RETIRED OR PURGED?

THE power to retire civil servants in the national interest has become a matter of widespread public concern, particularly following remarks that public officers suspected of supporting the opposition in the August 13 general elections could be removed from service. This is not a minor administrative issue. It goes to the heart of constitutional government, the independence of the public service and the political rights of every citizen. Chapter One Foundation executive director Josiah Kalala has made an important point: although retirement in the national interest is recognised under Zambian law, its use must comply with the Constitution. Mr Kalala cites Article 173(3) that protects public officers from removal without just cause and due process. The phrase “national interest” cannot be treated as a blank cheque, nor can it be casually equated with the political interests or convenience of the government of the day. He is right that any decision must have a legitimate public purpose, be supported by lawful and justifiable reasons, and be open to scrutiny. Transparency is essential. When the state exercises a power that can end a person’s career, it must be able to explain why. Public officers and citizens alike should be confident that decisions are based on evidence and proper procedure - not political suspicion, personal allegiance or an official’s perceived failure to support the ruling party. Without clear reasons and accountability, a lawful power can become an instrument of intimidation. Veteran politician Jonas Shakafuswa has also underlined a basic democratic principle: civil servants are Zambian citizens. They do not surrender their political rights when they enter public service, and they should not be expected to “toe the UPND line” simply because they work for the government. Their terms of service require them to perform their duties impartially, not to become political supporters of the party in power. The distinction matters. A public officer may have a private political preference while still serving the public professionally and without discrimination. That is why the comments attributed to UPND national youth chairman Gilbert Liswaniso are so troubling. Speaking of “flushing out” civil servants allegedly aligned with the opposition and retiring them in the national interest suggests a political cleansing programme, not a fair and individualised process. Such language, broadcast publicly, can create fear and anxiety among public workers - even before any formal action is taken. It risks sending the message that employment depends on political loyalty rather than competence, impartiality and lawful conduct. There is a further danger in treating suspicion as proof. Allegations about how civil servants voted or whom they supported must not substitute for evidence of misconduct. Nor should a party official’s pronouncements be taken as a determination of who may lawfully remain in public service. Decisions affecting people’s livelihoods belong within established legal and administrative processes, with safeguards that allow those affected to know the case against them and respond. The government is entitled to expect public officers to implement lawful policies and serve all citizens. But that expectation is not a licence to punish private political choices. Retiring an officer in the national interest may be legally available; as Mr Kalala cautions, it must not be abused. Protecting due process, explaining decisions and respecting political freedom are not obstacles to effective government. They are conditions of it - and safeguards for every Zambian, whatever party holds power.

Longwe threatens to sue Chief Justice

Chester, Felix, IDC finally granted bail

ZNBC journalist Mukuka released from police c...

We’re looking into accusation of misconduct a...

Independent candidates free to file nominatio...