be false!
Just in case Ms. Khan has forgotten, in the West, countries such as Germany, Spain, and the United States of America still maintain seditious laws. For example, the rioters who invaded and ransacked Capitol Hill in the States on January 6, 2021, were arrested and charged under the same Laws. In Europe where they seem to be still grappling with issues of race, religion, descent, or ethnic orientation, criminal laws against hate speech are still in place.
Zambians clearly understand what’s better for them. It’s therefore morally wrong for anyone to come and dictate to us what should be included in our statutes or not. Take for instance Munyaule Zambia; a rogue Facebook page. The other day, they published a voice note wherein someone was making disparaging remarks against certain ethnic groups. He singled them as generally having warped minds for choosing to vote in a particular manner.
“You have no brains; you are used to herding cattle in threadbare clothes and gumboots with gaping holes!” he ranted. “Like your forefathers who used to suck blood, you are damn fools and a primitive lot!”
Does Madam Khan surely appreciate the gravity of such sentiments? Does she understand how ordinary people in the Townships or villages are likely to interpret such strong remarks? Bitter seeds of infuriation would already have been planted in people’s minds. It would just be a matter of time before they begin festering like a boil before exploding to unimaginable proportions too ghastly to contemplate!
Prince Bill M. Kaping’a
Political/Social Analyst
The government should be applauded for bringing in Ms. Khan, and I hope they will use her report as a mirror upon which necessary improvements should be reflected. So, sentiments by Bo Kaping’a should be taken with a pinch of salt. Continual improvement must always be the key.
One should understand there are two views out there One from Ms Khan and the other by the cutizens of Zambia
I would prefer to side with the people who every day experience life here rather than someone on a short visit
Government invited Ms Khan to help it perform some sort of self-introspection. Weldone, HH