That's just me.

A brief introspection of ‘me’ reveals that a few years ago I was able to define myself in many different ways using different gobbledygook (to borrow from George Mpombo’s words). Today, all I say is that I am just me, and unless I am attending a job interview or in a meeting delivering a business pitch, I really don't know how to define myself. That's just me.

All I know is that I am a unique individual. I love life. I love my wife. I love my son. I love the rest of my family. I love my friends. I love to write.  I love good music. I love sports.  I love to read.  I love to be random.  I love to love.  I love me. That's just me.

I’m no better than any other human, neither am I any lesser human.  I’m not one to think I’m high and mighty.  I’m just…myself. I’m a creation of what is in my mind.  I seek to find and understand myself everyday but never finding me. That's just me.

I certainly have people that understand me even when I myself still seek to find myself. I do have people with whom I connect with, with whom I can have a great conversation with and so on. But I still have many, with whom I struggle to develop bonds with. That's just me.

That's just me. Purposely or not, I have my comfort zones and people I have in close proximity (or is it within my circle) as I keep finding myself. To many people though, I am hard to understand, extremely hard to define, perhaps hard to hate, hard to love; and extremely hard to please. That's just me.

One thing I'd say is that over the years, I've chosen my friends and confidants carefully. Looking back, it could have been a conscious decision I made. I needed to find happiness from within myself and no where else. In a world where friends can stab you in the back or use your back to climb the many life's ladders, to get to whatever heights they want to get to, it's wise to sieve friends. That' just me.

I have learned that learning is an everyday process until the very last breath of life. Yes until the very last breath of life. Even on the death bed, there are valuable lessons one can pick up. So then if learning is an everyday thing, how can I find myself? Well that's just me questioning myself. That's just me.

I’m a strange person definitely.  Funny enough, I like to be different and that I am.  I like to make my own opinions of things. I like having my own personal view point and digesting everything from my own perspective. Don't get me wrong, I learn a lot from other people, but a big part of my everyday existence still remains finding myself. That's just me. 

Finding myself has been a big part of my life's journey. I guess it stems from the fact that I am a last born child and I grew up trying to be like all of my older siblings but each had some unattractive behavioral traits I saw in them hence I kept looking. In the end it became a big battle choosing who to be like. But, do I really need to be like anybody else? How can I find me? I will keep looking for me. That's just me.

Many a time within myself, has been a raging debate in my mind. The answer I have always arrived at has been to find myself, and not find in me, a part of my siblings or any other person for that matter. I have ultimately always found time to myself to think and enjoy moments of 'me' time.  That is just me.

In good times and in the worst times…I find some 'me' time.  However, in trying to find my space as a father and a husband, my 'me' time has become ever so limited. My time is for other people, and the 'me' time is a waste of time. Time for some changes within myself I guess. Well, that's just me.

I remain a rather unique individual.  An extremely loving, tolerant individual. The other side of me is different. I am an individual who cares not what people think about what I do. But how is that possible not to care when I am not an island? I am a believer in individuality and what a group of individuals can achieve as a united team. I am my own individual.  And I love it.  I love me.  That's just me.

So my path to finding myself continues. I'll keep learning, introspecting and keep walking. I need to keep understanding myself more, find myself, the self I keep departing from many times. That's just me.

Still looking for me

Monster in law, Bother in law & Sorry in law …

The recent events surrounding the famous Knowles-Carter Celebrity family have prompted me to discuss the issue of in-law relations. Difficulty subject definitely, but I’ll discuss it in the context of the events in that Standard Hotel elevator after the met gala ball.

Hip-hop and business mogul Jay-Z, real name Shaun Carter was recently attacked in an elevator by Solanje Knowles, the young sister to his wife Beyonce. A video from the hotel’s lifts that was leaked to US celebrity website TMZ, shows Solanje kicking and punching her brother-in-law while Beyonce stands seemingly disinterested. Even though the video which has been widely circulated on the internet has no audio, one can conclude that Solanje’s attack was expletive laden too. A bodyguard is seen trying to restrain Solanje but she pulls away and continues the attack on her brother-in-law.

Why Beyonce stands there with an apathetic or unconcerned reaction as her sister physically attacks her husband really bothers me. In addition, Beyonce is then pictured leaving with her sister in the same car while Jay-Z in a separate car. Hardly two days after the incidence, Beyonce shared a series of pictures of herself and the sister on her instagram account. Some of the pictures were from their childhood while others were from recent events like when they performed at a concert together. That in my eyes was an endorsement of the sister’s despicable actions. However, a few days later the family released a statement in which both Solanje and Jay-Z claimed they had resolved their differences and were a united family who just had a fight like every family does.

Nothing attracts attention and speculation like a celebrity family fight in a public place, especially a notoriously secretive family like the Carters. Jay-Z and Beyonce are perhaps the most notoriously secretive celebrity couple today. The couple had dated for close to eight years before they married but almost always denied they were a couple even when it seemed obvious to the whole world.

So as speculation of what might have led to the elevator attack became rife and plenty, I looked at two versions and even though they seemed like the worst case scenarios, that did not permit Solanje’s attack. The first rumour was that Solanje was cross with Jay because while he is a mogul who has lifted the careers of many, he seemed disinterested in her career. After a few drinks at the met gala party, Jay-Z mentioned he was going to attend Rihanna’s party that night and as Beyonce said she wasn’t attending, he mentioned he would go alone. This according to the speculation is what infuriated Solanje.

Another version is that Rachael Roy, a former wife of Jay’s former business partner Damon Dash, had been seen too close to Jay to an extent that two of Solanje’s friends who had been heard claiming they were there at the invitation of Jay-Z were bellowed by the rapper for pretending to be his guests after Rachel Roy brought this fact to the Hard Knock life hit maker. According to this version of speculation, Rachael Roy’s relationship with Jay has not been the most fancied friendship in the eyes of the Knowles sisters.

And the award goes to...Solanje!

The sister in law (sorry in law)

Whatever sin Jay-Z might have committed, I do not believe a sister-in-law has any right to attack her sister’s husband. It is my long held belief that when a problem stems up in any relationship, no third party should take a side least of all the side of a relative. In addition, it is the duty of a spouse to shield a partner from the scrutiny, attacks and ridicule of family.

When a spouse or partner does not do this for the other half, a pandora’s box of problems is opened. These are problems that are certain to make the ‘in-law relationship’ never a good one. African marriage counselors even advise couples not to confide their relationship problems to their families but instead to the families of their spouse. This is so in order to avoid a situation where the weaknesses and mistakes of one are constantly exposed to in-laws.

In most relationships, the sister-in-law many a time over steps her boundary in trying to protect the interests of her sister or brother when in her eyes their partner is seen to be leading her sibling in the wrong direction. In the case of Solanje’s attack on Jay-Z, notwithstanding the many speculated reasons as motive for the attack, the best she could have done is confide in her sister that she didn’t approve of the brother-in-law’s association with Rachael Roy, Rihana or whatever the real reason was and nothing more.

Even though latest speculation suggests that Jay-Z has been two-timing his wife with a New York hostess named Casey Cohen, who he reportedly sees at least twice a month, Solanje’s attack on the brother-in-law is still inexcusable. Without overly blaming Solanje, Beyonce’s nonchalant response is not one I'd have taken lightly when put in the shoes of Jay-Z. A wife should at all times protect her husband from the scrutiny and ridicule of siblings and then if need be, berate the husband in private. 

As a wife, or even as a husband, one's first allegiance is to the spouse. No matter how heavy a bond one may have shared with his/her siblings in the past. You recognize that you and your spouse are a couple, made into one entity by the marriage vows. By promising to love and honor one another, you have created your own family which must now come first. You are now a team, which must work as one, get hurt as one. This doesn't mean that one must throw out his/her family, but protecting the spouse creates a more unified new happy family.

The sister-in-law has also been known to cause trouble by engaging in sexual relations with the brother-in-law behind the sister's back. Many marriages have broken down once a sister became too familiar with her brother-in-law. If it gets to this level, you have yourself a sorry-in-law and not sister-in-law.

The brother in law (Bother in law)

While the sister-in-law may be a problem for either a brother-in-law or a sister-in-law, the brother-in-law (bother-in-law) is usually a problem to his brother-in-law - the husband to his sister. There are many stories where the brother-in-law has been known to physically attack his sister's husband. However, the brother-in-law is rarely found meddling in the affairs of his sister unless in situations where there is really a guilty party or he perceives it as such. However, that is no excuse for him to meddle in the affairs of his sister.

As is usually the case, the brother-in-law who is over protective of his sister is one usually who himself is guilty of the crimes he is charging the brother-in-law-with. Most times he will get on a moral high horse and gallop off into the self-righteous distance, burying his indulgences in the sand only to return with a barrage of cases against the brother in law and convicting him guiltily.

As is the case with the sister-in-law, even in the relationship between brothers-in-law, the key is for the third party to stay away and let the sister exist in that relationship without the due interference of a third party. I personally believe that the most healthy brother-in-law relationship is achieved when they treat each other as friends. The friendlier they become the better they will understand each other and be able to develop mutual respect towards each other.

I can attest to the fact that when brothers-in-law treat each other as friends, a very healthy relationship ensues. Recently one of my wife’s cousins confessed that he was amazed at the kind of relationship my wife’s immediate elder brother and I share. His amazement stemmed at the fact that I had been in my brother-in-law’s company at local holsters on a few times and we would relax while discussing various topics including very personal problems within our homes and how we overcome them.

In as much as the gentleman was amazed at this extra ordinary friendship between brothers-in-law, he admitted the fact that the key to such a relationship was mutual respect.

The mother in law (Monster in law)

Relationships with mothers-in-law are many a time said to be pretty complicated. Most of the times, the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law live a real drama, plunging into an obscure universe of fears, intolerance and, in some cases, intrigues or hatred. She thinks she’s well-meaning, and the son's wife thinks she’s down right annoying. The proverbial mother-in-law / daughter-in-law conflict appears as an eternal tragedy.

There isn't a rule, that a mother-in-law and daughter- in-law relationship should be conflict laden, but, in most cases, the relationship is not a friendly one. The relationship is further strained if the two (mother-in-law and daughter-in-law) live under the same roof.

In as much as mothers-in-law are rarely a problem for the husbands of their daughters, there are isolated cases where such relations are strained. I know of a gentleman who has had to exchange harsh words with his wife's mother a couple of times until one day he barred her from visiting his home.

However conflict between a mother-in-law and her daughter's husband is far between, while the age old battle between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law rages on. One theory that has been floated around and has been given credence by German psychologists is 'the female complex theory'. The psychologists have issued a hypothesis according to which accentuated feminine complexes, both of the mother-in-law and the daughter-in–law, would greatly contribute to the generation of conflict.

Thus, in the space controlled by a mother-in-law, she will have a more powerful perception of her own complexes, due to a younger female presence. As a result, the psychic tension of the mother-in-law grows, whether she recognizes this or not. In this situation, mother-in-law shows a hostile attitude. Often, the daughter-in-law reacts with reciprocated appropriate behavior, which is the premise of a real conflict.

Another common theory is 'the beloved son that has been kidnapped by the daughter-in-law', which declares that; Like any woman, a mother defends her child from any intruders. Thus, unconsciously, some mothers-in-law may adopt a hostile attitude that leads to conflict.

There are a lot of theories that many psychologists and social scientists have come up with. However I truly believe that while many of these theories may have some aorta of truth, a big percentage of these conflicts arise as a result of stereotypical perceptions long harbored in our minds.

Sofas for in-laws? 

My views... my thoughts...

What stereotypical perceptions am I talking of? Because we know of an in-law relationship that wasn't exactly a great one then we expect to also have a strained relationship with our in-law! It is such stereotype perceptions that we all need to move away from so that we are as open minded as possible when it comes to in-law relations. 

I’ve never been a true fan of change.  It’s never been my thing.  Why?  I hate change that comes as a result of a reaction to society's perceived wrongs. I believe true change is only achieved at individual level by reacting to personal situations and giving personal thought to one's circumstances. Too many folks want to believe that a mother-in-law will be a monster, the brother-in-law a bother and so on. I do not share this perception. This is the perception many folks out there must change.

My point is that if you go into marriage expecting constrained in-law relations, that is exactly what you will get. You will react negatively to any little actions you will perceive as provocative even when it may be an honest joke. Most people that get into relationships with a pre-conceived thought that the in-laws will be trouble usually find what they are looking for -trouble. The fact remains that in life, whatever decision one makes it is going to upset another and that includes an in-law. Now if in one's mind they were expecting strained in-law relations, the very first time opinions are divided over an issue there will only be one outcome-trouble.

That is life. There are so many valid issues one can chew oneself over, so no need to make in-law relations one of them. Save the angst for other issues. Instead one must open their mind up and be expectant of the best in-law relations as they are one's newest family members. If you get into a relationship with an open mind you will enjoy your in-law relations.

I am the most open minded person when it comes to in-law relations thus I have enjoyed such relations for the last 18 months that I have been married. I do not want to portray rosy in-law relations, but my wife and I have appreciated open-mindedness and not letting popular perceptions without any recourse to personal judgment to become our own personal perceptions.

I am not one that picks up a phone every day to call my mother, but so many times my wife will do this and only inform me that mum was passing her regards. My mother also reciprocates by calling my wife so many times too. At least they are open minded and willing to enjoy their in-law relations and thus far have done nothing but enjoy this relationship. They are like mother and daughter and that is how it should be.

I have mentioned the cordial relationship I share with my brothers-in-law; I must also mention that I greatly enjoy my relationship with my mother-in-law too. She is like my own mother. In fact another of my wife's cousins who visited us at our humble abode in Lusaka having traveled from Glasgow Scotland mentioned she was surprised my mother-in-law and I, were eating from the same dining table.

Of course this was a light moment from her, as she later went on about how in-laws in her new home where she has spent close to 17years address each other on a first name basis. Had this been coming from a Sengahill or maybe a Mishulundu village in Kalabo dweller, I wouldn't be far from the truth if I said; it could have been representative of the general approach to in-law relation by most Africans. Generally Africans build brick walls in their relations with in-laws.

It is this brick wall I am really against. For this reason I reiterate the need for change in attitude in this regard. Changes that will see people look forward to seeing their mother-in-laws as their own mothers and enjoy life together as one family.

If some misunderstanding creeps into the family, there is no need to dodge or shelve it. Instead, bite the bullet and talk things over and move on as one family. There is no denying that this can never be an easy undertaking as things can be very tense under normal circumstances, but they can only be made better when treating each other as one family.

Having called for open minded relations between in-laws, the golden rule of non-interference by a third party in any relationship still remains the number one rule in order to maintain healthy in-law relations. Life isn't always black-and-white; there's a lot of room for gray between the lines. There is no reason for anyone outside of a marriage 'union between two people to the exclusion of all others' (as marriage is defined by the civic marriage registrar) to try and play umpire in the name of protecting a sister, son, brother daughter or whoever.

Such actions only create monsters, bothers or sorry in law, sadly Solanje has gone down as a sorry in law.

Blog Anniversary

Not for the first time, I openly assert the fact that I get the greatest inspiration not from the greatest philosophers, most achieving sportspeople nor the most distinguished politicians. Instead it is the closest of my friends that inspire me the most. I am one person who would not pay a motivational speaker in the hope of getting motivated to do big things.

Anyway, excuse my constant reminders about my lack of ‘celebrity’ centered motivation. In this blog, I’d like to specially acknowledge one of my friends as having inspired the birth of this blog site. The truth is that I credit Keith Hamusute for inspiration, encouragement and support towards the creation of this blog site. Keith himself has been maintaining a blog site he aptly calls ‘footprints in the dust’ since 2010 and I had been a regular visitor on his blog site since 2011. He is such a free thinker and an articulate writer. Every time I visit his blog site I can certainly feel the reverberation of his astuteness. Every blog post he put up, 80% of the time felt like my own words, my thoughts which had been plucked right out of me.

"Writing is perhaps the greatest of human inventions, binding together
people who never knew each other, citizens of distant epochs"

The reason for that I believe is simply that we are from the same generation, born around the same time, and then grew up experiencing similar circumstances even though we grew up in very different and distant places. Funny enough by the time we met, we shared a lot of things in common. We listened to the same kind of music, supported the same football team, went to the same church and the list of the common things that bound us during our time together is endless. To cut the long story short, after more than 2 years of following Keith’s blog site, I knew I wanted to tell my own stories in my own way and more importantly to exploit the 20% that was in my mind that he didn’t tell. As much as 80% of what he said felt like it was coming from me, I still wanted to blurt out that other 20%.

Blog stats

I am not known to speak out my mind much, but I do write and have always liked to write quite a lot. In writing I have always found an outlet for all my thoughts. In fact, my spoken words are many a time lost in excessive verbiage such that over the years I have learned to speak less believing a man of few words easily gets his point across. However I must confess I had reduced on reading and consequently writing. Life just became too busy for everything else except reading and writing. The closest to reading I ever came across was a study text book. As the years went on, I read less and I stopped writing at all. The last diary I owned and used to write memoirs of my daily life and experiences was in 2007.

So a little over a year ago, I found myself in a perplexity that William Shakespeare would refer to as; “to be or not to be, that is the question!” I chose ‘to be’ and I set up this blog site with the first blog post published on 13^th June 2013.

Since then I have put up thirty nine (39) posts, twenty seven (27) in 2013 and 12 so far this year. The very first post (debut in sporting language) is my favourite of all posts I have published so far. It is my favourite because it got me out of my shell and thus shed off 'my waned love for writing'. I always believe my blogs are really followed by a few of my friends but I have come to realize that some posts have appeared on google search results there by being accesed by a a lot more people. For this reason, I decided to track the most popular posts. 

As at 13th June 2014, the most popular blog was 'Trevor Noah on Zambian escalators', having had 1447 plus visits with the closest popular blog accounting for just over 257 visits of the total blog page visits at 6240. However, I suspect the only reason the post attracted that many readers is simply that the name Trevor Noah can easily come up on Google search results, thus a good number of the visitors 'accidentally' get to the blog.

One other reason could be that a lot of people just didn't believe what Trevor had said of Zambians and their incredulity towards escalators hence have been on the search for any material related to the story of escalators in Zambia as described by non-other than South Africa’s comic par excellence himself – Trevor Noah. However, for a very long time before the escalators blog was published, the most popular blog had been 'ice-cream and bikinis'. The reasons this was popular I really don't know but I suspect everyone was just amused at the connection between the two. 

The blog which I had the most fun writing, ‘the photographer in me’, though, has not proved to be popular. I actually wrote that particular blog just after attending a wedding ceremony on a weekend and as throngs of photographers jostled around in the hope of getting as many shots as was possible, I felt at times some of them were crossing the thin line of photographic etiquette. As soon as I got home I decided to write something about it.

The other thing I noticed is that even though I blog on my experiences and thoughts which most of the time center on life in Zambia, the blog site is more popular outside Zambia than it is in Zambia. 

The most traffic is generated from the USA, Canada, Germany, South Africa, Netherlands, Ukraine, United Kingdom and yes China. However my mention of some statistics of the blog site since the first blog was published, is not to showboat or create a perception that I maintain a very successful blog site. The reason for this blog is not a numbers measurement but just a celebration that after one year, I didn't drop the ball by the way side.

Instead, blogging has helped me rediscover my love reading and writing as well as adding a different dimension as I have developed a habit of following other blog sites among them, 'one more pair of boots' by Muuka Mary Gwaba, 'this is life' by Susan Mwape and another very successful and interesting blog site ‘diary of a frustrated brotha’. There are a few more other blog sites I enjoy reading and from which I am learning each day what blogging is all about.  

TREVOR WAS RIGHT: Escalators still fascinate many Zambians like
these copper-belt residents waiting for their turn to 'ride'

But what is blogging all about for me? I believe blogging is really just about using “words” or "pictures" in order to get the “word” out. We are now living in an age of the “online community” where everything is stored online, including books. I take blogging as all forms of authorship from an own book to magazine articles or even just an online diary. Blogs must not be too long, although many times I am guilty of long blogs and go over in order to adequately cover a topic.

I shot this: The two gentlemen in the picture at the weekend told me they
traveled from Kalulushi to Ndola just to come and have a feel of the escalator. 

HALLE BERRY BIKINI MOMENT!
This scene from the James Bond movie 'die another day' probably made the bikini
a very popular item. The name bikini in a blog post made the blog popular i think

Zambians having a bikini moment

On my blogs, I seek to speak my mind on anything even discussing topics I’d not normally address every other day. My philosophy is that free thought, free expression and self-determination are truly the real creek of true happiness. Every man has got to think freely. Even the man in prison has got to have a free mind though the body is incarcerated. Humanity must thrive on self-expression. It is okay to express one self, even when others feel you are stupid or not making any sense. That is just their opinion and each person needs to have their own independent opinion.

Those that have taken their time to engage me at any level of discussion or commentary regarding the material I have put up have not always agreed with me. One Zambian lady who resides in the United Kingdom was so annoyed with my blog “retired in national interest, the professor Chirwa story” such that she sent a private message to my google+ inbox to tell me that I have got to be ashamed of myself. We didn't really engage further as the next message she sent me was to just tell me that we live in different worlds.

However I’d have loved to hear more from her and get her complete opinion on the entire Clive Chirwa and Zambia Railways affair. However I truly understand that not everything that is my opinion will be shared by all. After all, depending on the time and place, I may not hold the same opinion years later when faced by different circumstances in a different place at a different time.

For this reason the blog aptly declares; “Free thought and expression is my philosophy. Thus my opinions on this blogsite are formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas. I will not accept ideas proposed as truth without recourse to knowledge and reason.”

People Driven Constitution

I like keeping political opinions to myself, but as a free citizen and a political observer, I tend to express my opinions every now and then. For this reason, my very last blog touched on the state of affairs regarding the leadership crisis in the MMD and today I discuss the constitution making process that has kept the nation talking for months (a couple of years it has been). 

The Constitution of Zambia is the supreme law of the country. It provides the legal foundation for the existence of the republic, sets out the rights and duties of its citizens, and defines the structure of the government. In the period since independence, Zambia has undergone four constitutional reviews. The first review in 1972 was the Chona constitutional review commission which brought forth a one party state while the Mvunga review commission in 1991 steered the republic of Zambia to a multi-party democratic state. There were to be two further reviews, the Mwanakatwe review commission in 1996 and the Mun’gomba review commission in 2005. 

The constitution being an important document, this time around most Zambians are entranced in the review and the entire constitution making process and will not want this opportunity wasted once again, considering the amounts of tax payers’ money so far spent. Should the People feel cheated and deprived of another opportunity for an inclusive constitution, they will not hesitate to use the only tool which they know that they can wield to register disappointment -the power of the ballot. 

I can candidly say that failure to deliver on the constitution is giving live ammunition to the opposition and all PF critics come 2016. 

When Levy Patrick Mwanawasa set up the Willa Mungomba constitutional review commission, most people knew it would be a long, costly and at times controversial undertaking. What many did not envisage was that the process would be so long and turned to comedy (animal constitution remarks) at some points. Above all, no one ever thought both men, Levy and Willa would not live to see the end of this process.

As a matter of fact, nine years after the Mungomba constitutional review commission handed the draft constitution to a body called the National Constitution Commission (NCC), the process seems as if it is yet to get started. No one knows the exact route to the enactment of this constitution. Along the way, there has been talk of a constituent assembly and a constitutional referendum, instead we have seen bodies in the name of National Constitutional Commission (NCC) and most recently the Technical Committee on drafting the new constitution but the majority of Zambians do not know what lies ahead of this process.

It was envisaged that this time around, there would be more transparency in the constitution making process with all groups of stakeholders constantly kept abreast of all the developments of the process. Many people had faulted the Chona review as having only had the mandate to introduce a one party state thus in many ways serving the wishes of very few individuals. The Mwanakatwe review commission was also accused by many of serving to advantage the MMD and disadvantage UNIP and Kenneth Kaunda in particular. It was for this reason that the general consensus in the country was that the Mungomba review commission needed to reflect the expectations, aspiration and hopes of as many Zambians as possible. The expectation was that in order to capture the wishes of most groups of people, the people themselves needed to be involved more in the whole process. The term coined was ‘people driven constitution’.

The end of a people driven constitution was expected to  have ideals espoused therein representative of the majority Zambians or at the very least representative of most demographic, religious, social, cultural and economic groupings in the country.

Alas the aspirations of the Zambians when the commission was set up are yet to be realized. In fact it seems our aspirations were buried with the visionaries who set this constitutional review process in motion. 

The Technical Committee on Drafting the Zambian Constitution was appointed on 16th November, 2011, by the President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr. Michael Chilufya Sata, using his executive powers vested in him by the current Republican Constitution. The Committee headed by judge Silungwe recognised that the constitution-making process is an important national issue thus involved diverse groups of people going as far as having sittings at district assembly level.

The committee has concluded the report which they handed to the government but there has been silence since. It is reported that they handed the report to the minister of justice who has now told the nation that the report is yet to go to cabinet before a draft constitution bill is tabled in parliament or whichever way forward cabinet will deem fit. However some stakeholders believe the lack of transparency shown by availing the draft report to cabinet only, jeopardizes the integrity of the whole process. In a country where the distinction between the party in power and the government is often a blurred line, many stakeholders do not believe the draft constitution will be released to the public in the exact form it was handed to the minister of justice. 

The draft constitution bill is yet to go to parliament

My view… my thoughts…

When the resplendent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were written by the architects of our republic, the people that fought against British colonization, they were signing a promissory note to which every Zambian was to fall heir. This note was the promise that all Zambians would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of prosperity. In our constitutional democracy, the constitution is supreme, as such must not serve or be seen as serving the interests of a few people or certain groups of people to the exclusion of others. This has been the cry of many citizens and groups of citizens since 1991.

The route of coming up with an acceptable or people-driven Constitution has been a long one. I can safely say that Zambia started making attempts, some of them very costly, at developing a democratic Constitution, which meets the aspirations of her people as far back as 1991. 

In introspecting the country’s democratic experience since 1991, it seems a multi-party democratic system has brought forth intra-party and inter-party political intolerance and lack of inclusiveness that is threatening to overshadow the good aspects that a democratic dispensation brings. This can even give credence to the notion that a one party state gives a nation more unity, arguably the main reason that the Chona commission submitted in favour of a one party state. The truth is that the most liberal and tolerant nations are all democracies.

However, Zambia’s democratic journey must just keep on growing and perfected along the way and by having constitutional reviews that involve and are seen to involve as many people as possible we will be going on the right path. Through such processes we can get rid of bad laws and even precisely define such ambiguous pieces of legislation as the public order act. Institutions of government serving the ruling elite only (or are seen to) such as the Police, Drug Enforcement Commission and others must be truly reformed to give such bodies real constitutional power. Instead of functioning like one party democracy institutions, such bodies can be re-aligned and depoliticized to function effectively and provide the necessary checks and balances. The civil service and public media is included as some of the institutions affiliated to government but must be reformed to serve all Zambians regardless of political or ideological affiliation. 

In having a clear democratic constitution that outlines political and institutional boundaries, government and politicians will be made to adhere to the fundamental principles of democracy, respect for human rights, and in particular the right to choice (personal liberty) and, freedoms of expression, movement, assembly and association. Politicians cannot just use the police to stop people from assembling and in the process fire live ammunition at such people killing some, not only denying them a right to assembly and free expression but also the right to life without being answerable.

As many representative groups of people as possible must be involved in constitutional reviews resulting in constitutional amendment acts to see to it that we move away from a situation where everyone has rights on paper but not everyone has the actual rights in practice. 

The Constitution in its current form therefore fools the majority of people with a mirage of equality and lets them feed on a feel good euphoria far removed from the reality of their daily lives. We must be mindful of the cliché that the constitution is only a piece of paper. It only gains force when the people rise up in defense when it comes under attack. This defense of the constitution includes participating in review processes that enhance the unalienable rights of all.

Personally I do not believe that the 50+1 clause is the most important that we need to fix immediately and thus must be included at all costs. The primal issue in Zambia’s democratic dispensation today is the divide between the written rules and enforced rules. The division need not amount to an unbridgeable gulf. Even though enshrined in the constitution, the basic tenets of any democratic dispensation are not enforced but exist only on paper. In practice many people do not enjoy personal rights and liberties like freedoms of expression, assembly, movement, association and even privacy. If life can easily be taken away by another because one chose to attend a meeting that the other did not approve, then our democracy is a farce. This we must fix urgently.

Those who wield mastery over the country’s political power and in most cases economic power, need to learn to protect the rights of all. One man one vote, the rule of law, equality and a free press must not only exist in writing on one page and conveniently being outlawed by other pieces of legislation where in practice it is only the former which is enforced.  

I have discussed the death penalty and duo citizenship before and I believe these were progressive clauses in the Mung’omba draft constitution. Like many Zambians, I am in the dark as to the actual contents included or excluded in the final draft report presented to government no wonder the inertia I have exhibited towards discussing the constitution process even though it has crossed my mind a couple of times.  

Great orators and charismatic politicians

When he came on TV for his Zambia shall be saved programme, he oozed confidence, charisma and a high level of swagger that not many Zambian preachers in the 1990’s possessed. All his sermons were punctuated by dramatic demonstration from him to stress his points more and the congregants responded with laughter that sent ripples of approval to the preacher’s sermons. The greatest attributes that defined him were his commanding voice and his gift and ability to deliver great speeches for his sermons. In other words he was and to this day remains a great orator.

In those days I was certain in my mind that Nevers Mumba would play a big part of Zambia’s history and I imagined him being the equivalent of Zambia’s Martin Luther King Jnr. I had listened to Dr King’s famous speech, I Have A Dream, and had taken note of his legislative successes tied to the American Civil Rights Act, and Voting Rights Act passed in 1964 and 1965 respectively. What drew this comparison from me was that, as Pastor Nevers Mumba appeared more and more on TV his sermons would have political and civil awareness connotations. 

In due course, the inevitable happened and Dr Nevers Mumba formed a political party that he called National Christian Coalition. At that point Pastor Mumba would not do any wrong in my eyes. I was his greatest admirer. I have always admired people that speak assuredly. In my younger days fluency of speech and intelligence were one and the same thing. My admiration for Dr Mumba soared in 1998 when I went to Hillcrest secondary school, I was shown a bunker bed where Dr Mumba allegedly spent most of his high school nights while Dr Danny Pule ostensibly spent his nights on the opposite bunker. That was it, I was now being cut from the same cloth as Dr Mumba!

Cometh the hour cometh the man! only on his 2nd coming as president of a party
he has spent more time in court--and losing bye elections

In 2001, Nevers offered himself for president of Zambia. He was the candidate of the then, National Citizens’ Coalition Party (NCC). His message then was that Zambia needed to vote for men and women with ‘morality and integrity’. According to Dr Mumba, Zambia had the legal and democratic frameworks for prosperity but as a country we kept being pulled backwards by selfish leaders. We needed leaders of high moral standing who would uphold the integrity of the office of president, and he Dr Mumba was that man.

Some of his competitors then were madam Gwendoline Konie, Michael Sata, Anderson Mazoka, Christon Tembo, Godfrey Miyanda, Inonge Mbikusita Lewanika and Levy Patrick Mwanawasa to mention but a few. There were a total of eleven presidential candidates that year. I personally was torn between Nevers Mumba for obvious reasons, Godfrey Miyanda also one I greatly admire, Anderson Mazoka since he spoke the right words and boasted of his economics expertise claiming that was what Zambia needed and Christon Tembo simply because he was captain of the ship that had saved Zambia from a third term by Fredrick Jacob Titus Chiluba.

In that election, Levy Mwanawasa emerged victorious against many people’s expectations with a simple majority vote of just over 28.69% and Mazoka came second with 26.76%. Christon Tembo and Tilyenji Kaunda were the others who got a significant percentage of the votes, 12.96% and 9.96% respectively. The rest fared as follows; Miyanda Godfrey (7.96%), Benjamin Y. Mwila (4.84%), Michael Sata (3.35%), Nevers Mumba (2.2%), Gwendoline Konie (0.58%), Inonge Mbikusita Lewanika (0.56%) and Yobert Shamapande (0.54%). 

Mwanawasa rose to power with very little support after inheriting an MMD party that was divided by Chiluba’s third term bid. Patriotic Front (PF), Forum for Democracy & Development (FDD), Heritage Party (HP), Zambia Republican Party (ZRP) were all splinters born in the aftermath of the third term debates.

The country was heavily divided and Levy faced a mammoth task to unite the people. Everything he did was heavily criticized. Even within the MMD Mwanawasa was not popular, as many members still showed loyalty to Fredrick Chiluba and Mwanawasa was seen by many FTJ loyalists as fighting his predecessor. But Levy was a very intelligent man, and one of the things he did was to appoint Nevers Mumba a leader of an opposition party as his vice president. As a fervent Mumba supporter, this was when I started warming up to Mwanawasa’s leadership. 

Nevers did not fare well in the only national election he has contested, however,
with the MMD having a larger appeal, he was expected to head to the promised land 

The Mwanawasa-Mumba combo definitely in the early stages looked like the perfect match. Nevers was a great orator which was one aspect where Levy was heavily faulted, and he also hailed from the north where many had felt that post FTJ presidency, the people from that part of the nation were being persecuted by Levy. 

However, it was not long before Levy and Nevers eventually fell out allegedly over statements the later made when he was acting president while the president was out of the country. Without going into the details of the statements, many felt Dr Mumba had shown a high level of contempt and being over ambitious by calling a press briefing at government house (the official residence of the vice president) and give an address on the state of the nation. The true reasons for the fall out still remain shrouded in secrecy. He was fired as soon as Levy came back into the country, and the rest is history.

In the years that followed, Nevers Mumba tried to redeem his NCC which he had dissolved to merge with the MMD at his appointment as republican vice president. At some point it was reported that he had in 2006 applied to contest an election as Member of Parliament for the PF in Chinsali central constituency at that time the PF had started showing great signs of growing popularity. That never materialized and in 2008 when Rupiah Banda became president, all of a sudden Nevers Mumba was a member of the MMD and was then sent to the Foreign Service as Zambia’s ambassador in Canada. 

As it turned out, the Banda presidency would be the shortest when the MMD under his candidature lost the 2011 elections to PF. Rupiah Banda shortly after retired from politics and all of a sudden there was a vacancy for the MMD presidency. As they say, ‘cometh the hour, cometh the man’, and all of a sudden Nevers Mumba the man in Ontario was being touted as the man to take over. In due course Pastor Mumba was making his return to Zambia and a big crowd of MMD members was receiving him at Kenneth Kaunda International airport. 

It would not take long before Nevers comprehensively beat his competitors in a democratic election that was meant to serve as a platform for reorganizing the MMD. Nevers was elected as MMD president by a resounding 67%, which was even higher than the 63% that first ushered Fredrick Chiluba to the MMD presidency in the 1990’s. This time around the party had lost an election after being in power for 20 years and a lot of commentators were predicting the end of the MMD’s influence like the fate that befell UNIP the ruling party before them. 

MMD under Nevers Mumba has seen quite some turmoil in the party. In the period that Pastor Mumba has been at the helm of the MMD, the party has lost parliamentary seats to either PF or UPND, seats they held after 2011. The party has also performed poorly in local government elections to a level where they have lost control of councils they previously held by surrendering seats to their two main rivals. In addition, the two vice presidents of the party (Dr.Michael Kaingu & Dr.Brian Chituwo) together with the party spokesperson (Dora Siliya) have been at arms with the party president.

The three senior party officials have been the most vocal even though there are other members who have expressed discontent with Nevers’ leadership. The trio has been calling an extra ordinary mid-term party convention at which all party positions would be up for election. Dr Mumba has also had many supporters and sympathisers as well as a group calling themselves MMD die hard ably led by a friend of mine – Bowman Lusambo. 

My thoughts… My view...

The biggest problem with the MMD now is not Nevers Mumba but those leaders that foresaw the party’s loss of the 2011 election. The leaders I am talking of include Dora Siliya, Michael Kaingu, Brian Chituwo, Ronnie Shikapwasha to mention but few.

I could add to that list, Mike Mulongoti, the late George Kunda and the late Benny Tetamashimba. The names I have mentioned appear on my list simply because of the kind of arrogance they exhibited when they held public office as ministers in the MMD government. This arrogance in the end became the main reason why many a voter eventually decided to vote against the MMD. 

After losing the elections it was expected by many that a few members of the MMD would jump ship and join the PF as most opportunist Zambian politicians do. To them ideology matters less but what matters is being part of the ruling elite as that comes with benefits such as ministerial appointments, business contracts with government departments and many other favours such as lack of harassment from government agencies like the police. A few MMD members did cross over to the PF and in some cases causing costly bye election.

The root cause of the problems the MMD has at the moment can be traced back to the third term debate that greatly divided the party in the early 21st century. Many credible and well-meaning members left the party in defense of the party and state constitution by not tolerating the idea of a sitting president going for a third term of office disregarding the constitutional requirement of a maximum two 5 year terms.

Edith Nawakwi, Godfrey Miyanda, Christon Tembo, Chifumu Banda, Ben Mwila, Danny Pule and many others left the MMD to form splinter parties. Of course a few of them like Gen Shikapwasha eventually rejoined the MMD but they only reunited with other chancers and opportunists who added nothing more than just numbers to the MMD. In the years that followed, more people that shared little or nothing of the original ideals on which the MMD was founded infiltrated the party. These are the people whose conduct displeased Zambians more as the years rolled on. When these people eventually lost an election collectively with Ruphia Banda, they now want to point fingers at Nevers Mumba. This is typical behavior of opportunists that many of them are. The best they could do is resign and form their own political parties.

While most founding member left the MMD in the aftermath of the 3rd term debates
opportunists invaded the party and eventually took the party into opposition

MMD did take a retreat at a lodge in Chilanga at which they reportedly took a postmortem of their 2011 election loss. Having had the postmortem, I expected the likes of Michael Kaingu and Dora Siliya to take a back seat in the affairs of the MMD in the manner that Michael Mabenga has done. The action by Mr Mabenga is honourable. 

It would have been beneficial and refreshing for both the party and the individuals in question. Had these key members of the team that lost an election gone on sabbatical, I’d have expected the likes of Muhabi Lungu, Keith Mukata, Bradford Machila, Bwalya Chiti and a few members of the old clique whose images and reputation remains undented such as Felix Mutati and maybe Dr Situmbeko Musokotwane to take a front seat row on the day to day running of the MMD. This would have been a new look and rebranded MMD, but with the support and numbers of the old guard.

Alas, the same old guard that Zambians voted against was still calling the shots in the MMD. The team that was elected together with Dr Mumba was not in any way his team, it was very much an assembly of the Ruphia Banda MMD remnants. 

The mistake Nevers Mumba has made as MMD president is that even though his party took that retreat in Chilanga, they did not execute a plan for rebranding quick enough. Rebranding for the MMD would have meant sidelining the arrogant clique which Zambians grew tired of and were willing to replace with anyone as long as it wasn’t MMD. In the immediate aftermath of the MMD 2011 election loss, Ruphia Banda and most of his very last lieutenants were still very unpopular in most parts of the country.

In western province for instance, the MMD had enjoyed support and many credited the province for the party’s election victories in 2001, 2006 and 2008. However, in 2011 the province was shared with the PF and UPND, as the MMD lost the majority margins they previously held. One of the reasons the MMD lost popularity in western province was the manner in which the cabinet in January 2010 handled the case of a group of individuals that had wanted to hold a meeting at the Mongu blue gum grounds to discuss and understand the issues surrounding the Barotse agreement issue.

The government sent a group of policemen from other parts of the country (possibly soldiers included), who went to stop that meeting from taking place and a mini riot ensued. Two lives were lost immediately while others died later in hospital. What angered the locals the most was the arrogance with which cabinet ministers defended police action of shooting at unarmed youth. Then home affairs minister Mkondo Lungu, Vice president George Kunda, information minister Ronnie Shikapwasha took turns to defend police action. A story was coined that those who were shot and killed on the spot had tried to set a local filling station ablaze.

The damage caused by the police did not end with the killings and injuries to the local people. By the time they were pulled out of the area, close to 30 girls from a local basic school where the police camped in one of the class rooms had gotten pregnant. Reports in the press suggested that some of the girls had consented to the sexual acts, but most were forced and raped. Close to 30 children were going to be born and would never know even just least of all the names of their fathers.

These events were a turning point for the MMD in western province, and the likes of Michael Kaingu, Michael Mabenga, Situmbeko Musokotwane and all Lozi speaking members of that cabinet were heavily criticized for supporting such criminal acts against their own people. But it seems the retreat the MMD took was devoid of any postmortem or else they would have found out all this.

Recently the MMD lost the Katuba parliamentary seat which they held before and after 2011. Again, they lost this seat because they did not do their homework properly. In 2011 Jonas Shakafuswa who had held the seat under the MMD contested the seat under UPND and lost to MMD’s Dr Chikusu, but recently Mr Shakafuswa won the seat back under the UPND after the incumbent died. Though the people of katuba felt that Shakas had been part of the arrogant MMD and did not vote for him in 2011, the time elapsed since convinced most of them that he was better off. He was one of them and is always attending funerals in the area and contributing financial help during funerals something that never happened with Dr Chikusu. Katuba is a rural constituency and an effort such as attending funerals is highly appreciated.

In a nut shell, all these mistakes that the MMD has made are all under the leadership of Nevers Mumba and he must shoulder the blame. But the man is shouldering a bigger load than he is responsible for. The members of the MMD who were cabinet members in the last government must shoulder the biggest load. In fact they should step away from the lime light to enable the party to start afresh and re-launch itself.

The MMD under pastor Mumba is also making another grave mistake which Ruphia Banda did, fighting sections of the press. It is folly for any right thinking politician to engage in battle with a media house. The media should be embraced no matter how critical they are of the actions of politicians. If those letters that are making rounds on the internet purportedly authored by Muhabi are anything to go by, he has done written his political demise and we can start preparing eulogies for a promising political career that never realized its full potential because of ego.

I wrote a blog last year in which I supported the appointment of Muhabi Lungu as presidential media officer for Nevers Mumba and believed it was cardinal for a party that was increasingly being seen to exhibit a high degree of indiscipline as any member gave out statements to the media at will. I also support Muhabi’s election to position of national secretary but he is best advised not to wage war against any sections of the media. He can take heed from Michael Sata who went down that route and later changed course.

Many Zambians do not want the MMD to go down the road that has befallen UNIP to an extent where the party has no representation in parliament any more. Mistakes they have collectively made aside, Nevers Mumba is the best suited individual now present in the MMD who can help save the party from going into oblivion. He is not tainted with the arrogance, filthy and perceived corruption that made the MMD unpopular.  Nevers Mumba has the charisma to draw people to him and believe his message and he has the oratory skills to drive this message across. Maybe, and just maybe… the MMD shall be saved under Pastor Nevers Mumba.  

“This is a world of compensation; and he who would be no slave must consent to have no slave. Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a just God, cannot long retain it.”

  - Abraham Lincoln