Poorly conceived use of legal systems sometimes plunges countries into turmoil. In Zambia, let us not experiment with the law and politics. The electoral majority legally voted for Edgar Chagwa Lungu.
Remember the George W. Bush elections in Georgia and ballot boxes in church yards. There was no Acting President. It’s 50%+1.
Lungu should be sworn-in and the courts should do their part, albeit, performing the role of peace makers.
Let us not pay a blind eye to the judicial activism that is creeping through the window into political rule. It is a dangerous trait.
In life, people throw stones at a mango tree that bears good fruit! Chagwa is that tree right now. Let us defend our democracy. The future is on that Tree despite the maneuvers of some people who want to bring our future down with their middle aged battle zone tactics.
The silent majority that voted lawfully for Chagwa cannot have their vote trashed through our deficit of political will to defend their collective and decisive act of voting for Lungu with more than 50+1.
To ignore the will of the electoral majority would be a traversity of democracy.
Yes, the law must and should be respected, however, it is equally true that what the law cannot properly handle remains a preserve of the people.
As such, the political constitution of government is the sovereign act of the people. Hence any judicial review of procedural questions of mistakes of a process cannot and must not invalidate the substantive will at stake; the lawful election of Edgar as President until August 2021 .
As Observers have rightly noted, it can only help in improving future processes. This is not a matter of law as such but of policy consideration. The effect by the court not to heed this humble opinion especially against the background of mindsets like the Dundumwezi factor may lead to unintentional chaotic outcomes and widespread emotional damage.
Edith Nawakwi could as well be right. What needs to be looked into is by what means was the Dundumwezi outcome made possible? Was it by sheer appeal of the UPND manifesto to voters in the affected regions?
I suggest that those involved in handling “concerns” do so in a responsible, creative, anticipatory and visionary manner that would resolve the outcome into a state respectful of the will of the majority.
If all regions had done a “Dundumwezi” would the outcome be any different? Edith Nawakwi could as well be right. What needs to be looked into is by what means was the Dundumwezi outcome made possible? Was it by sheer appeal of the UPND manifesto to voters in the affected regions?
I have no evidence to answer this vexying question but any reasonable man on the street might be excused to suspect something less than politically right was being used materially or symbolically; that is, in words including perhaps, a hate campaign.
We have a dangerous situation at hand. We are in fact in murky waters that we have never before been in. Let no one ignite the wrong match stick!
At a time like this, our Clergy must come together and set up dialogue symposium. They are an important factor in reading our national sensibilities than may be possible with a newly constituted judicial organ; respectable as the learned court might be.
Our legal fraternity know that decisions of court that break new ground come from Judicial authorities who read into both the law and policy.
It takes courage and wisdom and not merely intellect, to depart from established legal positions.
Our courts are just beginning to handle us in a new constitutional order. I urge that if they have to err, rather it be in the interest of peace than poisonous technicality.
Let there be peace and let the substantive will of the masses prevail.
I pray for civility and peace on the motherland.
Katele Kalumba, Dr.