Impeachment: Is it necessary for Zambia right now?
In South Africa a top court ruled that parliament had failed to hold President Jacob Zuma accountable for using public money for private home upgrades, a move that could lead to impeachment proceedings.
TBy EDWARD MWANGO HE much sought after impeachment by the opposition United Party for national Development (UPND) which has left many Zambians with unanswered questions mostly the purpose for which the opposition party badly wants this motion to go through in Parliament. But this has left many people wondering as to why such a motion should come when no discernible malfeasance warranting impeachment has been adduced.
It will be recalled in 2009 the UPND again began debate on a controversial motion to impeach President Levy Mwanawasa for violating the Constitution by appointing a vice president they said was unTualified. Accordingly fifty three lawmakers (53) signed a petition calling for Mwanawasa’s impeachment, citing a constitutional stipulation that a person must have served as a Member of Parliament before being appointed vice president.
Opposition leader Nevers Mumba was appointed vice president in May 2003 replacing Enoch Kavindele, even though Dr. Mumba had never been a lawmaker and lost in the December 2001 presidential vote won by Mwanawasa.
The impeachment motion was being moved by UPND lawmaker Sakwiba Sikota.
The motion was put to a vote on the government’s request and parliament members voted 92-57 against it.
The Constitution also barred a person from holding the second highest office in the land if they lost in a general election.
Before the impeachment motion came to parliament, the opposition FDD had already mounted a court challenge, to be heard in October, arguing that the appointment was unconstitutional.
Meanwhile a Lusaka resident, Stanley Kombe wonders whether the UPND is able to get the numbers required to succeed with such an ambitious motion.
Mr Kombe further notes that on another interesting note, an opposition legislator Dipak Patel – a Mwanawasa supporter recently appointed as trade and industry minister – said the motion was an act of “vindictiveness by the opposition.”
And Government has said that the impeachment motion submitted by the United Party for National Development 83ND to Parliament is misconceived and an abuse of the procedures of the National Assembly.
Chief Government Spokesperson, Dora Siliya has since said that the allegations contained in the notice of motion do not amount to any impeachable offense recognized in any system of Government.
Ms. Siliya last week told Journalists that the allegations contained in the motion neither fall within the scope of impeachable offenses, nor meet the test of substantiality.
Ms. Siliya noted that the allegations set out value judgement and opinions which they are entitled to, adding that a difference in opinion and the opposition’s discontent with the Government cannot form the basis of impeachment.
Ms. Siliya also said that the abdication by the opposition to represent their electorate and instead advance the wishes of one person represents breach of trust that the electorate reposed in them.
Added to this argument was the observation by Patriotic Front 3) Chairman for Legal $ffairs, Brian Mundubile who noted that the impeachment motion contains generalities and other matters that were already before the Courts.
Patriots for Economic Progress 3e3 president 6ean Tembo has charged that the impeachment motion against President Edgar Lungu lacked objectivity and was merely the UPND’s continued persecution of the Head of State and promotion of tribalism, .
“As the party we do not support the UPND motion of impeachment against President Lungu because it lacks objectivity, is onerous and promotes tribalism and undermines national security ,”
bent “As the party we do not support the UPND motion of impeachment against President Lungu because it lacks objectivity, ne is onerous and promotes tribalism and undermines national ’s security,” Mr Tembo said nt And Isaac Mwanza writes bpd ’,n the first and second series in which I offered an analysis of the grounds tendered by Hon. Garry Nkombo, the UPND member for Mazabuka constituency, n I discussed how parliament in e its motion wanting to impeach the President of the Republic on thas the grounds of debt contraction, wnt would have to show that the debt ins, in question, did not have the approval at of Parliament and was nte therefore unlawfully contracted, or was contracted outside the parameters set in our constitution and our laws. Parliament would ss also be required to show that it is as illegal for government to deposit nt public funds in a working Acar count in light of 6ection of the as Public Finance Act.
d “In this series, I address the iste sue of procurement of the fire tenders and whether the process by which they were acquired, can provide grounds as a basis for a motion to impeach the President. How the procurement officers handled the tender process is beyond the scope of this discussion and this author confirms that he has had a change to look at some of the procurement documents pertaining to the tender process. He still disagrees with the handling of the process by procurement officers in the Ministry of Local Government.
Mr Mwanza argues that the particulars of the allegation for impeachment of the President in ground . . reads
. . That the 3resident fell into violation of Articles 90 and 198 of the Constitution when Cabinet authorized the Ministries of Local Government and Health to procure fire tenders and ambulances, respectively, at an exorbitantly high cost contrary to the principles enshrined in Articles 90 and 198 which require that the executive authority including the use of public resources is exercised prudently and in manner compatible with the principles of social justice and for the peoples well being and benefit.
“Put simply, the motion accuses all members of the Cabinet of authorizing the procurement of fire tenders and ambulances at an exorbitant cost. From the outset, I must mention that this ground is too general to be an allegation against one person as it generalizes the authorization. I will not attempt to look at the issue of ambulances as the same principles in fire tenders would apply.
In South Africa a top court ruled that parliament had failed to hold President Jacob Zuma accountable for using public money for private home upgrades, a move that could lead to impeachment proceedings.
Opposition parties had gone to the Constitutional Court to argue that the speaker of parliament failed to enforce the appropriate processes to censure Zuma over the scandal.
Zuma had failed to abide by recommendations made by the country’s anti-corruption watchdog in 2014 over refurbishments at his personal home in the eastern KwaZulu-Natal province that misused million
million euros of ta[payers’ money. The scandal came to a dramatic climax when the Constitutional Court last year found the president guilty of violating his oath of office by refusing to pay back the cash.
And contacted on the scheme by UPND to move the impeachment motion, rd Liberation Movement Party leader, Enock Tonga charged that the move was a waste of time as it would only destabilise the peace and unity the country had enjoyed.
“The intended motion is useless because it will just bring confusion in the country and destroy the unity,” Mr Tonga charged.
As Zambians enjoy peace it is necessary that they divulge into this debate while sober and be mindful of the peace the country has enjoyed since independence.