LAZ’S EMBARRASSING MOMENT

THE Law Association of Zambia’s failed attempt to halt the constitution amendment process in Parliament is a fiasco that has embarrassed the association and its champions for lack of a better term. LAZ’s inability to show neutral leadership in the Constitution (Amendment) Bill process is a disaster and an embarrassing poor reflection on its president, Eddie Mitwa, who must personally shoulder the blame. That LAZ has failed to lead objectively in the Constitution (Amendment) Bill number 10 of 2019 process is not in dispute unless one has political blinkers on. It is such a disaster that Mr Mwitwa, State counsel, should quit to save members from further embarrassment. It is also clear that LAZ is misleading the nation on the bill, and the sooner it halts this misguided campaign the better for everyone. It is a disaster and a disgrace to the nation for LAZ to embark on a mission that was doomed to failure from inception. The whole farce was politically driven. It was against the wishes of majority of its members. What is even more embarrassing is the fact that LAZ has already lost the battle, whether its leadership wants to admit it or not. Speaker of National Assembly Patrick Matibini’s decision to reject the association’s attempts to halt a constitution amendment process has put paid to any hopes that the association may have had to succeed in its campaign. We can surmise that from the moment Dr Matibini said “no”, the rest of the process even in the Constitutional Court is just an academic exercise. What we know, in our layman’s understanding, is that Parliament makes laws and the Judiciary enforces them through interpretation. So, if the Speaker says “no one can stop Parliament from making laws”, what can one do? LAZ has only one option, and that is to withdraw its ill-conceived court action against the President, National Assembly and Attorney General. The cardinal question that LAZ must answer, which has baffled everyone, is has the association been stopped from submitting its objections to the parliamentary select committee that will be handling this bill? The answer is No. If anything, LAZ, having been identified by Parliament as one of the major stakeholders in constitution amendments, has been given a date on which to appear and make its submission. We would think that LAZ would seize this opportunity to put its objections in writing and make them a public record by presenting them before the committee. For the record, the Speaker has revealed that the select committee comprises members of Parliament with a representation from each political party as follows: Patriotic Front 6, UPND 5, FDD 1, MMD 1 and 2 independents. Why, then, should the process be halted just because one organisation wants it halted for no good reason other than satisfy some political egos? So many organisations have tried to reason with LAZ and others at odds with the constitution amendment process to give their objections to the Parliamentary Select Committee, but this advice seems to be falling on deaf ears because of preconceived positions. As Government Deputy Chief Whip Tutwa Ngulube said the case before the Constitutional Court will not yield any results because the amendment bill process will go ahead rendering the case an academic exercise. And the Independent Churches of Zambia (ICOZ) advised LAZ to withdraw the case before the Constitutional Court and present its concerns before the Parliamentary Committee. We agree with lamentations by ICOZ member Charles Mumba that it is disheartening to see that the professionals who are supposed to give guidance are the ones causing confusion. Bishop Mumba also said during a press briefing yesterday LAZ was hypocritical because its members participated in the National Dialogue Forum. The Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) has also added its voice. There is indeed no reason for antagonism and bickering over NDF resolutions as individuals with misgivings and dissenting voices can still make submissions to Parliament. EFZ representative at NDF, Reverend Chongo Phiri, said the NDF process was guided by cardinal principles of consensus, inclusiveness and transparency as was required during the constitution making process. He said in a statement the process of constitution-making following the NDF was work in progress and had not reached finality. Rev Chongo said there was no reason for antagonism and bickering over NDF resolutions as individuals with misgivings and dissenting voices could still make submissions to Parliament. He said in as much as there was some opposition from a few people, there had been wide support from all sections of society who believed the NDF presented an opportunity for all stakeholders to meet and deliberate on various concerns in a quest as a nation to come up with a constitution that could stand the test of time. With such views from organisations and individuals who took part in the National Dialogue Forum (NDF) together with LAZ, is it any wonder that people are questioning the intentions of the LAZ president, Mr Mwitwa, and his cabal of friends for taking the matter to court.