WHY DOES ZAMBIA HAVE A SERIOUS POLITICAL VIGILANTE PROBLEM?
By MUBANGA LUCHEMBE
CALL it, if you like Zambia’s political party caderism or vigilantism in public places such as markets and bus stations. But what’s meant by political vigilantism or cadreism and how long has it been an issue in Zambia?
Vigilantism is when people “take the law into their own hands” in order to protect or advance their interests. In this way, all vigilantism is political because it always involves the use of (illegal) power against others who are perceived to be a threat to those interests. However, when we speak of “political vigilantism” we mean specifically the use of vigilantes in the name of partisan politics. And why does Zambia have a serious political vigilante problem?
It’s common knowledge that in Zambia, for decades political parties – whether in government or the opposition – are known to form and use vigilante groups who then act on their behalf. These vigilante groups are often violent, target opposition groups and public officials, and seize property or assets. But vigilantes aren’t just thugs who operate at the street level in markets and bus stations. With just few weeks after this year’s general elections, most UPND politicians appear to have failed to convince a skeptical Zambian electorate that the newly-elected government will not tolerate party cadres both at markets and bus stations.
But will UPND Lusaka Province Chairperson Obvious Mwaliteta’spronouncement that the ruling party intends to set up branches everywhere including markets and bus stations prove that Zambia’s most notorious vigilante groups have finally metamorphosed into “vigilantes-in-disguise” the term used to refer to cadres in positions of authority – for grassroots mobilization and maintenance of UPND support base – who will pursue their party’s interests by any means in public places?
Mr Mwaliteta was under fire and unending bombardment for his ill-fated decision to set up branches in markets and bus stations. Predictably, things turned out rather ugly for him as UPND-aligned CiSCA urged party members and government officials to pull in the same direction as the President in reversing evils and lawlessness perpetuated by the previous PF administration.
Besides, CiSCA chairperson Judith Mulenga commended President Hakainde Hichilema for condemning the UPND’s proposed setting up of party branches in markets and bus stations, as announced by the party’s Lusaka Province chairperson and supported by the ministers of home affairs and local government and rural development, Jack Mwiimbu and Gary Nkombo respectively. Undoubtedly, the ugly aftermath of this provincial chairperson-made decision was threatening both Mr Mwiimbu and Mr Nkombo’s political standing. The duo wanted to find a campaign promise-linked diversion that had a constitutional and legal spin as civil rights activists condemned their colleague’s proposal. In their view, what could be gloriously better than recruiting the jobless youths in urban slums and the over-crowded peri-urban informal settlements?
Political vigilantism isn’t a new feature of Zambian politics. Some researchers argue that it has its roots in the country’s independence movement from British colonial rule. The erstwhile main political parties UNIP and ANC were engaged in fierce political struggles over whether Zambia should be a single-party socialist or multiparty capitalist state. The struggle involved violent vigilante activity by elements on both sides. Today, Zambia’s two main political parties – the UPND and the PF – have vigilante groups who wear T-shirts branded with their group’s colours and logos. How does this manifest itself?
Political vigilantism often involves violence, both physical and psychological. Vigilantes engage in riots, violent protests and property destruction. They’re also known to target elections, intimidating voters or mounting roadblocks to prevent “outsiders” from observing polls. Vigilantes have also been known to harass, threaten, assault, and assassinate opponents. Who perpetuates political vigilantism?
As observers of the country’s political landscape are acutely aware, Zambia’s two main political parties, recruit, train and fund vigilantes. These are young people who feel that the state doesn’t represent their interests. They also feel powerless because they don’t have many opportunities to improve their situation or are poor. These frustrations make them vulnerable to indoctrination by older generations – largely politicians – who give the young recruits ideological direction and justification for their actions.
Vigilantism has also flourished due to lack of deterrence. Criminal justice agencies – particularly the police – are highly ineffective against vigilantes. Based on the insights knowledgeable observers have gained from their research, it’s believed that this is because of significant partisan interference in police work which has left them powerless. They either don’t make arrests or, if arrests are made, suspects are released because a politician intervened through the back door. What can be done to put a stop to this?
Tackling political vigilantism won’t be easy because young people may feel that being a member of a vigilante group defines and gives meaning to their life. It might give them power, esteem, prestige and a sense of belonging. It, therefore, won’t be enough to just disband the groups and give them moral lessons on the perils of vigilantism. They must be given enough support to find alternative livelihoods. Zambia could draw lessons from conflict-prone African countries that have successfully demobilised and re-settled ex-combatants after internal conflicts.
Longer-term strategies must address the issues of unemployment and Zambia’s deeply unequal society. Unless government policies create a more equal society, for example, through better employment opportunities for young people, vigilantism will remain a stable feature of Zambian politics. Tackling inequality also means more decisive action against corruption, which is widespread and vicious. Corruption allows the rich to get richer and prevents people from being held accountable for their actions. This creates conditions for vigilante activity.
Lastly, the police service must be independent, well-resourced and insulated from partisan politics. To do this, there must be an overhaul. The police service must be decentralised to improve community-police relations and the current political appointment of police chiefs should be replaced by a competitive recruitment process. A new governance structure made up of people with expertise in police work, like academics and practitioners, should be created to oversee police work.
