Monday, November 25, 2024
Subscribe
Home Blog Page 20

HH Suspends 3 Constitutional Court Judges: Power Grab or Judicial Accountability?

Lusaka Times Editor
-
51
HH Suspends 3 Constitutional Court Judges: Power Grab or Judicial Accountability?

HH Suspends 3 Constitutional Court Judges: Power Grab or Judicial Accountability?

In a move that has sparked national debate, President Hakainde Hichilema suspended three Constitutional Court judges Justice Anne Sitali, Justice Mungeni Mulenga, and Justice Palan Mulonda on September 23, 2024. The suspension, based on a report from the Judicial Service Commission and authorized under Article 144(3) of the Zambian Constitution, raises key questions about the balance of power, judicial independence, and the future of Zambia’s political landscape.

This unprecedented action has drawn contrasting reactions. While some view it as a positive step toward ensuring judicial accountability, others see it as an alarming power grab, particularly with the 2026 elections on the horizon.

The timing of the suspensions has led many to speculate about its underlying political motivations. Critics argue that Hichilema’s decision to suspend the three judges is part of a broader strategy to consolidate control over all arms of government, potentially paving the way for political maneuvering ahead of the 2026 elections. The judges in question were involved in key rulings that favored former President Edgar Lungu, including a controversial decision that allowed him to run for a third term in 2016 despite widespread opposition.

One critical voice argued, “This is what we should fight against. A president shouldn’t appoint or fire judges when we have a Judicial Commission. We joke a lot in this country. IG, Chief Justice, electoral commissioners, judges, DEC, DPP, etc., should be jobs based on applications, not likes and politics. This is nonsense.”

This perspective reflects a deep concern about the concentration of power in the Zambian presidency. Many fear that Hichilema’s actions signal an erosion of judicial independence, undermining the checks and balances essential to a functioning democracy. Critics warn that this could lead to a judiciary filled with loyalists who may be more inclined to rule in favor of the president and his party.

On the other hand, Hichilema’s supporters argue that the suspensions are a long-overdue response to judicial misconduct. They point to specific rulings, such as the decision to allow ministers to remain in office after the dissolution of parliament in 2016, which was later criticized for being unconstitutional. These actions, they argue, reflect a pattern of corruption and incompetence that has eroded trust in the judiciary.

One supporter expressed this view strongly, stating, “Well done, Mr. President. How can judges fail to interpret the Constitution? That is gross incompetence. Kindly revoke the suspensions and fire them ASAP.”

For these individuals, Hichilema’s actions represent a necessary clean-up of a judiciary that had become too closely aligned with the previous Patriotic Front (PF) administration. From their perspective, the suspended judges were more interested in serving political interests than upholding the law.

While the suspensions have triggered heated debate, they also raise an important question about judicial accountability. Zambia’s Constitution gives the president the authority to suspend judges, but only based on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission. This mechanism was put in place to ensure that judges could be held accountable for misconduct, while also protecting them from arbitrary dismissal.

In this case, the involvement of the Judicial Service Commission provides some legitimacy to the suspensions. It suggests that the decision was not made solely on political grounds but rather in response to concerns about the judges’ conduct. As one commentator noted, “He is the president of the Republic of Zambia with all instruments of power in his hands. HH to 2090.” For those who support the president, this is a necessary use of his constitutional powers to restore integrity to the judiciary.

At the center of this controversy is the Judicial Service Commission, a body tasked with overseeing the conduct of judges and ensuring they adhere to ethical standards. The commission’s recommendation to suspend the three judges suggests that there were serious concerns about their behavior. However, critics argue that the commission itself may be influenced by the executive branch, raising doubts about its independence.

Some Zambians believe the current system, in which the president appoints and suspends judges, is flawed and open to manipulation. One commentator proposed, “Concerned about the concentration of power in Zambia’s presidency. Wish we could elect our Chief Justices, judges, and judicial officials instead of appointing them. This would promote accountability and independence in the judiciary.”

This viewpoint advocates for a more democratic process in the selection of judges, one that would protect judicial independence and prevent the concentration of power in the hands of the president.

The proximity of the suspensions to the 2026 elections has fueled speculation that this move is politically motivated. Some fear that Hichilema is preparing to replace the suspended judges with individuals loyal to his administration, potentially paving the way for legal decisions that favor his re-election bid. The concern is that this could undermine the judiciary’s ability to act as a check on the executive branch, particularly in the event of election disputes.

Opponents argue that this is an attempt to reshape the judiciary in Hichilema’s image, ensuring that future legal challenges—especially those involving former President Lungu—are decided in his favor. As one critic noted, “He just wants judges who will do his bidding. Instead of focusing on reducing the cost of living, his preoccupation is wanting to fix ECL (Edgar Lungu).”

This fear is not unfounded. The three judges in question played pivotal roles in the legal battles surrounding Lungu’s third-term bid, and their suspension could be seen as part of a larger strategy to neutralize any potential opposition to Hichilema’s political ambitions.

Beyond the immediate political implications, this controversy highlights the need for broader judicial reforms in Zambia. Many have called for a more transparent and democratic system for appointing judges, one that would protect judicial independence and ensure that judges are accountable to the public, not the executive branch.

The idea of electing judges, rather than appointing them, has gained traction among some Zambians who see it as a way to prevent political interference in the judiciary. As one citizen put it, “Let’s strive for a more balanced distribution of power!” This reflects a growing desire for reforms that would reduce the concentration of power in the presidency and promote greater accountability in Zambia’s democratic institutions.

The suspension of Constitutional Court judges Justice Anne Sitali, Justice Mungeni Mulenga, and Justice Palan Mulonda has exposed deep divisions within Zambian society. For some, this is a long-overdue move to hold corrupt judges accountable and restore trust in the judiciary. For others, it is a dangerous power grab that threatens the independence of the courts and undermines Zambia’s democratic institutions.

As Zambia approaches the 2026 elections, the implications of this decision will continue to reverberate throughout the country. The challenge for Hichilema will be to demonstrate that this move was made in the interest of justice, not political expediency. Only time will tell whether this was a step toward greater judicial accountability or a slide into authoritarianism.

Ultimately, the suspensions highlight the need for a more transparent and accountable judicial system—one that serves the Zambian people, not political interests.

by Kantu Mutuna.

Lungu Poised for Major Comeback as Opposition Falters, While Hichilema Faces Political Reality

Lusaka Times Editor
-
28
Lungu Poised for Major Comeback as Opposition Falters, While Hichilema Faces Political Reality

Lungu Poised for Major Comeback as Opposition Falters, While Hichilema Faces Political Reality

As Zambia’s political landscape shifts, the opposition continues to falter in disarray, and rumors abound that former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu is on the brink of making a dramatic comeback. Sources close to the matter suggest Lungu is preparing to exit the United Kwacha Alliance (UKA) in October 2024 and position himself for a nomination under the Tonse Alliance or the People’s Pact. This calculated move could upend the 2026 general elections, as Lungu still commands significant influence and poses a genuine threat to the ruling UPND and President Hakainde Hichilema.

Lungu’s frustrations with UKA’s internal dysfunction are clear, with reports suggesting that he’s displeased with how the alliance handled the expulsion of Sean Tembo, while Saboi Imboela who made similarly controversial statements—was treated with kid gloves. Lungu is said to blame UKA Chairperson Sakwiba Sikota for this bias, further fueling speculation about his imminent exit.

This turmoil within UKA has exposed the cracks in Zambia’s opposition, but what remains equally concerning is President Hichilema’s political approach. While Lungu repositions himself as a serious contender for 2026, Hichilema appears detached, adopting a “know-it-all” attitude that is alienating the very people who propelled him to power. Despite his administration’s long-term vision for Zambia, the President is failing to address the immediate needs of the populace a grave misstep in a country where people vote based on their daily struggles, not future promises.

Hichilema’s strategy to focus on grand plans for infrastructure, economic reforms, and governance is commendable, but it risks becoming irrelevant if Zambians feel their stomachs are empty today. The reality is that politics is often decided by short-term issues. Zambians want results now, not in five or ten years. The “Mr. Nice Guy” politics Hichilema is pursuing might soon become a liability, as the tables could turn dramatically when the electorate prioritizes their immediate needs over lofty visions of future prosperity.

Political analysts warn that Lungu’s potential departure from UKA, coupled with his growing disenchantment with the opposition, could energize his base and attract disillusioned voters. Meanwhile, Hichilema’s inability to listen to the people’s cry for immediate economic relief could be his downfall. History has shown that Zambian voters will not hesitate to oust a leader if their day-to-day struggles are ignored—no matter how impressive long-term plans may appear on paper.

The opposition’s disorganization is undoubtedly working in Lungu’s favor, but the ruling UPND government must also recognize the danger of complacency. President Hichilema’s refusal to heed the voices of the people, particularly when it comes to addressing their pressing needs, may backfire. People vote with their bellies, not with a vision of a distant future.

As the 2026 race draws closer, the political landscape is becoming increasingly unpredictable. With Lungu likely to contest under a new alliance and the opposition in disarray, the UPND must wake up to the political realities at play. Hichilema’s “know-it-all” approach could become a self-imposed obstacle if he doesn’t start addressing the current hardships faced by everyday Zambians. Edgar Lungu is not only re-emerging as a credible contender, but Hichilema’s inability to focus on the now could very well give Lungu the edge in the next election.

In a country where political fortunes can shift overnight, both the opposition and the ruling party must tread carefully. As it stands, Lungu’s chances of reclaiming power in 2026 seem more realistic with each passing day, while Hichilema risks being caught off guard if he continues to underestimate the importance of listening to the immediate concerns of the people. The opposition may be divided, but Hichilema cannot afford to rest on his laurels—because in politics, nice guys don’t always finish first.

By Joseph Ngubeni.
Political Scientist

“Zambia’s Bold Beef Export Ambitions: Will HH’s Vision Overcome the Maize Crisis Mistakes?”

Lusaka Times Editor
-
29
“Zambia’s Bold Beef Export Ambitions: Will HH’s Vision Overcome the Maize Crisis Mistakes?”

President Hakainde Hichilema recently announced that Zambia is poised to start exporting beef to neighboring countries in the coming months. Speaking at the Lwanza Traditional Ceremony in Bweengwa, Southern Province, he highlighted the government’s strategic focus on enhancing cattle production, declaring the Kafue South and North bank areas as cattle economic zones. According to the president, this initiative will boost beef production, improve disease control, and enhance cattle genetics. While the prospects of increased beef exports may appear promising, critics are raising concerns over Zambia’s past experiences with agricultural exports, specifically maize, as a potential warning sign.

In his remarks, President Hichilema also acknowledged the devastating impact of drought on the country, emphasizing the urgent need for Zambia to improve resilience within the agriculture sector. However, as Zambia prepares to export beef, many are recalling the maize export situation that has resulted in the country now importing a product that it once had in abundance. The maize experience serves as a cautionary tale that might soon extend to beef if not managed properly.

Several months ago, Zambia found itself in a precarious position when the government, buoyed by what appeared to be a bumper harvest, approved large-scale exports of maize. At the time, Zambia was praised for its abundant maize production, and the decision to export made sense as a means to bring in foreign currency and boost the economy. However, this short-term economic strategy ignored potential risks, including unpredictable weather patterns, domestic food security needs, and regional demand.

Fast forward to 2024, and Zambia is now importing maize, having fallen short of domestic supply due to a combination of poor planning, climate-induced drought, and over-exportation. The government’s earlier enthusiasm for maize exports inadvertently led to domestic shortages, forcing the country to rely on costly imports to feed its population. This sequence of events has sparked criticism of the government’s export policies, and many are asking whether the same could happen with beef.

Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) President Kasonde Mwenda has been particularly vocal on this issue. He recently commented that Zambia’s experience with maize should serve as a critical lesson as the country embarks on beef exports. “We’ve seen what happened with maize. The government celebrated exporting maize to other countries without fully considering the long-term consequences for the local population,” Mwenda remarked. “Now, we are importing what we once had in surplus, and the cost is being borne by ordinary Zambians who are struggling to afford basic staples. The same mistakes must not be repeated with beef.”

Mwenda further warned that focusing too heavily on beef exports without securing domestic food security could lead to shortages in the future, especially if Zambia faces recurring droughts and other climate challenges. The drought the president mentioned, which has already impacted both maize and livestock production, should be a wake-up call to ensure that the country’s own needs are prioritized before turning to exports.

While the government’s declaration of cattle economic zones is aimed at improving disease control and beef genetics, Mwenda cautioned that there are still significant challenges ahead. The cattle sector, like the maize sector, is vulnerable to climate change and disease outbreaks, which could rapidly reverse any gains made through export initiatives. “Improving disease control and genetics is essential, but the government must also ensure that local consumption needs are met before exporting beef on a large scale. If we fail to do so, we will find ourselves in the same position we are in with maize—importing what we should be producing ourselves,” Mwenda added.

The EFF leader also criticized the government for prioritizing foreign markets over domestic welfare, a pattern he claims has emerged under President Hichilema’s administration. “It is good to export and earn foreign exchange, but we must never do so at the expense of our people. Exporting beef should not lead to a situation where Zambians are unable to afford the meat they produce, just as we are now struggling with maize.”

Mwenda’s comments echo concerns from other political and economic analysts who argue that while agricultural exports can be a boon for the economy, they must be carefully managed to avoid creating vulnerabilities in domestic markets. One of the key issues raised is that Zambia’s reliance on rain-fed agriculture makes it susceptible to droughts and other extreme weather events, which can easily disrupt both crop and livestock production. As such, experts are urging the government to invest not only in disease control and genetics for cattle but also in more sustainable farming practices, including irrigation, to ensure consistent production regardless of weather patterns.

The beef sector, if managed well, has the potential to be a significant driver of economic growth for Zambia. However, the lessons from the maize crisis are a stark reminder that exports must be balanced with domestic needs to avoid creating shortages at home. As Zambia prepares to expand its beef exports, it is essential that the government takes a cautious approach, ensuring that food security for Zambians remains a top priority.

President Hichilema’s push for increased beef exports can be a positive step for the Zambian economy, provided it is executed with foresight and planning. The focus must remain on building resilience in the agricultural sector, as he pointed out during his speech. However, as the maize situation illustrates, unchecked enthusiasm for exports without safeguarding domestic needs could leave Zambia vulnerable to future crises. The government’s actions in the coming months will determine whether this new venture will benefit the country as a whole or repeat the costly mistakes of the past.

by Nathan Siloka.

EFF Voices Concern Over HH’s Reluctance to Engage Directly with Zambians Amid Growing Crises

Lusaka Times Editor
-
7
EFF Voices Concern Over HH’s Reluctance to Engage Directly with Zambians Amid Growing Crises

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has expressed deep concern over President Hakainde Hichilema’s apparent reluctance to engage directly with the Zambian people, particularly in critical regions like the Copperbelt, Eastern, and Northern Provinces. According to EFF President Kasonde Mwenda, the president’s perceived avoidance of these areas is exacerbating the struggles that many citizens are currently facing due to widespread economic and social challenges.

“President Hichilema seems to be deliberately avoiding the voices of the people who are most affected by the current crisis,” Mwenda said in a recent statement. “It is the responsibility of a leader to be visible, accessible, and responsive during times of difficulty. However, what we see is a president who is out of touch with the suffering of ordinary Zambians.”

Mwenda pointed to key issues that continue to plague the nation, including widespread hunger, prolonged load-shedding, a devastating drought that is crippling food production, skyrocketing prices of essential commodities, and a deteriorating healthcare system. He argued that the president’s lack of direct engagement has deepened citizens’ feelings of abandonment and despair.

“The people of Zambia, especially those in regions like the Copperbelt, Eastern, and Northern Provinces, are suffering. They have been waiting for the president to address these issues, but instead, they are met with silence,” Mwenda remarked. “Families are going hungry, businesses are shutting down due to power shortages, and inflation is making it impossible for the average Zambian to afford basic necessities. Yet, the president is nowhere to be seen.”

The EFF leader further criticized President Hichilema for failing to address the long-standing issue of load-shedding, which has disrupted daily life for millions of Zambians. Mwenda noted that while the government has promised solutions to the energy crisis, the situation continues to worsen, with frequent power outages hurting both small businesses and households.

“Load-shedding is not just an inconvenience—it’s a crisis,” Mwenda stated. “It is devastating businesses, cutting off livelihoods, and making it impossible for families to function. The president has promised time and again that things will improve, but where are the results? The people are tired of empty promises.”

Mwenda has been a vocal critic of President Hichilema since his administration began, and this is not the first time he has voiced concerns over the president’s leadership style. In the past, he accused Hichilema of being more focused on maintaining international relations and appeasing foreign investors than on addressing domestic challenges. Mwenda has also criticized the president’s perceived elitism, claiming that Hichilema’s government has done little to uplift the poor and marginalized in Zambian society.

“Zambians are crying for leadership that understands the real issues on the ground,” Mwenda said during a previous address. “President Hichilema seems more concerned with his global image and the approval of foreign investors than with addressing the needs of the people who put him in power. This is unacceptable.”

Mwenda also accused the president of failing to provide clear strategies to deal with the ongoing drought, which has severely impacted Zambia’s agricultural sector. He emphasized that the drought is not only affecting food security but is also driving up the cost of food, making it harder for families to feed themselves.

“The drought has left many rural communities in a state of emergency,” Mwenda said. “Farmers are struggling, crops are failing, and food prices are going through the roof. Yet, the president has not presented a concrete plan to mitigate the effects of this crisis. His silence is deafening, and the people are suffering as a result.”

Another area of concern for Mwenda is the state of Zambia’s healthcare system. He described it as being on the brink of collapse, with hospitals and clinics facing critical shortages of medicines and medical supplies. He also raised alarm over the conditions in public hospitals, where patients often have to wait for long periods before receiving care, if they receive any care at all.

“Our healthcare system is in shambles,” Mwenda stressed. “Patients are dying because there are no medicines, and healthcare workers are overstretched and underpaid. The president needs to address this crisis immediately, but instead, we see a government that is slow to act and indifferent to the suffering of its people.”

Mwenda concluded by calling on President Hichilema to break his silence and engage directly with the Zambian people, particularly those in regions most affected by the current crises. He urged the president to prioritize domestic issues over international engagements and to take responsibility for the economic and social hardships Zambians are facing.

“Leadership is about accountability and action,” Mwenda stated. “President Hichilema cannot continue to ignore the voices of the people. The country is facing multiple crises, and it is time for the president to show up, listen, and provide real solutions. Zambians deserve a leader who is present, engaged, and committed to addressing the challenges they face every day.

PF fumes over MP’s “load shedding would have been worse under the previous President”. Statement

Lusaka Times Editor
-
16
PF fumes over MP’s “load shedding would have been worse under the previous President”. Statement

PF Faction Chairperson for Information and Publicity, Emmanuel Mwamba, has issued a pointed critique of Chipangali Member of Parliament Andrew Lubusha and Chama South MP Davison Mung’andu for what he describes as their “opportunistic stunts.” This rebuke comes in the wake of their recent invitation to the Malaila Traditional Ceremony in Mambwe by President Hakainde Hichilema, a move that some perceive as an attempt to curry favor with the current administration.

In his statement, Mr. Mwamba specifically challenged Mr. Mung’andu’s disparaging remarks about the previous government and former President Edgar Lungu. Mung’andu’s assertion that “load shedding would have been worse under the previous President” was labeled by Mwamba as not only inaccurate but also an attempt to mislead the public. “It is essential to remember that the current administration has faced significant challenges, including energy shortages, which they themselves have not been able to resolve,” Mwamba stated, emphasizing the need for a more honest dialogue about the current state of affairs.

Mwamba further articulated that the ongoing energy crisis under President Hichilema’s administration contradicts the praise lavished upon it by Lubusha and Mung’andu. “Their comments reflect a dangerous disconnect from the realities on the ground, where citizens are still grappling with the consequences of poor governance,” he added. He underscored that both MPs should refrain from misleading the public and focus on genuine support for their president, advising them to do so “quietly and without resorting to false flattery.”

The political ramifications for Lubusha and Mung’andu could be significant. First, their public statements could alienate their core constituents, who may feel that their representatives are out of touch with the challenges they face. If voters perceive that their MPs are engaging in opportunistic behavior rather than advocating for their needs, it could lead to a loss of support in future elections.

Moreover, should the energy crisis continue without resolution, Mung’andu and Lubusha’s comments may backfire, as they could be held accountable for endorsing an administration that has struggled to address critical issues. The electorate is often unforgiving of perceived betrayal, and if constituents feel their MPs are prioritizing political survival over honesty, this could foster discontent and lead to calls for new leadership.

Additionally, Mwamba’s warnings about their political careers serve as a sobering reminder of the precarious nature of political alliances. If they continue down this path, they risk being viewed as opportunists, diminishing their credibility within the party and the broader political landscape. This could make them vulnerable to challenges from within their party, as more principled candidates may emerge to take their places, appealing to voters’ desire for authenticity and accountability.

In conclusion, Mwamba’s remarks serve as a reminder of the complexities of political loyalty and the consequences of public statements that may misrepresent the realities of governance. “As public servants, they owe it to their constituents to be truthful and constructive,” he stressed, calling for a more responsible approach to political discourse. The ongoing challenges faced by the current administration should serve as a catalyst for constructive criticism and collaboration rather than opportunistic posturing. If Lubusha and Mung’andu fail to navigate this delicate political landscape thoughtfully, they may find their careers in jeopardy, ultimately leading to their political downfall.

President Hichilema Officiates at Lwanza Traditional Ceremony, Calls for Unity and Resilience Amidst Drought Challenges

Chief Editor
-
7
President Hichilema Officiates at Lwanza Traditional Ceremony, Calls for Unity and Resilience Amidst Drought Challenges
President Hichjilema and Chitimukulu at the Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the
Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province.

President Hakainde Hichilema joined thousands of citizens in Bweengwa, Monze District, to celebrate the Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province. The ceremony, which honors the migration of cattle into the Kafue Plains, is a significant cultural event aimed at preserving the heritage of the Lundwe people.

President Hichilema extended his gratitude to His Royal Highness Chief Hamusonde for the invitation to officiate the ceremony. He also expressed admiration for the presence of 47 Royal Highnesses from across the country, including His Majesty the Chitimukulu of the Bemba people, showcasing a powerful display of national unity.

“The solidarity displayed here is truly inspiring and a reflection of the unity and collaboration we need for our nation’s progress,” President Hichilema said. He reiterated his government’s commitment to promoting national unity as a cornerstone of their agenda, highlighting the importance of “unity in diversity” as a divine gift to the Zambian people.

The President emphasized that cultural events like the Lwanza Ceremony not only preserve traditions but also promote peace, unity, and tourism development. He urged the youth to embrace these values as cultural identity shapes the future of the nation.

However, the President acknowledged the severe drought affecting Zambia, which threatens food security for over one million households. He encouraged citizens to view this challenge as an opportunity to seek innovative solutions. The government has already implemented drought response measures, such as enhanced social cash transfers and emergency support, ensuring vulnerable citizens are not left behind.

President Hichilema reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to providing free healthcare and education to all Zambians, underscoring these as key investments for the country’s future.

“We remain focused on creating opportunities for our people and ensuring no one goes hungry, even in the face of adversity,” he concluded.

President Hichilema at the Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the
Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province.

Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the
Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province.
Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the
Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province.
Lwanza Traditional Ceremony of the
Lundwe-speaking people of Southern Province.

CNMC Luanshya Copper Mines Urges Ministry of Mines to Curb Illegal Mining by Regulating Informal Oxide Ore Treatment Plants

Chief Editor
-
2
CNMC Luanshya Copper Mines Urges Ministry of Mines to Curb Illegal Mining by Regulating Informal Oxide Ore Treatment Plants

CNMC Luanshya Copper Mines (LCM) says the Ministry of Mines must curtail mushrooming informal oxide ore treatment plants to curb escalating illegal mining on the Copperbelt Province.

Two people died and one survived this week after a rock fell on them when conducting illegal mining at LCM in Luanshya.

LCM Manager – Corporate Affairs Sydney Chileya said illegal mining is rife on the Copperbelt because of mushrooming oxide ore treatment plants in Kitwe, Chingola and Chambishi.

Mr. Chileya said illegal mining is riding because these treatment plants are providing readily available market for minerals being mined illegally by some youths.

Speaking to Radio Icengelo News, Mr. Chileya further expressed sorrow over the recent death of two young men in Luanshya.

“We regret the loss of life. One life lost is too many and call upon the government to take steps to ensure that illegal mining is arrested.This issue of illegal mining if not addressed will land this country into serious challenges,” Mr. Chileya said.

In 2022, President Hakainde Hichilema announced Zambia’s target to increase copper production from 830,000 metric tonnes to 3,000,000 in the next ten years.

“The government has pronounced a very ambitious plan to ensure that the next ten years we reach 3 million tonnes of copper production per annum. Illegal mining is a serious threat to that ambition and with the current incidents of illegal mining it will be a huge challenge to reach 3 million tonnes of copper in the next 10 years,” he noted.

HH Mpaka 2031 Alliance National Coordinator Criticizes Former President Lungu’s Conditional Meeting Proposal with President Hichilema

Chief Editor
-
5
HH Mpaka 2031 Alliance National Coordinator Criticizes Former President Lungu’s Conditional Meeting Proposal with President Hichilema

HH Mpaka 2031 Peoples’ Alliance National Coordinator says it is ridiculous for former president Edgar Lungu to say that he is willing to meet President Hakainde Hichilema under condition.

In an interview, Mr Kapinga said,Mr Lungu should feel shameful to even t of think of having a meeting with President Hakainde Hichilema adding that the incumbent President meeting with the ex president Lungu would be tantamount to an insult and cordoning lawlessness in the country.

Mr Kabinga said that the HH Mpaka 2031 Peoples alliance will not allow President Hakainde Hichilema to meet with Mr Lungu.

He wondered why Mr Lungu wants to legitimatise his stay in the PF as President when it is a well known fact that their are three factions in the former ruling Party,the PF.

“We as HH Mpaka 2031 Peoples’Alliance we saying we don’t endorse such an engagement or a meeting if you like ,we are calling about the President to ignore what Mr Lungu is talking about, you see meeting Lungu would be as would as good as cordoning lawlessness and illegality in the country,” Mr Kapinga.

He added that during his stay in office Mr Lungu never wanted meet Mr Hichilema and wondered why this time he wants to have a meeting with him.

A New Zambian Mining Entity Envisaged

Chief Editor
-
6
A New Zambian Mining Entity Envisaged

1. Background

Mines Minister Paul Kabuswe has announced the creation of a new 100% Zambian mining entity.Following this announcement, many questions were raised in the media and on social networks, as the Zambian people already directly and indirectly own 92.6% of the emblematic mining company ZCCM-IH. Concerns have been expressed about the motives behind the creation of this new entity. Many believe that it is merely a means of escaping
the scrutiny of Authority Bodies and minority shareholders, in particular our Group which is seen as a watchdog for ZCCM-IH. Drawing on our decades of experience as a ZCCM-IH shareholder, we would like to
contribute our views and insights on this new entity to the debate.

2. Imperative transparency

As a listed company, ZCCM-IH is obliged to follow stock market rules. Everything is transparent. The regulatory Bodies – LSE, Euronext and particularly the Lusaka Securities Exchange – ensure compliance with stock market and accounting regulations, and safeguard the interests of all shareholders.Our group also monitors the company’s management. Indeed, we have publicly warned that we were denied access to crucial documents when ZCCM-IH acquired 90% of Mopani from Glencore and when the royalties deal with First Quantum was signed.

This new state-owned company will have no independent control and could be manipulated by bad eggs, for example. Indeed, the Parliamentary Committee on Parastatal Bodies only makes recommendations, it has no coercive powers. When over $120 million went up in smoke in suspicious circumstances at Ndola Lime, the Committee recommended thorough investigations and the involvement of Interpol, but nothing was done despite our insistence to former IDC CEO Mateyo Kaluba.

It is therefore imperative that the Committee on Parastatal Bodies can sanction and dismiss the Directors and Management of this new entity.

3. Governance and total independence

To protect this new entity from interference harmful to the country’s interests, the Board must be TOTALLY independent of the GRZ. Zambia has many competent people in this field who have the country’s interests at heart: former ZCCM-IH chairperson Dolika Banda, Bishop Mambo, Mwansa Chalwe, Bob Sichinga,

4. Financing in question

In an interview on 18 August 2024 on ZNBC, Mines Minister Paul Kabuswe indicated that financing could be provided by the Ministry of Finance. How is this possible when Zambia is broke?
As for the advance of equities by the partner with repayment from future profits, the minority shareholding is always miserable in this type of arrangement.

Moreover the assertions regarding the ease and capacity of financing thanks to the mining licences and the reserves in the ground held raise questions. Mopani Copper Mines held mining licences, shafts, a smelter, produced copper and yet was unable to borrow to invest in order to increase production and create working capital.Since IRH injected money, the situation has improved dramatically.

In this case, it is astonishing that the Minister has given the majority of Mopani to foreigners when he knew that Mopani had all the assets to succeed on its own according to his mining vision.

In the interview, in the face of relevant questioning of Franklin Tembo, the Minister indicated that this new entity would have ‘zero interference’ with ZCCM-IH. We acknowledge this commitment and will ensure that ZCCM-IH does not participate in the financing of this entity in any way whatsoever.

5. Proper and strong safeguards

Finally, it is entirely legitimate for the Zambian people to benefit 100% from the maximum of their wealth. However, the creation of this new entity must be accompanied by proper and strong safeguards set out above to ensure that the Zambian people can benefit fully from this new entity.

Issued by:
Thierry CHARLES
Spokesperson of Minority Shareholders of ZCCM-IH

Message For Today: Give Ear To

Chief Editor
-
0
Message For Today: Give Ear To

Today’s Scripture

“My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.”
John 10:27, NIV

Give Ear To

Friend, how many times is God speaking to us throughout the day but we’re not sensitive to it? Perhaps it’s just a whisper, “Slow down on the freeway. Be kinder to your spouse. Call your friend and give her some encouragement. Turn off the computer and get some more sleep. Take care of yourself.” Gentle whispers. They’re not loud. God is not going to force you to do it. It’s just an impression. The word “obey” in the original language means “give ear to.” To be obedient, you have to give your ear to what God is saying. You have to be a listener. Be sensitive to the whisper. What are you feeling in your spirit? It may not be words, just a knowing deep down of what you’re supposed to do. Other voices, thoughts, reasonings, and people’s opinions will be much louder, but you have to learn to give the whispers the most attention. When you let the still small voice be the voice you follow, you’ll make the best decisions.

A Prayer for Today

“Father, thank You that You speak to me throughout my day in gentle whispers in my spirit. Help me to give ear to what You are saying rather than push it down or ignore it. I will listen to Your still small voice and obey. In Jesus’ Name, Amen.”

Joel Osteen Ministries

We are now living in peace after hounding out the Patriotic Front regime- President Hichilema

Chief Editor
-
21
We are now living in peace after hounding out the Patriotic Front regime- President Hichilema

President Hakainde Hichilema has commissioned the newly built Mambwe District Hospital in Malambo Constituency, Eastern Province. The state-of-the-art facility is expected to significantly improve healthcare delivery in the region, where residents have long struggled to access quality health services.

President Hichilema, speaking during the commissioning ceremony, reaffirmed his government’s commitment to delivering quality healthcare to all corners of Zambia. “Our government is determined to take quality health services to all the corners of our great nation, and we are doing everything possible to improve healthcare delivery,” the President said. He also expressed gratitude to Zambia’s development partners for their support in making the hospital a reality.

Mambwe District Hospital in Malambo Constituency of Eastern Province.

The Mambwe District Hospital is part of a broader initiative by the Zambian government to enhance healthcare infrastructure across the country. President Hichilema emphasized that these new facilities would be equipped with adequate manpower through the recruitment of healthcare personnel. “We will continue to ensure that these facilities are adequately staffed to serve our people,” he added.
We are now living in peace after hounding out the Patriotic Front regime

Malaila traditional ceremony of the Kunda people under Senior Chief Nsefu in Malambo of Mambwe District in Eastern province.

Earlier in the day, President Hichilema attended the Kunda Malaila Traditional Ceremony of the Kunda-speaking people in Malambo Constituency. Upon his arrival at Mfuwe International Airport, the President addressed a large crowd, thanking the people of Malambo for their steadfast support during the time his party was in opposition. He noted that the country’s current peace and stability were a result of their decision to vote for change.

“We are now living in peace after hounding out the Patriotic Front regime,” President Hichilema stated, while commending opposition Members of Parliament, including Chama South PF MP Davison Mung’andu and Chipangali MP Andrew Lubusha, for their cooperation with his government in delivering development to their constituencies.

“We are working with the opposition political party leaders to deliver development. This is what the people want to see,” the President said, emphasizing that unity and collaboration across political lines were essential for national progress.

On the issue of climate change and hunger, President Hichilema assured citizens that his government was implementing measures to mitigate the effects of drought and ensure food security. He reiterated the government’s commitment to ensuring no Zambian dies of hunger, especially in drought-affected areas.

MP Davison Mung’andu praised the government’s free education policy, highlighting its positive impact on children in his constituency. “For the first time, many children are now back to school for free,” he said, acknowledging the many developmental projects being carried out under the Constituency Development Fund (CDF).

Andrew Lubusha, MP for Chipangali, also expressed appreciation for the government’s intervention in addressing hunger in his district. He mentioned that the “cash for work” program had significantly helped alleviate food shortages, and the distribution of relief food by President Hichilema’s government had demonstrated a commitment to serving the people without partisan bias.

The President’s visit to Eastern Province was a one-day working tour that combined tradition and development, reflecting his administration’s broader vision of unity and national growth. As President Hichilema put it, “We are One Zambia, One Nation, One people. Together, we shall overcome the challenges before us.”

The Malaila Traditional Ceremony celebrated the rich cultural heritage of the Kunda people, while the commissioning of the hospital marked a significant milestone in improving healthcare for the people of Mambwe District.

Kitwe Police Retrieve Five Bodies Of Illegal Miners

Chief Editor
-
5
Kitwe Police Retrieve Five Bodies Of Illegal Miners

The Zambia Police officers in Kitwe District retrieved five bodies of illegal miners that were buried at green mountain tailing Dam.
Copperbelt Province Police Commanding Officer, Peacewell Mweemba confirmed that the accident occurred around 14:30 hours on Saturday 21st September in Kitwe district.

Mr Mweemba said the five who have not yet been identified went mining at the site when suddenly the tailing dam collapsed and buried them.

He added that the police officers went to the scene of the accident and managed to retrieve all the five bodies.

Mr Mweemba said the situation is calm at the area and the bodies of the five illegal miners have been deposited in the Kitwe Hospital Mortuary awaiting postmortem.

Why Zambia’s president is threatening to delay the country’s 2026 elections

Lusaka Times Editor
-
35
Why Zambia’s president is threatening to delay the country’s 2026 elections

On 13 September, Zambia’s President Hakainde Hichilema addressed parliament in fulfilment of the Constitution that requires the president to address the National Assembly every year and provide a report on the progress made in the application of the national values and principles. During his address, Hichilema made a series of revealing and largely off-the-cuff remarks on constitutional reform that are worth quoting at length.

He said: “The country has failed to reach consensus on this very important national document over many years. As a country, therefore, we still need to reform our constitutional order to ensure that it is truly reflecting the aspirations of our citizens. Given the substantial work that has already been done in the past, this government is committed to facilitate a least cost, efficient, and credible process [of constitutional reform] to address lacunae, omissions, or oversights in our Republican Constitution. So, we are looking at this House to be supportive of a process that would be least cost, that will be time conscious, that would not lead to allowances and more allowances and sittings and [more] sittings. And this House is the one that should help us. After all, some of your constituencies are too big. After all, I don’t understand the wisdom of how members of parliament were taken out of the council chambers. After all, some lacunae can lead us to a situation where we could have no general election for eight years. That is not a joke. Yes, we could have no elections for eight or nine years. Those lacunae sit in the Constitution. So, those who designed or signed off that Constitution, I am not sure what they were intending to do.”

Many organisations and individuals have since condemned Hichilema’s remarks. Former president Edgar Lungu described the comments as “reckless” and urged Zambians to “wake up and stop this apparent dictator from tampering with our Constitution to extend his stay in power even when he has lamentably failed to improve the lives of the people.”

Several opposition parties accused Hichilema of not understanding the Constitution and attempting to distract attention from the real issues that affect Zambians such as mass hunger, the cost-of-living crisis and the 21 consecutive hours of load-shedding a day.

This condemnation is necessary, but not sufficient. Zambians also need to understand why Hichilema is making such comments. The president’s implied threats to extend his stay in power were neither random nor a result of ignorance of the law. Hichilema has a proven record of undermining democratic institutions in a crude manner. If Zambians wish to reclaim their democratic institutions and space, they will do well not to underestimate Hichilema and the lengths to which he is prepared to go in his bid for absolute power. His warning that Zambia could have no general election for eight years should be seen as part of his wider strategy to stay in power beyond 2026.

Hichilema’s remarks were directed at different audiences for different objectives.

Preparing the public’s mind

The first targeted audience was the public. His objective here is to prepare the minds of Zambians to accept both his U-turn on a major policy issue and the changes that his administration plans to make to the Constitution on the understanding that the exercise would be cheap, time efficient and result in the removal from the Constitution of clauses that have been the subject of criticism. A brief discussion of the wider context that preceded Hichilema’s comments is needed to understand this point.

Over the past year, some opposition parties and prominent individuals have repeatedly accused the government of scheming to amend the Constitution to, among other objectives, extend presidential term limits from five to seven years and remove the requirement that a winning presidential candidate should secure a minimum of “50 percent + 1” of the total vote. For instance, in October 2023, 11 opposition parties wrote a joint open letter to Hichilema in which they criticised the secretive commencement of the constitution-making process.

“We are alarmed that there are secretive efforts aimed at amending the Republican Constitution in which people are being asked to submit recommendations on non-contentious issues,” the letter read in part. It continued: “Given the lack of criteria on what constitutes non-contentious, we do not think that these non-transparent efforts represent the best way of carrying our constitutional reform forward, unless the objective is to remove popular clauses such as that relating to the running mate and the 50+1.”

In July this year, Lungu, who presided over the 2016 constitutional amendment, repeated these assertions, urging “Zambians to stand up and oppose any arbitrary attempts to defile and rape their Republican Constitution … to oppose and stop President Hichilema from taking Zambia back to autocracy and tyranny through these UPND [United Party for National Development] arbitrary schemes to alter our Constitution only to suit their agenda”.

These allegations prompted Hichilema to finally respond on 2 August. In a statement issued by his spokesperson, Clayson Hamasaka, Hichilema assured Zambians that he has no plans to alter the country’s Constitution. As well as criticising “the emotive debate and the distorted narrative being peddled by the opposition to the effect that government wants to embark on a secret constitutional review process”, the president vowed that he will “continue to uphold and defend the Constitution” and touted his lack of “interest in manipulating it for … personal benefit”.

This reassurance earned a response from the highly regarded constitutional lawyer, John Sangwa. In a letter to the president dated 8 August, Sangwa made observations that are worth quoting at length, including the point that successive Zambian governments are addicted to amending the Constitution.

Sangwa wrote: “I take this opportunity to commend you for clarifying your position on the allegation that you intend to amend certain provisions of the Constitution ahead of the 2026 general election. Your statement … that you: (a) “swore to uphold and defend the Republican” (b) “remain resolute to defend the Constitution” and (c) “have no interest in manipulating it [the Constitution] for [your] personal benefit” is commendable. The clarification, coupled with the fact that after nearly three years into your presidency no Bill to amend the Constitution has been published, is noteworthy. It represents a radical departure from what we have witnessed in the last 60 years. Since independence in 1964, all your predecessors either initiated or continued the process to make a new Constitution or amend the Constitution. Their motivation, invariably, was the desire to use the Constitution as a political tool to further their personal benefits. They prioritised their interests over those of the Republic. It is laudable that you have so far not succumbed to his temptation.”

Sangwa’s letter continued:

“Any person that seeks the office of president who believes that the fulfilment of his promises to the people, once elected, is dependent on the amendment or making of a new constitution, does not deserve to be re-elected. The promises to the people must be made within the confines of the Constitution as it is and not as it ought to be … Your primary focus, Mr President, should be to address the pressing economic, social and political challenges facing the Republic. So far, there is no evidence which shows that the Constitution, as it stands, hinders or undermines your ability to fulfil your campaign promises. Your additional obligation must be to ensure that your commitment to ‘uphold and defend the Republican Constitution’ is not just a slogan. You must respect the constitutional limitations on your office and ensure that the Zambians who voted for you and those who did not are: (a) treated equally; (b) afforded the same opportunities” and (c) enjoy the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. In short, you must do better than your predecessor.”

This is the wider context within which Hichilema’s latest comments should be understood. By claiming that “we could have no general election for eight years”, Hichilema is finally confirming that he will, like his predecessors, take to parliament a constitutional amendment Bill that would alter the Constitution ahead of the next election. The objective was to announce this major U-turn using the least embarrassing platform and initiate public conversation on his new position using his set agenda; the process that would inform the content, the mobilisation of resources required to undertake the exercise, and the timing.

The reference to ‘the substantial work that has already been done in the past’ constitutes a public disclosure of how Hichilema intends to go about this exercise. He may ask the minister of justice to lead the process or appoint a small team of ruling party sympathisers to undertake the amendments using previous reports of constitutional review commissions or identify the so-called non-contentious clauses that must be revised. Both routes may result in the publication of a constitutional amendment Bill.

The talk about controlled allowances and sittings is a strategic way of pre-empting public opposition to the exercise on account of the huge costs involved — especially at a time of more pressing national concerns — by suggesting that cost-saving measures will be adopted. The emphasis on efficiency is meant to prevent potential public criticism about the timing: with less than a year and a half remaining before the dissolution of parliament in readiness for the 2026 election, can the exercise be completed in time? Hichilema is suggesting it can be because it would be – in his words – time-conscious.

Mobilising MPs

The second audience Hichilema was speaking to are MPs from the governing UPND, opposition parties led by the Patriotic Front (PF) and the Independents. On this front, he has three objectives.

Firstly, through his comments, Hichilema was effectively encouraging the MPs to imagine an impossible scenario where a general election is repeatedly postponed for eight or nine years. To avert such a scenario, the president was pleading with MPs to support his planned changes to the Constitution to “straighten” specific provisions that require the cancellation of an election whenever a validly nominated candidate resigns from the race before the date of the election.

Here, it is important to briefly discuss the three grounds on which an election can be postponed: death, resignation or disqualification by court. Article 52 (6) of Zambia’s Constitution provides that “Where a candidate dies, resigns or becomes disqualified in accordance with Article 70, 100 or 153 or a court disqualifies a candidate for corruption or malpractice, after the close of nominations and before the election date, the electoral commission shall cancel the election and require the filing of fresh nominations by eligible candidates and elections shall be held within thirty days of the filing of the fresh nominations.”

In June 2023, the constitutional court ruled — in the case of GEARS Initiative Zambia Limited v Electoral Commission of Zambia and the Attorney General — that although this provision does not apply to an independent candidate, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) is obligated to cancel the election in instances where the candidate who has died, resigned or been disqualified after the close of nominations but before the election date was sponsored by a political party. This, the court added, is meant to ensure that the affected political party is not disadvantaged by circumstances beyond its control. To avoid misinterpreting what the concourt said, it is worth quoting its ruling at length:

“When a political party’s candidate resigns from the political party [that sponsored their nomination for election to a given office], that candidate’s nomination is invalidated as the candidate can no longer represent that political party in that election. The political party therefore must be given another opportunity to field another candidate for the election which is why the ECZ is required to cancel the nominations and call for fresh nominations from eligible candidates before the election can be held in terms of Article 52 (6) of the Constitution … For the avoidance of doubt, we wish to state that in terms of Article 52(6) of the Constitution, where a political party sponsored candidate for election as a member of parliament resigns after the close of nominations but before the election date, the Electoral Commission is obligated to cancel the election and call for fresh nominations from eligible candidates and call for fresh elections in accordance with Article 52(6).”

The implication of this judgment is that a general election cannot be postponed on account of the resignation, death or disqualification of one candidate — even if sponsored by a party — who had been validly nominated for election to any public office. Article 266 of Zambia’s Constitution provides that “general election” means “presidential, National Assembly and local government elections when held on the same day”.

The Constitution also states that “A general election shall be held, every five years after the last general election, on the second Thursday of August.” This means that if a parliamentary candidate dies, is disqualified or resigns from the political party that sponsored them to parliament after the close of nominations but before the election date, what would be postponed is only the election in the affected constituency. All other elections — presidential, national assembly and local government — will proceed.

Similarly, if a presidential candidate dies, is disqualified or resigns from the political party that sponsored them to parliament after the close of nominations but before the election date, what would be postponed is only the presidential election, not the parliamentary or ward elections. Even then, the cancellation of the presidential election itself would be followed by the filing of fresh nominations by eligible candidates and the holding of a new election within the next 30 days.

Triggering the postponement of the general election after the close of nominations but before the election date would require the death, resignation or disqualification of a presidential candidate AND at least one candidate sponsored by a political party in ALL the parliamentary constituencies and ALL the wards in Zambia. The prospect of this calamity happening, let alone for eight consecutive years, is exceedingly remote. By asking MPs to support his planned constitutional changes using the threat that failure to do so could delay the general election for as long as eight years, Hichilema is demonstrating his desperation to change the Constitution.

The question is: what is in it for him? The simple answer is everything. As well as lacking the capacity to manage the magnitude of the national problems that confront him, Hichilema is realising that he is unlikely to fulfil his campaign promises and secure re-election on merit. As a result, he seems to have decided that the surest way of guaranteeing his stay in power is by manipulating the Constitution to secure political advantage. If he was confident of delivering his promises, he would not be making the kind of desperate manoeuvres he has now resorted to.

In any case, Hichilema’s opposition to Article 52 (6) demonstrates his opportunism or inability to stick to one position. In opposition, the UPND leader supported the very constitutional provision he is now opposing, stating in early 2021 that Article 52 (6) is “in good faith”: “That article protects citizens from having a president who is an imposter, who does not qualify. That article is in good faith. If the election is postponed for 30 days to remove an imposter from the ballot paper, [that is] perfect. 30 days is fine for me. If 30 days are a price we have to pay in order for the people of Zambia to get a leadership that will … end violence, corruption, a leadership that will bring credibility and restore the kwacha, stop people [from] sleep[ing] without food, 30 days is a good price to pay.”

What exactly does Hichilema believe in? How has the same constitutional provision that he previously defended as a necessary check become problematic today? Moreover, even his criticism of his predecessor for the passage of the 2016 constitutional amendment represents a needless attempt to apportion blame and escape responsibility. This is because the amendment was a bi-partisan affair that was supported by both PF and UPND MPs. Without the support of MPs from Hichilema’s party, the 2016 amendment could not have passed. In fact, Hichilema’s assertion that Zambians have previously “failed to reach consensus on this very important national document over many years” is incorrect. Both the 1991 and 2016 constitutional amendments were products of consensus.

In 1991, for instance, the ruling UNIP and the opposition Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) came together to produce a Constitution that was meant to facilitate the holding of the elections. Both parties reached a general agreement that after the election, they would work on a new constitution-making exercise, which is how the John Mwanakatwe Commission came about. But, after former president Kenneth Kaunda returned to active politics in early 1995, the MMD abandoned the agreement and settled for an amendment to the Constitution that excluded Kaunda from running for office. After Levy Mwanawasa came to power in 2002, he attempted to complete the constitution-making exercise by appointing the Willa Mung’omba Constitution Review Commission.

Unfortunately, Mwanawasa died in office and his successor, Rupiah Banda, botched the process. When Michael Sata came to power in 2011, he attempted to complete the exercise by appointing the Annel Silungwe Technical Committee, whose draft constitution provided the basis on which the PF and the UPND reached consensus to pass the 2016 constitutional changes that were a product of wider public assemblies at district, provincial and national levels. Hichilema will do well to acquaint himself with the accurate history of constitution-making in Zambia.

Second, Hichilema’s speech seems intended to use bribery to secure the support of MPs who may be unconvinced by his scaremongering prediction. To pass in Zambia’s 167-member National Assembly, the planned constitutional amendment Bill would require at least two-thirds support (at least 111 MPs). This is a tall order given the current composition of party representation in parliament.

The UPND has 93 MPs — 85 directly elected and eight nominated. The main opposition PF has 58 MPs. There are 13 independent lawmakers, seven of whom are working closely with Hichilema. Even with the combined support of all UPND MPs, most independents, the deputy speaker (the speaker cannot vote) and the one MP belonging to a small opposition party that tends to support the ruling party, Hichilema would still require the backing of several PF MPs. To induce these legislators to support the Bill, Hichilema has dangled a carrot in front of them by promising to deliver three specific changes — delimitation; the reintroduction of MPs on council chambers; and the “editing” of specific clauses that relate to nominations.

The 2016 constitutional amendment removed MPs from municipal councils, much to their annoyance. This change has undermined their capacity to accumulate through increased business opportunities and to check the decisions of the local authority that adversely affect the interests of sitting MPs. Some lawmakers have also repeatedly called for delimitation, blaming their failure to deliver services and the high turnover during general elections to the large size of their constituencies. By claiming that he does not understand why they “were taken out of the council chambers” and decrying the size of some constituencies as “too big”, Hichilema is effectively mobilising lawmakers to support the proposed constitutional amendment on the premise that the Bill will include two of their longstanding demands: their reinstatement onto municipal councils and the breakup of some constituencies into two.

Here, we see that the would-be content of the “very important national document” has already been decided in a manner that reflects the aspirations of the president and governing party, not the citizens. Gerrymandering would increase the number of constituencies — mostly in Southern, Western, Northwestern, and Central provinces, a region that has historically voted for the ruling party. Winning the new constituency seats created by this partisan exercise would then increase the UPND’s overall majority in parliament and make it easier for the president to make further changes to the Constitution in future.

Third, if there is credibility in the claims by opposition parties that Hichilema plans to extend the president’s term of office to seven years, then his comments also have an indirect appeal to all MPs: that is, in exchange for supporting his own bid, he is offering them the promise of greater security in their positions through longer terms of office.

Preparing Western allies 

The final audience that Hichilema was speaking to are Western governments, whose representatives in Zambia endured his hours-long address to parliament. His unscripted comments are meant to prepare them to “understand” how he may end up in power for eight or nine years without elections if the constitutional changes he wishes to make do not pass. In effect, the president is warning that if Zambia fails to hold the next general election, it would be because of the unspecified lacunae in the current Constitution, not because he wishes to perpetuate himself in power.

Now, it is possible that the planned constitutional amendment Bill may fail since the ruling party lacks a two-thirds majority in parliament, but I should hasten to mention that Hichilema has tried to secure this elusive majority since his election in 2021. His bid to take control of the main opposition party using Miles Sampa was intended to secure the clear majority either through the subsequent cooperation of the PF MPs with his proxy or by inducing by-elections in the constituencies of uncooperative MPs who were to be expelled from the party by Sampa. Hichilema, who set this process in motion in October 2023, went very far in this regard. But he has hit some roadblocks in recent months.

Majority PF MPs have refused to cooperate with the Hichilema proxy and remain loyal to former president Lungu. This prompted Sampa to expel in December last year nine PF MPs for alleged gross indiscipline and insubordination. The main motivation behind these expulsions was to trigger several by-elections in the affected constituencies, which the UPND hoped to win to raise the two-third majority needed to make changes to the constitution. Frustratingly for Hichilema, the expelled MPs have challenged the actions of his proxy, slowing the president’s desperate search for a two-thirds majority. Despite this setback, Hichilema remains confident that the courts and the electoral commission will yield to his manoeuvres and has now proceeded to publicly disclose that his administration plans to change the constitution and to mobilise MPs to support the exercise that would help him perpetuate his stay in power.

In the unlikely event that he fails to secure the majority he craves, Hichilema is revealing a strategy he has carefully devised on how he may avoid elections and prolong his stay in power for at least eight consecutive years: sponsoring some proxy candidates — the same way he has used Sampa to weaken the PF — to file nominations for each presidential election and then inducing them to resign from their political party after the confirmation of nominations but before the election date. Unless induced by an incumbent president who is politically insecure, there is no incentive for opposition parties to delay the presidential election. In fact, opposition parties would wish for an earlier election date, not a delayed one. By law, as earlier shown, the electoral commission will be required to call for a new election each time a validly nominated candidate resigns from the party that sponsored their nomination. He would then be able to tell Western allies that “I warned these natives that this could happen, but they did not listen. They vetoed the constitutional amendment Bill that we took to parliament that could have removed the lacunae that are responsible for the status quo.”

If Hichilema manages to secure a clear majority in parliament and change the constitution, nobody knows when he may finally leave power.

Why Hichilema is desperate to retain power at all costs 

There are three reasons behind Hichilema’s desperation to secure a second term and prevent an early assumption of the title he is seeking to avoid: former president of Zambia.

The first is the fear of what might happen to his extensive businesses were he to lose power. Hichilema has refused to publish his assets and liabilities, which makes it difficult to work out to what extent his policies are benefiting companies in which he has an interest. Once he leaves office, a new government can revisit the subject and seek to charge him with corruption, such as in relation to his controversial decision to allow private companies with links to him to audit the security wings.

The second is that Hichilema wishes to avoid the embarrassment of losing power after just one term. During his decade-and-a half in opposition, he cultivated close ties with private supporters — local and external — who backed his election bid and would wish to recoup their investments. This includes local business people, multinational corporations in the extractive sector and the Johannesburg-based Brenthurst Foundation, a creation of the Oppenheimer family, that appears to have undue influence on the president and direction of policy especially in mining. Given the escalating rivalry between major powers, Western countries would also prefer having Hichilema in office as a gateway to a region that is still dominated by liberation parties and as a counterweight to the growing illiberal influences of China and Russia.

Third, Hichilema appears to see himself primarily as the leader of Zambians from one half of the country. Many people from Southern, Northwestern, and Western provinces believe they have been historically marginalised by their counterparts from the Eastern and the Bemba-speaking provinces of Northern, Luapula and Muchinga. As was the case under Lungu, the binary between us and them has been sharply drawn under Hichilema’s leadership and found expression in the skewed distribution of appointments to public office.

As well as heading the executive, parliament and the judiciary, Zambians from Hichilema’s region dominate the key ministries, the leadership positions of four of the five security services, the justice system, electoral commission, foreign service, and most posts in the civil service and parastatal bodies. Hichilema — the first president from his region since independence in 1964 — does not see anything wrong with this, believing he is simply addressing historical imbalances. Fearful that a leader from the other region would reverse the trend were he to lose, the solution is to remain in power until 2031 and then organise a successor from his region who can consolidate its hold on power.

‘I can’t wait to vote Hichilema out’

As a 55-year-old distressed Zambian who voted for Hichilema in 2021 told me in an email message recently: “I do not know why you bother yourself writing, offering advice or suggestions to our president. Hichilema does not listen to advice, unless it comes from his white friends. He is extremely arrogant and set in his ways, does not care about the poor, and only cares about his rich friends and private businesses … I am in Zambia right now, and we have not had electricity for three consecutive days due to load-shedding. It finally came today but lasted for only 45 minutes. I do not know what is worse: the absence of electricity or the tragic lack of leadership … Like most Zambians, I have stopped talking. What is the point? In fact, I wish I could go into a coma and only wake up in August 2026 to vote him out.

“I am just from reading your 2022 article in which you wrote this: ‘Hichilema has shown himself to be out of his depth on many key issues.  He only appears positive in contrast to the disastrous Lungu, but as memories of the PF’s terrible record fade, the new president’s shortcomings may dawn on many people.’ I did not agree with you then, but I do now. He is clueless, so terribly out of touch and incompetent that he makes Edgar Lungu look like a better option. It pains me to write the last sentence. We were so consumed by the dislike of Lungu that we did not pay attention to Hichilema’s weaknesses. The drought that is affecting Zambia is a natural phenomenon, but it has exposed how poorly equipped he is for the office. He clearly walked into that office without a plan. I can’t wait to vote him out.”

The problem is that voting out Hichilema is no longer as straightforward as it once seemed. At the very least, the exercise of the right to vote would require the holding of a presidential election. Whether that election takes place on 13 August 2026, as provided for in Zambia’s Constitution, or in eight or nine years from now, nobody knows for certain.

Nothing is guaranteed anymore in Zambia under Hichilema. Not electricity, not food, not water, not even the hope that tomorrow will be better than today.

Dr Sishuwa Sishuwa is a senior lecturer in history at Stellenbosch University. His latest publications are Party Politics and Populism in Zambia; Populism in Africa in Research Handbook on Populism (Elgar, 2024); Defamation of the President, Racial Nationalism, and the Roy Clarke Affair in Zambia, African Affairs, Vol. 122, Issue 486, (2023); Multi-ethnic Vision or Ethnic Nationalism? The contested Legacies of Anderson Mazoka and Zambia’s 2006 Election, Canadian Journal of African Studies, Vol. 57.No. 2 (2023). Media: How Zambia’s president is using lawfare to subvert democracy, Mail &Guardian; Compromised by politics? A response to the judiciary of Zambia, News Diggers; Zambia is on the verge of being a one-party state, African Arguments

Source: Mail &Guardian

Chamber Of Mines Calls For Stable Policies

Chief Editor
-
11
Chamber Of Mines Calls For Stable Policies

The Zambia Chamber of Mines has warned that policy instability would negatively affect the mining sector.

The Chamber has expressed concern over what it has termed as abnormal and impractical mining policy proposals.

In a joint statement by the chamber board and council, the Chamber said the mining industry has been confronted with a raft of mining policy initiatives, which amount to an unprecedented threat to investors.

The Chamber said if the Zambian government does not go back to the drawing board on these proposals, it risks undoing all the good work achieved since 2021 in attracting mining investment to the country.

According to the Chamber, the international community is now waking up to these developments, and questions are being asked about what is perceived to be a clear U-turn in policy direction.

“Industry representatives point to a serial unwillingness by the relevant government ministries to consult meaningfully, and at an early stage, with the industry. Policies and draft laws have been conceived and drafted in isolation, with industry consultation treated as an afterthought. Detailed industry concerns and counter proposals are received, but ignored. As a result, the proposals that the government is currently taking forward are commercially impractical and, in certain key provisions, abnormal in their application to the mining sector. The Chamber has already publicly voiced its concerns over the looming Minerals Regulation Commission Bill that is currently before Parliament. Amongst other failings, the Bill grants unaccountable and arbitrary discretionary decision making powers to individual regulators, presenting obvious future corruption risks,” the statement read.

“This at a time when there are already inexplicable actions by the Mining Cadastre to reallocate or carve up licenses.Now, as revealed in the recently released National Critical Minerals Strategy 2024-2028, the Government is set upon mandating a minimum 30% stake for the State – at no cost – in all new mines, together with an additional minimum 30% ‘production share’. There is no definition for production sharing – a mechanism sometimes applied on a project basis in the oil and gas sector – but if this were a share of mine revenue, it could amount to an additional 30% royalty, on top of the mineral royalty tax (MRT) that is already applied. These proposals are so far outside the norm for global mining investment that they will undoubtedly deter potential investors from exploring Zambia. Furthermore, if we once again acquire a reputation for policy instability, as a nation that changes course every few years as short-term needs dictate, we will do ourselves long-term damage.”

The Chamber argued that the proposals that the government is currently taking forward are commercially impractical and, in certain key provisions, abnormal in their application to the mining sector.

“Zambia must extract fair value from its national resources, however our Government should be open to different perspectives, particularly those with a commercial understanding of the business of mining, in determining what constitutes a fair return for nation and investors alike. If we continue down the present road, the unintended consequence will be to drive away potential investors, and delay our nation’s development for yet another decade,” the Chamber stated.

ECZ Speaks On Article 52 Of The Constitution

Chief Editor
-
20
ECZ Speaks On Article 52 Of The Constitution

The Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) says it has noted with concern the public discussion around Article 52 of the amended 2016 Constitution of Zambia which relates to the nomination procedure.

ECZ Chairperson, Mwangala Zaloumis said the discussions have focused on sub articles as opposed to the whole article 52 as amended under Act No. 2 of 2016.

Ms. Zaloumis added that the entire Article 52 of the constitution is key to the operations of the commission and the execution of nominations.

Ms Zaloumis said this during a media briefing on the orientation of the electoral Reform Technical Committee (ERTC) on the provincial stakeholder engagement meetings in Lusaka.She noted that the Commission is aware of the challenges that Article 52(6) poses in the implementation of nominations and the electoral process.

Ms. Zaloumis added that in cases where article 52 (6) has been invoked, the commission has had no option but to cancel the nomination and call for fresh elections.

“For instance, the Commission is on record as having cancelled the Kayo Ward by-election in Mwansabombwe district on 12th January 2024. The cancellation of the ward by-election was triggered by the resignation of the candidate of the Citizen First Party. This cancellation was done after the Commission had conducted its nominations and was scheduled to hold the polls,” she explained.

She noted that such a provision is therefore subject to abuse by candidates and had potential of disrupting the electoral process.

“There are serious costs attributed to the cancellation of an election to both the Commission and participating candidates which have to be taken into consideration every time the provision is invoked,” she said.

Ms. Zaloumis further said the Commission recognises that there is need to address the gaps that have been identified in the constitution and other electoral laws.

She further added that the Commission has appointed the Electoral Reforms Technical Committee (ERTC) to spearhead the electoral reforms process which will be led by Rabbison Chongo as its Chairperson.

She has, however, encouraged the general public, political parties, civil society organisations and other stakeholders in the electoral process to take advantage when the Electoral Reform Technical Committee will be receiving submissions on proposals on the amendment of the electoral laws.

1...192021...5,578Page 20 of 5,578

Company

Trending

Categories

© Lusaka Times