Treason

Often, when politicians make a statement we, the electorate, tend to ignore the words that are being spoken.This is especially true during campaign period, which is sometimes referred to as the ‘silly season’! This is the time when politicians seem to want to promise us the world, knowing full well that they could never deliver on these pledges. Yet we take no notice of these empty vows and continue to vote for them.

However ever, once in a while a politician makes a remark that we all need to sit up and take notice of. Michael Sata has just made just such a comment. This weekend Sata announced that there would be no elections in 2011 for president, because he feels that the 30th October by-election will give the winner (whom he thinks will be himself) a full term to serve for five years.

This statement is tantamount to treason!

If Sata were to carry out his demand and extend his term beyond the mandated period of time as set out in Article 88(6) of the constitution, he would be committing a treasonous act by orchestrating a coup d’etat.

One of the many reasons why this statement is so concerning is that this is not the first time the PF Presidential candidate has shown scant regard for the Zambian constitution. In 2001 it was Sata that proposed that President Chiluba disregard the term limits set in the constitution, amend the bill of rights and run for a third term. Thankfully the constitution withstood this ill-thought out and dangerous challenge. But what other attacks would our fundamental principles have to endure if Sata were to be elected president?

What Sata’s comment demonstrates is that he truly represents the old style African politician. African history in the post-colonial period has been rife with leaders who have disregarded their nation’s constitution, rejected the rule of law and presided over their country with total impunity. Since 1991 and even more so since 2001, Zambia and its people have fought to be a nation based on the rule of law, where all citizens are equally protected and not only those who are part of a certain politician’s cadre. This is something that we as a nation we should be very proud of and something we should defend.

Michael Sata represents the bad old days of history, to bring such a dated politician in to power after several years of great progress in Zambia would provide another yet example of how the promise of a nation can be taken single handedly by an individual’s ego and greed!

Zambia Must Not Sleepwalk Into An Electoral Nightmare

With ten days to go all three parties are conducting the usual campaign trail travels. UPND is targeting the Southern Province, Lusaka and to a degree the Copperbelt. PF are concentrating on Lusaka, Copperbelt and occasionally visit places like Northern Province. It looks like the MMD is the only party conducting a national campaign. As you would expect allegations and counter-allegations are being made.

All candidates are saying only they have the solution to our countries problems and we have to vote for them, and so on. So all in all it is business as normal; in that respect Zambian politics is actually quite healthy.

Where the differences do appear, and quite starkly, is on how they are predicting the outcome. We hear the usual “…hard battle ahead but we are confident we will win” sort of lines from the relevant spokesmen. What is interesting is that PF, and more recently UPND seem resigned to defeat. How else can one explain the allegations of vote-rigging, predicted electoral corruption and impending malfeasance? Similar allegations were made following the last election in 2006, and readers may well remember the violence and rioting by PF cadres. This time around the allegations are being made well before polling day, why?

The answer lies in the question ‘Do PF themselves think they can win?’ The apparent answer is ‘no’. The considered opinion is that PF, knowing it cannot win has looked to recent events in Zimbabwe and Kenya for an electoral solution. PF strategists have concluded they cannot win an outright victory so the only option available is to get into government by stealth. Such strategy and such talk is defeatist and begs the question, “Why is PF in the running at all?”

The answer can be found in Kenya and Zimbabwe. In both cases the winner of the majority vote was robbed by the second place candidate. Both Raila Odinga and Morgan Tsvangerai should be President’s of their respective countries, but they are not. The real victims in all of this are not the politicians themselves but the voters of Kenya and Zimbabwe, not forgetting democracy itself. If our democracy is hijacked in this way then it is us, the Zambian people who will have been robbed.

Our country will enter into uncharted territory; how would a MMD/PF coalition actually work, how long would it be before there is a split and we are once again going to the voting stations? Can you really see HH in government? What position would Guy Scott hold? Would Sata really be prepared to go as No. 2 to Rupiah Banda?

Many of these scenarios are too ludicrous even to contemplate. Already we see that the Zimbabwe ‘coalition’ falling apart – actually it cannot fall apart as it never really got going in the first place. The prospects are not good for that country. The message is this: Zambia must not sleepwalk into an electoral nightmare.

Zambia has a healthy and well respected democratic history. It is to be remembered that the PF allegations of 2006 were proved to be unfounded by both the Zambian Electoral Commission and the International Observers who oversaw the elections. If any political party has fears of impending electoral malpractice it should go directly to the Electoral Commission, SADC Observers and EU Electoral Mission and voice its concerns. To create political mischief and make allegations from the sidelines damages not only themselves but also Zambia as a nation, and that would be wrong.

The rule of law or the law of rule?

There are certain skills and understandings a potential President should posses. The most important of which, no matter which country the individual seeks to govern, is the understanding of the rule of law. The judicial processes and the organs which enforce the law should remain untouched by political shenanigans and meddling. All citizens of a country, from the very top to the very bottom should maintain a healthy respect for the law of the land. Without it officials and friends of those in power soon think they are above the law, corruption flourishes and the reputation of the country dives into the gutter.

It is most interesting then to review the stances taken by the three main candidates on the issue in this election (alas Miyanda does not really count). Both HH and RB remain fairly onside on the issue, neither has threatened to abuse the legal organs of the country and neither has threatened to arrest those who do not agree with them. Threatening to arrest people because they do not agree with you is a sure sign of a megalomaniac and a person with dictatorial tendencies.

One would think that someone with a legal background would understand all of this and indeed, would be a champion of the country’s legal system. Michael Sata was once a policeman so he should fit the bill. After all we expect the police to uphold the law, don’t we? Alas no, he seems to think that the legal system is for him to play with and to use as is his want. Only he has threatened to arrest somebody, you will not be surprised to hear that RB and top MMD officials are his intended victims. That PF mouthpiece the Post newspaper ran a headline ‘Banda to face arrest for corruption if Sata wins’ (3rd Oct 2008). Mr Sata was quoted as saying “I will deal with them and sort them out, sort them out clean”. He also went on to say of Mike Mulongoti that he would be arrested for trying to stifle freedom of the press and for dictating what the press should write. What is most worrying is the ‘I’ in all of this. Had he said ‘I will ask the police to investigate’, or, ‘I will ask the ECZ to look into the allegations’ then we would have nothing to worry about. But no, it is the ‘I’ that damns him as ignorant of the rule of law, as an abuser of power. Nobody will be safe if Sata becomes President on 30th October.

Some great politicians have been to prison for their beliefs or allegiances. Think of the twenty-seven years of incarceration of Nelson Mandela, our own Kenneth Kaunda was locked up by Chiluba, so was Rupiah Banda. Michael Sata too has been to prison but sadly for Zambia not for political beliefs or for any revolutionary struggle. His time in prison was for theft. Sata is a common criminal with a criminal record to prove it. He is certainly no material for a future President.

The most worrying thing is that his friends at the Post can say what they like, they never retract the false statements they make about other candidates; as far as they are concerned Sata can do no wrong. This is all the more strange when one considers that until a few weeks before the campaign it considered Sata one of the most evil and corrupt people on the planet. So why then do Sata’s newfound police powers not seem to apply to the Post? Why has the Post suddenly converted itself into the ‘I love Sata’ fan club? These are questions the Zambian people would love to know the answers to. As for me I have a word of warning to those at the Post, beware strange bedfellows.