Pontius Pilate was wiser

The more things change, the more they remain the same. Notwithstanding time and space, the same events occur and reoccur. I want to refer to an event that took place 15years and two millenniums ago.

On that day, a 33year old son of a Carpenter stood charged of treason and had come to face whatever would be appropriate – either trial or judgment, at the ‘praetorium’, a place where the Roman governor, who was then Pontius Pilate, used to hear and try cases in.

The charge against Jesus was what the politicians of today would call treason. A group of Jewish elders had accused Jesus of claiming to be king, oddly enough a treasonable claim in that period. A multitude that included scribes and chief priests gathered as Jesus was bound, and before dawn brought to the hall of judgment.

“Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?” –John 18:33 - (KJV)

³⁴ “Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”

³⁵ “Am I a Jew?” Pilate replied. “Your own people and chief priests handed you over to me. What is it you have done?”

³⁶ Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

³⁷ “You are a king, then!” said Pilate.

Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” – (NIV)

³⁸ Pilate said unto him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, “I find in him no fault at all.”

³⁹ “But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one [prisoner] at the Passover; will ye therefore that I release unto you the king of the Jews?”

⁴⁰ Then cried they all again, saying, “Not this man but Barabbas.” Now Barabbas was a robber. –(KJV)

Many scholars of the bible and preachers alike claim Pilate understood Jesus’ response as an admission of guilty therefore he collaborated with the Jewish elders to execute Jesus. This school of thought portrays Pilate as an unfair and cruel governor sitting on the day as judge, weakly succumbing to the Jewish elders’ pressure to execute Jesus.

What I do find Pilate guilty of is being indecisive, and of course not standing up for what he thought and believed was right. I do not see Pilate as a collaborator or any tiny bit an initiator in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Pilate even conceded to let Jesus free but since he had been brought to him already, had wanted to opportunistically use the custom of releasing a prisoner at Passover, to which the Jewish authorities and elders reclined and even suggested that the robber Barabbas be released instead.

Pilate like Zachaeus the petite taxman, do not get the benefit of any ‘good publicity’, but rather get indoctrinated versions of their portrayal as government agents who put themselves above religion, even from modern day clergy. However, the fact that as governor and judge, Pilate most likely had the final say. He could have done more and should not have allowed the injustice to go ahead especially after finding the man with no case to answer. But, he was just a man. With a riot about to erupt in his midst, he couldn’t stand up for ‘true justice’ and save Jesus. All in all, he was still bold enough to declare Jesus innocent in front of an almost riotous crowd hankering for the blood of Jesus.

This particular act, shows the kind of wisdom and fairness of the man which many people fail to recognize. Granted the man wasn’t bold enough to stand by his word and, belief and initially fair judgment, he still showed great courage and wisdom. This was a crowd of Jewish elders and other leaders with many followers most of them violent and unruly like the present day political cadres. This breed can get away with a crime and many other things thus almost always get their way.

Scripture is on record that the first time Pilate came out of his palace into the judgment hall, he had recused himself to judge Jesus and had asked the Jews to take Jesus and judge him by their own law. This they refused because they said their law did not grant them the power to execute a man. Scripture is again on record that Pilate washed his hands in public to distance himself from the slaying of an innocent man. Mathew 27:22-25 (KJV)

²² Pilate saith unto them, “What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?” they all say unto him, “Let him be crucified.”

²³ And the governor said, “Why, what evil hath he done?” But they cried out more, saying, “Let him be crucified.”

²⁴ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this person: See ye to it.”

²⁵ Then answered all the people, and said, “His blood be on us, and our children.”

Before deciding to bring Jesus to Pilate the Jewish elders had interrogated him throughout the night, every now and then breaking for caucus consultative assemblies to come up with what to do with him. By the time the Jewish elders and priests took Jesus to Pilate, they had already found him guilty and were not prepared for any other outcome. Ultimately, they played the role of police, complainant, judge and jury ensuring that Jesus was condemned to death.

The fact that Pilate publicly washed his hands and declared he found Jesus with no case, shows the wisdom of Pilate although scripture also shows that his wife had told him she had a sleepless night with terrible visions as a consequence of the pending execution of an innocent man and had asked Pilate to have nothing to do with it. Whatever transpired, Pilate exhibited some level of wisdom.

Fast forward to the second millennium, a 30 years old Zambian musician with an unkempt beard and an afro wig going by the stage name PILATO, was reported to the Zambia police as having defamed the President. At 30, Pilato is at the age when it is said Jesus most likely began his ministry which led to the accusations of treason and eventual crucifixion three and a half years later. The people who made the complaint at the police were referred to by many names from the different sections of the media. Some media houses called them concerned citizens while other media sources labeled them as cadres. The crime committed was that, the satirical Pilato, had released a song titled “a Lungu anabwera”, which contained lyrics with direct or indirect reference to the president.

Following the complaint reported to police (whoever reported), eventually Pilato was interviewed at Lusaka Central police later arrested and charged with a case of ‘conduct likely to cause a breach of peace, by releasing onto online platforms the song, a lungu anabwera.’

Well, the initial complaint was that of defamation but the case he was eventually charged with was that of ‘conduct likely to cause a breach of peace’. Complaint from cadres or not, the wise thing would have been to wash one’s hands and declare Pilato’s rights to free expression and as a satirical musician and performer, freedom of conscious to engage his audience in debate, entertainment, social enlightenment and just personal expression. This is where Pontius Pilate proved to be wiser by washing his hands.

Conveniently, the bible in my native Silozi, interprets the name Pilate as PILATO. However, I have come to learn that the stage name PILATO has nothing to do with the governor Pontius Pilate, but an acronym standing for People In Lyrical Arena Taking Over. For all I can say, this whole episode has made PILATO more popular and definitely is now getting noticed by many more people.

In a liberal and democratic state of the 21^st century, the free exchange of opinions and ideas without fear, favor, intimidation and harassment must be the corner stone of such a society. Of course freedoms must have limits, but no limit should come before freedom of expression. No limit should come before freedom of choice, never mind good or bad choices. No limit should come before ANY civil liberties.

There are many songs in Zambia and abroad that have been said to be ‘politically charged’ and that should be left as it is; only attracting social debate and life must go on. A few years ago, Musician 2twice, released a song ‘Tomato ba lunda’ in reaction to the rising cost of living and of course the song never played on any government media stations. The musician himself was reportedly harassed. There were stories of him being arrested for possession of marijuana. Former Zambia Association of Musicians’ president, Maiko Zulu was also arrested for possession of marijuana, not long after he released the song, ‘mad president’.

Of course musicians are not above the law, and if the law says that possession of marijuana is an offence, then the law must take its course. It is suspicious though when the law starts to apply as soon as an ‘unpleasant song’ to the powers that be is released. Musicians will not always produce love songs. Many of them will engage in social commentary and this must be defended by all Zambian citizens. We must not all think in a straight line. We need divergent views and thoughts.

Rapper Eminem is a firm critic of president George Walker Bush and has produced songs in which he has expressed his opinions regarding the former American president as well as his policies including the war in Iraq but has never seen the inside of Jail for this. There were many songs that were done before the 2008 American election in support of then, Democratic presidential hopeful Barak Hussein Obama, among them ‘My president is black’ by young Jeezy. However in the time Mr Obama has been president, there have been many songs from the rap and black community some of which have labeled him a sale-out. These are just opinions open for social debate, and nothing more.

I have a feeling with the way things are going now, Jamaican reggae star Peter Tosh, had he been Zambian, would have been arrested by the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) for propagating marijuana when he did the song, ‘Legalise it’. But as I say, the more things change, the more they remain the same. While police authorities couldn’t learn from Pontius Pilate’s public washing of hands and refusing to be party to the travesty that was to be committed in executing Jesus the Nazarene, they could have at least picked vital lessons from events from within Zambia just this century.

Then, a post newspaper columnist Roy Clarke was on the verge of a deportation after mock coffin carrying cadres had marched to the ministry of home affairs to demand his deportation. Clarke’s crime was writing a satirical piece titled ‘Mfuwe’ in which he projected a political address by the King Elephant Muwelewele. Among those present were the “red lipped snake in charge of legal reform, the hungry crocodile in charge of child welfare, and the knock-kneed Giraffe in charge of Agriculture”. Others present were "monkeys dancing around in circles and wagging their bottoms each painted with a picture of the Great Elephant." Coincidentally, or maybe satirically intentional, some of these descriptions corresponded to the physical appearances of the real ministers holding the named ministries at the time.

Coincidentally, or maybe satirically intentional again, many people, including the cadres who demanded Clarke’s deportation, said the elephant’s description could also have easily been then president Mwanawasa. This according to them was tantamount to defamation.  At that time the justice minister was George Kunda and the minister of agriculture was Mundia Sikatana. The Mfuwe address by the elephant resembled a real political meeting in many ways with cadres dancing for presidents with chitenges bearing faces of political leaders being likened to "monkeys dancing around in circles and wagging their bottoms each painted with a picture of the Great Elephant." 

Despite a deportation which was supported by both home affairs minister then Ronnie Shikapwasha, and his permanent secretary Peter Mumba, the courts eventually ruled in favour of Roy Clarke. This in many aspects was a statement upholding the rights of Roy Clarke to publish his satirical piece. The more things change, the more they remain the same it seems because now we are back at it again harassing Pilato and infringing on his rights of expression. 

The head of the police is a lawyer and the head of state who is alleged to have been injured is also a lawyer and these understand the law better than the cadres whose complaint was used to arrest Pilato. I have a feeling that the head of state may not even have listened to the song and may not even be offended by it if he did listen to the song. However, the all-powerful breed of cadres are at it again, forcing the police to make unnecessary arrests and causing unnecessary alarm in the nation.

For now, opinions will not matter, but the court will determine whether PILATO is innocent or guilty. But before even getting this far, someone should have been as wise as Pontius Pilate showed and washed their hands in public. Saying, ‘I am innocent of the persecution of this person: See ye to it.’ Alas we await the conclusion of this latest episode.