Sun, 12 Mar 2017 08:39:07 +0000
By Sycorax Tiyesa Ndhlovu
| The way some opposition leaders are practising democracy is threatening law and order; and eventually might destroy the peace and stability our country has enjoyed for more than 50 years now. |
Former American president, Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as government of the people by the people for the people. However, we have direct and indirect democracy.
In direct democracy like in Sweden, citizens participate directly in national decision-making processes of their country to determine their own destiny. In Zambia, we have indirect democracy. In such a type of democracy, citizens elect political representatives such ward councilors, members of Parliament (MPs) and a republican president as conduits for citizens’ views and participation in governance. In indirect democracy, citizens can also directly express their views through the press and other platforms.
To further promote and achieve high levels of democracy in a country, human rights are also promoted. Basically, human rights are inherent privileges and responsibilities that every human being has; and should therefore enjoy while respecting the rights of others. In democracy, among others, human rights include right to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
Among many other human rights is freedom of association for a citizen to belong to any legally registered religious, political or any legally constituted group. Regular, free and fair elections in electing political representatives from majority citizens’ choice and rule of law are part of good governance.
Legitimately elected political leaders also have their constitutional rights to govern a country according to the wishes of majority citizens.
Human rights promote each citizen regardless of one’s socio-cultural, political, economic or legal status to be treated fairly within the confines of the laws of the land. In both direct and indirect democracy, no one is above the law of the land.
While human rights in democratic governance are appreciated, in Zambia, one can argue that such rights are being abused because some opposition leaders and their supporters seem to be unable to accept majority citizens’ consensus on which political party formed government with which presidential candidate in the August 11, 2016 polls.
Contrary, the same opposition leaders appear to appreciate the political party which formed government; but they are reluctant to accept that the presidential candidate of the same ruling party won in the stated elections. Is it possible in Zambian voting patterns for a political party to form government without its presidential candidate winning the same polls?
In Zambia, our constitution clearly states that a presidential candidate who scoops 50 per cent plus one votes of the total votes cast should be declared the winner of an election. After August 11, 2016 presidential and general elections where ten (10) presidential candidates contested the presidency, Patriotic Front (PF) presidential candidate, Edgar Chagwa Lungu was declared winner of such elections after scoring 50.2 per cent of the total votes cast.
Local and international observers confirmed the President Lungu’s victory in the stated polls. Reflecting on their own massive electoral malpractices before and during the stated elections; and their demonstration of over confidence that they would win the same elections, some opposition leaders seem to be perplexed that they lost in the same polls. Therefore, they are feeling shy to concede defeat in the same polls.
Hence, information and broadcasting minister, Mulenga Chanda says the PF government feels responding to baby cries who don’t appreciate democratic dispensation; and in the process, who think that the August 11, 2016 elections’ results were stolen from them is wasting time.
However, before, during and after the stated elections, Zambia has experienced unprecedented high levels of political violence and alarming statements that threaten peace and stability of this country. Some opposition leaders have gone to international community to unjustifiably discredit the Zambian government as part of licking their electoral defeat wounds.
In the name of democracy, some opposition leaders warned of Armageddon if elections results were stolen from them. Some opposition leaders and other groups have agreed and publicly promised to make Zambia, under President Lungu, ungovernable. Consequently, one sees many things that can be described as part of the Armageddon some opposition leaders promised if the August 11, 2016 elections’ results don’t go in their favour.
Foreseeing potential for more unprecedented political indiscipline that can slide into civil strife, Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni when he was in Zambia to officiate at last year’s national agricultural and commercial show warned President Lungu to check on high levels of indiscipline in the country to avoid making his leadership too difficult to govern.
Already, can one be surprised to see some opposition leaders, some circles of the press, anyone, any professional and any professional body saying and doing anything at any time without respective laws following such people?
It is in this light that unjustifiable inflammatory statements; even against the Head of State are now common. Many such statements before have set precedents to others that one can get away with such statements and action despite having appropriate laws of the land against such statements and actions.
One can argue that dictatorship in Zambia is now doesn’t come from current government; but from some opposition leaders and their allied groups such as some news media houses, the cartel and some professional bodies who want their minority votes and views to prevail over the majority ones.
As Lusaka provincial youth chairperson, Kennedy Kamba said, it’s true that some opposition leaders are insulting the international elections’ observers by giving an impression that the stated elections’ results were stolen from them. One can also add that such opposition leaders are not only insulting international elections’ observers but they are also insolent to the majority Zambians and the combined church elections’ monitoring group that witnessed and confirmed such elections’ and their results. Majority Zambians are happy with the stated elections’ results!
If the same opposition leaders who are dictating things against majority Zambians’ will were in government, would they have allowed such levels of indiscipline against their legitimately elected government and its leadership? Matthews 7:12 urges us to do to others what we want others to do to us.
But does democracy and human rights replace discipline and the rule of law? What do our laws say on elections’ results? Don’t we have norms, values and practices for preserving and promoting love, unity and peace in this country as part of promoting discipline among ourselves and among our socio-cultural, economic or political groups?
The levels of indiscipline in Zambia, in the name of democracy and human rights, have now reached alarming levels.
Democracy and human rights should be practices in a socio-cultural context. Do such high levels of indiscipline prove that formal education levels among some Zambians are still too low to understand and practice high levels of democratic dispensation? Does this confirm that some Zambians have inadequate capacity to understand how democracy and human rights are practiced?
Thank God that we have such a God-fearing, peace-loving and therefore, tolerant republican president, President Lungu. If it was some other African presidents; or if it was the current US president, Donald Trump, such indiscipline wouldn’t have been allowed to reach such high levels; thereby threatening peace and stability of a country.
However, while President Lungu has earned high respect for accommodating some unrealistic opposition leaders and some disgruntled circles of the press to say and do what they want even against the laws of the land, as a Head of State, he should just put his foot down; and say: ‘For the sake of promoting unity and peace in Mother Zambia, enough is enough; and let the law take its course.’
Majority Zambians have a right to enjoy government leadership of their choice. President Lungu also has constitutional rights to govern this country according to the will of majority Zambians. Apart from few forms of Armageddon here and there as promised, most parts of the country are peaceful.
But one can still argue that tolerating such high levels of indiscipline further might attract worst forms of Armageddon than we have experienced before.
The author is a lecturer in Journalism and Mass Communication. He is also a trainer in Public Relations (PR) and in Local Governance.
For ideas, comments and details, contact:
Cell: 0977/0967 450151
E-mail: sycoraxtndhlovu@yahoo.co.uk
