Sun, 06 Aug 2017 10:56:14 +0000
AN emerging culture in which the opposition political players are blatantly failing to provide credible checks and balances to the Patriotic Front (PF)
administration raises grave concern.
Instead, an impression has been created over the months and years that belonging to the opposition political party in Zambia means use of vulgar language and character assassination, wrongly believing that belittling the incumbent president is a hallmark of creating impact.
We beg to differ.
This position only demonstrates failure by the opposition to play their rightful role in a democratic dispensation like ours where they are expected to offer not only objective criticism but equally provide
alternative solutions to government.
Unfortunately, this is not what is currently happening. Our politics are vacuous. Though opposition members of Parliament are elected on the promised to provide alternative development strategies, they choose to preoccupy themselves with advancing a narrow political party agenda at the expense of championing development in their constituencies.
Is using unpalatable language against the Head of State and those in government the reason the opposition exist? How does gibberish debate benefit the electorate?
Our understanding is that electorate demand for mature and issue-based politics in providing checks and balances as opposed to the on-going petty and character assassination vibes dominating the political space.
It is rather inconceivable that the biggest opposition political party, the UPND, can pander to populism as a way to remaining relevant in the aftermath of the 2016 electoral defeat. The UPND made it very clear during the campaign period in the run up to the August 2016 general elections that it would not
concede defeat.
This is the same position the party maintains now despite several credible independent election observer organisations that monitored the elections
attesting to the authenticity of the results.
Is it possible that the European Union, African Union election monitoring team and SADC election monitoring team could all have made wrong
analyses? We do not think so.
However, continued deliberate attempts to mislead the international community on the state of the political atmosphere in Zambia is not only irksome but also demeans the role the opposition should play in our governance structure.
By now, the international community must know that the dictatorship mantra trumpeted by hired guns is neither here nor there. It is a farce. If anything, it is an agenda of fake news sponsored by disgruntled political elements.
The question we ask is: Why should a political party desiring to form government tarnish the image of the country it seeks to preside over? Does this show patriotism? Should such characters be trusted with instruments of power?
Look at how some opposition political leaders myopically reacted to President Lungu’s invocation of Article 31 of the Constitution. They purposefully misled the international media into believing that the reason for the proclamation of a threatened state of emergency was to clamp down on the opposition.
Is the opposition confirming they are the ones behind a spate of fire outbreaks and acts of economic sabotage on vital installations?
Unless the UPP leaders Saviour Chishimba just dropped from another planet, he could be excused for displaying such sheer ignorance on unfolding progression of acts of arson, sabotage and Armageddon threatening public security in Zambia for him to have defamed President Lungu in the manner he did.
To launch scathing attacks on President Lungu’s persona is surely a misguided priority. Being in the opposition political party does not imply unreasonably opposing whatever government does even when it is well intended.
We are certain that objective and patriotic Zambians of good intent do not only appreciate cabinet’s decision to invoke Article 31 to give the police officers more power to contain activities threatening public security, but also fully support the move.
