By Dr C Ngoma

This is a quote from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet (Act III, Scene II). Hamlet and his mother, Queen Gertrude are watching a play. In the play, the character of queen is trying very hard to convince that if her husband died she would never marry again because she loves him too much. While watching this, Hamlet asks his mother what he thinks of the play. The mother replies, ‘The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.’

We can easily misunderstand what she means because we do not use the word ‘protest’ today in the same way they did in Wm Shakespeare’s day. What she is talking about is that the character in the play is making too much effort to try to be convincing so that she is coming out as being insincere. In our day, it would be like a person who is trying too hard to convince someone saying ‘Napali a mama ku Chingwere!’ (I swear upon my dead mother buried in Chingwere cemetery!).

This is what I feel is happening in this election campaign period when it comes to the Patriotic Front message. They have gone out all guns blazing to try and convince the Zambian people that all is not so bad but hunky-dory. The pain that the Zambian people may be feeling is not real, it is a phantom pain. Let me explain what a phantom pain is. People whose limbs have been amputated can feel pain in the absent foot. It is a most extraordinary and distressing condition. Sometimes, they even feel an itch but cannot scratch because there is no limb to scratch!

The PF party politicians are telling Zambians that prices are not higher than they have ever been, they are lower if you look with prescription glasses. If the prices are higher, well, it is because they are higher everywhere else in the world. It is Covid 19 ‘stupid.’ What Zambians should be doing is to look at the roads, the fly-over bridges, the roundabouts, the all singing and all dancing ‘state-of-the art hospitals, the schools, the universities, the spanking new houses for service personnel. If bread is expensive, switch to kandolo. What about expensive toilet paper? What do you switch to?

The infrastructure is visible and not invisible. Even visiting former heads of state who had not been to Zambia for ages were impressed. The change of the urban built environment is palpable! But, why isn’t this infrastructure campaigning for them? Is there is something that is drowning the voice so that it cannot be heard? Could it be the sound of grumbling of empty stomachs? Could it be the din of screams from hospital beds where there is no medicines? Could it be the wailing of mourners burying their prematurely dead relatives?

The tired combatants that we heard in 2016 have re-oiled their rusty armour and have been re-conscripted into the Home Guard. Suddenly, the people who were ready to jump on throats and even go to prison for saying what they said for many years are now saying that they were lying to Zambians. It is only now that they are telling the truth when there is no prison for them but just amanone to come.

The message of the resurrection of Jesus Christ was credible because people were ready to and did, die for it. If there was a promise of good things in the Roman empire such as a seat in the Senate of Rome if they spread the resurrection news, who would have believed the apostles? A witness who will benefit from his testimony in a court of law cannot be taken seriously. Are the Zambian people going to stomach more apologies in 2026?

The ruling party campaigners are trying too hard to be convincing. They come out as being insincere. Is anyone listening?

The PF party doth protest too much, me thinks.

By Henry Kyambalesa

The use of chieftains as political cadres or proxies by any ruling political party is, no doubt, an enticing prospect due to their dependence on the government of the day for public assistance granted to them, including the electrification and maintenance of their palaces, provision for their stipends and motor vehicles, and other trappings relating to their welfare.

The following selected headlines which have appeared in various news outlets over the years depict the worrisome trend in this regard:

“Chavuma sub-chiefs pledge to support President Lungu, PF.”—Lusaka Times, July 14, 2021.

“Explain PF achievements to your subjects, GBM tells chiefs.”—Lusaka Times, July 11, 2021.

“Chiefs pledge to support President Lungu.”—Zambia Daily Mail, September 19, 2020.

“LUNDA chiefs in North-Western Province will support President Edgar Lungu in the next presidential election, says the Lunda Cultural Association.”—Daily Nation, January 29, 2017. And

“South Chiefs support Lungu.” Patriotic Front (PF), July 21, 2015.

The House of Chiefs was first established in 1965 soon after Zambia’s independence on October 24, 1964 as an advisory body to the United National Independence Party (UNIP) and the late Dr. Kenneth D. Kaunda’s administration on matters relating to ethnic cultures and traditional customs until 1991 when the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) and Dr. Frederick Chiluba assumed the reins of power and banished the House and ignored the role of traditional leaders in development.

The apparent reason for getting rid of the House of Chiefs was the use of the House and chieftains during the UNIP era as one of the tools designed to support the interests and political survival of the ruling political party—the same role the House of Chiefs and chieftains have been expected to perform since their re-introduction into the realm of governance by the MMD and the late Dr. Levy P. Mwanawasa upon winning the general elections held on December 27, 2001.

Since chieftains and the House of Chiefs have an important role to play in national development and the preservation of our cherished cultural values and traditions, there is no need to consider the prospect of repealing Article 169 of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016—which recognizes and acknowledges their relevance—as a solution to the problem at hand.

However, we need to devise a viable and sensible solution to the problem. In this regard, I wish to suggest that the following be added to existing Electoral Code of Conduct:

1. Candidates for elective public office who openly seek or solicit the support of traditional leaders and/or any other individuals and/or institutions that depend on public assistance for their welfare should be barred from participating in elections for a period of 5 years;
2. Candidates who induce traditional leaders and/or any other individuals and/or institutions that depend on public assistance for their welfare by means of gifts or donations of any value during any year elections are scheduled to be held should be barred from participating in elections for a period of 5 years; and
3. Chieftains who openly declare their support for any political party or candidate should have the public assistance granted to them suspended for a period of 5 years.

This is one of many issues that will require new political players—such as HH and the UPND Alliance—to address. The Patriotic Front and its officials, after having perfected the art of using chieftains to garner support to their advantage, will not support the introduction of the foregoing sanctions or any other similar sanctions.

They have truly gained a great deal of experience in extracting endorsements from chieftains—by asking them to gather at a designated location and tactically persuading and coercing them to make joint statements declaring their support for the ruling political party and its candidates.

Chieftains particularly will have to support the measures suggested above in order to guard themselves against being gathered and manipulated like headless chickens to support inept public officials who have exhibited little of no ability to address the numerous problems facing the country at its people.

Finally, but certainly not least, chieftains and political parties and their candidates need to be mindful of the following potential consequences of the nature of their questionable political maneuvers:

1. Solicitation of support from chieftains by political contestants through gifts and donations, for example, can consciously or otherwise induce them to abuse the absolute traditional authority they wield by imposing their political views and choices on residents in their areas of jurisdiction.
2. Chieftains are, ideally, impartial leaders of all the residents in their chiefdoms regardless of their political affiliations. However, their support for any political party or candidate can inevitably place them in an adversarial position against some of the residents who may have different political alignments. And
3. Chieftains’ endorsement of any political party or candidate can easily frustrate efforts aimed at creating a level playing field for all political contestants, since they (the chieftains) already have a faithful following in their areas of jurisdiction. In this regard, we would do well to address the deep-rooted scourges of election-rigging, vote-buying, monopolized access to major news outlets, and access to public resources by a ruling political party without opening up other avenues for unfair political advantage.

By Sampa J. Kalungu TI-Z Chapter President

Transparency International Zambia (TI-Z) has noted the release this week of the Annual Report for the year 2020 by the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC). TI-Z has taken time to analyze this report, whose release was eagerly being awaited by the general public and key stakeholders.

Our general view is that the 2020 FIC report is appallingly shallow, lacking in detail and way too generalized to be of any meaningful value for effective public or stakeholder engagement, or indeed for the sort of follow up action that would be required to address the issues it has attempted to report on. We have reached this conclusion due to a number of reasons, which we are very happy to elaborate on.
Firstly, We have noted with deep concern that the 2020 FIC report is in fact not a Trends Analysis report but merely an annual report. While this may seem to be an inconsequential change at face value, it has wider implications for the issues that the FIC Trends Analysis reports have highlighted in previous years. TI-Z would like to bring to the public’s attention the fact that the FIC has produced a Trends Analysis report every single year since 2015, with the 2019 one that was released last year being the 6th Trends Analysis report that has been produced.

Secondly, The 2020 annual report has provided a lot of information focusing merely on numbers without going into the details behind the numbers. There is for example mention of the 18 analysed reports of corruption with a value of K2.2 million. The report is deafeningly silent on what the individual composition of these 18 reports is. Who is involved in these cases? What is their nature exactly?

Lastly, Because of the abrupt change in the methodology and presentation of the report as outlined above, the 2020 report does not provide any details on how issues reported in the 2019 Trends Analysis report have been followed up, making it likely that the issues have merely been brushed aside and not been addressed at all. For instance, one of the key issues raised in the 2019 Trends Analysis report was the environmental crimes in relation to the Mukula tree trade. The 2019 report made three key recommendations for government to implement, along with many other recommendations touching on tax evasion, corruption, and use of cash in commerce, among others. None of these recommendations have been reported on in this 2020 report, which in our view raises serious doubts about the extent to which the FIC is really interested in seeing progress being made on the issues it raises.

This also effectively makes the 2020 report a baseless output that doesn’t make any reference to baseline data of any sort to inform any reported progress on the current issues it has raised.
On the whole, TI-Z is concerned about a worrying trend that we have noticed since the release of the FIC’s 2018 Trends Analysis report in 2019.

Zambians will recall that in the wake of the release of that report, whose contents did not sit well with the government, President Edgar Lungu publicly attacked the FIC and accused it of spreading rumors and being on a witch hunt which was poisoning the country.

We have noted that the two reports that the FIC has released since that public rebuke have both depreciated in quality, suggesting that the FIC is slowly being cowed into submission to the narrow interests of politicians rather than those of the wider Zambian citizenry.

We are worried that the trust and reputation that the FIC has cultivated in the Zambian public as an institution that delivers on its mandate without fear or favour will quickly get eroded, which will be a real shame because a professional, strong and truly independent FIC is an absolute necessity if we are to make progress not just in the fight against corruption, but generally in adhering to the principles and ideals of good governance.

Despite these glaring weaknesses in the 2020 report, we would like to applaud the increase in the reports of suspected corruption to the FIC, which supports the Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of Whistle Blowers) Act. We also note the challenge of low staffing levels mentioned in the report, and therefore urge government to provide adequate resources to enable the FIC not only to have the required staffing levels, but to also be equipped with modern and appropriate capacities and skills to deal with different dimensions of corruption.

TI-Z further calls for the refinement of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act to give the FIC an enhanced mandate to enforce its findings.