Tag: Tribalism

Hichilima’s curtailing of freedom of expression is not the way to combat tribalism, hate speech

Hichilima’s curtailing of freedom of expression is not the way to combat tribalism, hate speech Featured

Zambia has struggled to eliminate tribal and racial discrimination throughout its post-independence history. And we are certainly not at the end of the road toward equal justice and the elimination of tribal and racial discrimination.

Today, we have a government that is more tribally inclined than we have seen or experienced before in our post-independence history. Today, whichever public institution, ministry, department, agency, commission or parastatal organisation you look at, the tribal composition of the key positions is difficult to conceal or ignore.

But those who try to question, challenge or criticise Mr Hakainde Hichilema’s tribally inclined appointments are accused of promoting tribal hatred or hate speech. They are trying to defend their tribalism by curtailing free speech and restricting freedom of expression.

In light of this, we have long made clear our concerns over resorting to restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly, in order to defend what cannot be defended or tolerated.

Curtailing and punishing such speech is neither an effective approach to defending what cannot be defended nor an appropriate way for Mr Hichilema’s government to stop Zambians from questioning his appointments and other decisions and actions.

Suppressing ideas and criticism never succeeds in making them go away. In fact, to do so can be counterproductive and even raise the profile of such ideas and criticism. We believe the best antidote to all this is constructive dialogue that counters and responds to such speech by refuting it through principled arguments, causing the criticism to fall under its own weight.

Our history has taught us that curtailing freedom of expression and speech is both a misguided and dangerous enterprise. The better course is to ensure that avenues of expression remain open in order to expose, contradict, and drown out tribal and hateful speech in the marketplace of ideas.

As Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States, wrote, “[W]e have nothing to fear from the demoralising reasonings of some, if others are left free to demonstrate their errors and especially when the law stands ready to punish the first criminal acts produced by the false reasonings.” False and hate speech, in other words, will wither in the face of public scrutiny.

Today, so many opposition leaders are being arrested and detained for allegedly publishing, “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the government of Mr Hichilema with the intent to “excite against them … the hatred” of the people. This is being used as a very potent political tool in the hands of Mr Hichilema to prosecute Zambians for speaking out against the tribalism and other misdeeds of his government.

Mr Hichilema’s actions are increasingly becoming unpopular because many Zambians are recognising that our young multiparty democracy needs dissent, not dictates, in order to survive.

Mr Hichilema is effectively making it illegal to criticise his tribalism and other misdeeds. Those who speak out against his tribalism in public or in writing are punished as criminals, often severely.

It will only be through the efforts of those who are today courageously spreading their message at the risk of being arrested, detained, and tortured, that we will end these injustices of Mr Hichilema.

In so doing, we are reaffirming our commitment to freedom of expression and the right to speak out against injustice. Clearly, competition in ideas is a more appropriate way to address these issues than is government action to restrict expression.

Moreover, liberal democrats believe that, “however pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries but on the competition of other ideas”.

We defend freedom of expression not only because it is enshrined in our Constitution as the law of the land, but also because our multiparty democracy depends on the free exchange of ideas and the ability to dissent. And we protect freedom of expression because the cost of stripping away individual rights is far greater than the cost of tolerating hateful words. We also have grave concerns about empowering governments to ban offensive speech and about how such power could easily be misused to undermine democratic principles.

We believe that robust implementation of obligations to combat these evils, while simultaneously protecting freedom of expression, is essential.

Our observations are well corroborated or supported by the recently released US Department of State – US 2022 Country Report on Human Rights Practices: Zambia.

Fred M’membe
President of Socialist Party

Tribalism in Zambia Police

Tribalism in Zambia Police Featured

There is a need for Mr Hakainde Hichilema to explain why Zambia Police key command positions at all levels and in all departments or units are predominantly occupied by people from one ethnicity and related ethnicities almost to the exclusion of all others.

Is it by pure merit or coincidence that:

  1. Inspector General of Police Lemmy Kajoba is KAONDE?
  2. Deputy Inspector General of Police (State House) Fanwell Siandenge is TONGA?
  3. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Operations) Milner Libusa Muyambango is LOZI?
  4. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Administration) Doris Nayame is MAMBWE?
  5. Director Administration Byemba Musole is LOZI?
  6. Director CID Yuyi Mwala is LOZI?
  7. Deputy Director CID Maxwell Timba is TONGA?
  8. SPIO (Intelligence) Mweemba Robertson is TONGA?
  9. PRO Rae Hamoonga is TONGA?
  10. Commissioner Administration Auxensio Daka (who is said to have been recommended by the late president Lupiya Banda) is NSENGA?
  11. Quarter Master Mubita Munenbo is LOZI?

STATE HOUSE POLICE:

  1. DIG Fanwell Siandenge is TONGA?
  2. Aide de Camp Shapa Wakung’uma is LOZI?
  3. Commissioner of Police Justin Moolo is TONGA?
  4. In Charge Administration Malambo is TONGA?
  5. In Charge Intelligence Chiwala is TONGA?
  6. In Charge Operations Lumanyendo (a relative of Siandenge and coming from the same village) is TONGA?
  7. Senior Driver Mubiana is LOZI (but they often opt to use his junior Mbaimba who is TONGA)?
  8. In Charge Bodyguard Siandiza is TONGA?
  9. Callabashi-Mrs Serah Mwenya (BEMBA)?
  10. Armoury in Charge Mumeka is KAONDE?
  11. Food Analyst Mazaza is LUNDA?
  12. In Charge Garage Kakeja is KAONDE?
  13. Quarter Master Mukolo is LOZI?

COMMISSIONERS OF POLICE:

  1. Lusaka Province – Kreto Nkaanza is TONGA?
  2. Copperbelt Province – Peacewell Mweemba is TONGA?
  3. Central Province – Mukuka Davies Chileshe (who is a close associate of Deputy Inspector General Muyambango) is BEMBA?
  4. Eastern Province – Limpo Liwali is LOZI?
  5. Northern Province – Gloria Mulele (a very close associate of DIG operations Milner Muyambango) is TONGA?
  6. Muchinga Province – Mubaanga Kaunda is LUNDA?
  7. Luapula – Fwambo Siame is MAMBWE?
  8. Southern – Paul Achiume is TUMBUKA?
  9. North Western Province – Dennis Moola is TONGA?
  10. Western Province – Roy Kashimba is LUNDA?

UNIT COMMANDERS:

  1. Paramilitary – Yobe Luhana (who is step brother to Deputy Inspector General Siandenge) is TUMBUKA?
  2. Protective Unit – Fred Hamamba is TONGA?
  3. Airport – Robison Moonga is TONGA?
  4. Lilayi College – Desmond Mwaanza is TONGA?
  5. TAZARA – Simon Mbaulu is LUVALE?
  6. Mobile Unit – Pethias Siandenge (who is younger brother of Deputy Inspector Siandenge) is TONGA?

PROVINCIAL POLICE
INTELLINGENCE:

  1. Lusaka Province – Malambo Muchinda is TONGA?
  2. Northern Province – James Chiti is BEMBA?
  3. Luapula Province – Chimuli Kapenda is LUVALE?
  4. Muchinga Province – Munankopa Nesbert is TONGA?
  5. North Western Province – Abel Chifumpa is LENJE?
  6. Southern Province – Clement Matomola is LOZI?
  7. Central Province – Limwanya Kapupa is LOZI?
  8. Copperbelt Province – Chris Chipepo Chiyabi is TONGA?
  9. Eastern Province – Edify Milambo is TONGA?
  10. Western Province – Joe Malumo is LOZI?

UNIT INTEL OFFICERS:

  1. College – Mponyela Ireen is LOZI?
  2. Mobile Unit – Kanondo Royd is LUNDA?
  3. TAZARA – Fwankila is TONGA?
  4. Airport – Mbwainga Harry is TONGA?
  5. Protective Unit – Kaumbi Lilian is LOZI?
  6. Paramilitary – Neverson Mpundu is BEMBA?

These are the key positions in Zambia Police.
Like Deputy Inspector General Siandenge, some of these officers were part of the UPND security team. Two of Deputy Inspector General Siandenge’s brothers are in charge of the two striking police units – paramilitary and mobile units.

Where does this staffing of the police leave the opposition when it comes to policing politics and elections? Would Mr Hichilema keep quiet and accept this if he was in opposition?

These are honest questions seeking honest answers.

Fred M’membe
President of Socialist Party Zambia

WHAT’S FUELLING TRIBAL POLITICS DEBATES? Featured

It seems Mr Hakainde Hichilema and the UPND are perched on the defensive over accusations of tribalism. Why? Probably it is because of the promises they made to have a tribal and regionally balanced and representative government. Critiques are asking if what they are seeing is equal to what they were promised:

  • President (Tonga)
  • Vice-President (Bemba married to a Lozi)
  • Speaker (Lozi)
  • Chief Justice (Lenje)
  • Acting President of the Constitutional Court (Lozi)
    Attorney General (Lenje)
  • Solicitor General (Tonga)
  • Chairman of the Judicial Service Commission (Lozi)
  • Chairman of the Judicial Complaints Commission (Tonga)
  • Commissioner of Lands (Tonga)
  • Chief Legal Advisor to the President (Lozi)
    Minister of Justice (Tonga).

They are saying the key state institutions and the country’s justice system are basically is the hands of Tongas and Lozis (with very little or no meaningful participation from the rest)

They are saying the same about the key government ministries (Ministries that are not easily done away with by any government):

  • Home Affairs (Tonga)
  • Local Government (Tonga)
  • Education (Tonga)
  • Tourism (Tonga)
    -Justice (Tonga)
  • Foreign Affairs (Lenje)
  • Health (Soli)
  • Defence (Luvale)
  • Infrastructure (Lozi)
  • Finance (Lozi)
  • Lands (Lunda)
  • Governor of Bank of Zambia (Tonga).

The rest are, in the main, pushed to ministries that can easily be done away and receive very limited budgetary allocations.

They say the picture is the same for key defence and security agencies:

  • Zambia Army Commander (Lozi)
  • Zambia Air Force Commander (Kaonde)
  • ZNS Commandant (Luvale)
  • Inspector General of Police (Kaonde)
    Director General of Intelligence (Lozi)
  • Commissioner General of Correctional Services (Tonga)
  • Chief Immigration officer (Lozi)

They are saying in all these key command defence and security positions there’s no one from the East or the North as the political leadership to keep the tribal and regional balance the political leadership had promised.

They are also pointing to the Electoral Commission of Zambia:

  • chairperson (Lozi)
  • vice-person (Mambwe)
  • the other three commissioners are Tonga, Lozi and Lunda

There’s no one from the East or the North proper.

These concerns are raised about lower positions in these and other state, government and quasi government institutions and agencies.

These are the concerns they are raising and the response is to label them tribalists, divisive elements and prosecute or persecute them on charges of tribal hatred.

With these concerns and the debates they are generating our multiparty political dispensation is back on the spot. The concern is no longer the lack of political pluralism or diversity, but the hijacking of the political processes by tribal politics.

The challenge to our multiparty political dispensation is not the prevalence of ethnic diversity, but the use of identity politics to promote narrow tribal interests. It is tribalism.

But the African experience over the last six decades has
shown us the dangers of ethnic competition and underscore the importance of building nations around ideas rather than clan identities.

In the absence of efforts to build genuine political parties with clear ideologies that compete on the basis of ideas, we have reverted to tribal identities as foundations for political competition.

Leaders are often exploiting tribal loyalty to advance personal gain, parochial interests, patronage, and cronyism. How else can one explain the tribal or regional voting that was confirmed by a Commission of Inquiry following the 2016 elections?

We shouldn’t forget the fact that tribes are not built on multiparty democratic ideas but thrive on zero-sum competition. As a result, they are inimical to multiparty democratic advancement.

In essence, tribal practices are occupying a vacuum created by lack of strong multiparty democratic institutions. The political parties are unable to find common ground through coherent party manifestos and ideological positions.

Many members of our political parties often don’t even know that their parties have manifestos.

The manifestos are generally issued just before the elections because much of the effort goes into regional manoeuvring and building tribal alliances.

Tribal politicians are clever and calculating.
They are quick to dress in the latest fashion and co-opt emerging trends to preserve their identities. They buy influence and create convenient alliances.

Their sole mission is self-preservation, with the side effect of subverting multiparty democratic evolution.
For them tribal politics is a zero-sum game.

The way forward for our multiparty democracy lies in concerted efforts to build modern political parties founded on strong ideological foundations, clear development ideas and not tribal bonds.

Such political parties must base their competition for power on ideological and development platforms.

Defining party platforms will need to be supported by the search for ideas – not the appeal to tribal coalitions.

Political parties that create genuine ideological and development platforms will launch initiatives that reflect popular needs.

Those that rely on manipulating ethnic alliances will bring sectarian animosity into government business by appointing to key government positions people from their tribes and allied ethnicities.

Party manifestos should fundamentally be documents in which parties outline their principles and goals in a manner that goes beyond popular rhetoric and cheap promises. They should arise from careful discussion, compromise, and efforts to express the core values and commitments of the party.

But building clear party platforms requires effective intellectual input, usually provided through think-tanks and other research institutions. Most of our political parties lack such support and generally their manifestos are cobbled together with little consultation.

Tribal groupings see themselves as infallible but parties have to be accountable to the people.

By stating a vision for the future, political parties provide voters with ways to measure their performance on all fronts.

Forging platforms fosters debate within parties that transcend tribal differences. Such debates are a central pillar of multiparty democracy. Building modern political parties and associated think-tanks is, therefore, the most urgent way to counter tribal politics. Policy debate is a key element of multiparty democracy.

Specific manifestos would foster healthy political competition that would force parties to distinguish themselves from each other. Conversely, such debates would also help to illustrate areas of common interest.

Indeed, it is becoming clear that issues such as poverty, infrastructure – energy, transportation, agriculture and food, and telecommunication – and youth employment are emerging as common themes in our politics irrespective of ideological differences.

So long as multiparty democracy offers the best chance for sustained growth and prosperity, tribal politics must be replaced by genuine party platforms and modern democratic institutions like think-tanks.

Otherwise our road to doom will continue to be paved by tribal intentions.

Fred M’membe
President of the Socialist Party

What’s  fueling tribal politics debates?

What’s fueling tribal politics debates? Featured

It seems Mr Hakainde Hichilema and the UPND are perched on the defensive over accusations of tribalism. Why? Probably it is because of the promises they made to have a tribal and regionally balanced and representative government. Critiques are asking if what they are seeing is equal to what they were promised:

  • President (Tonga)
  • Vice-President (Bemba married to a Lozi)
  • Speaker (Lozi)
  • Chief Justice (Lenje)
  • Acting President of the Constitutional Court (Lozi)
    Attorney General (Lenje)
  • Solicitor General (Tonga)
  • Chairman of the Judicial Service Commission (Lozi)
  • Chairman of the Judicial Complaints Commission (Tonga)
  • Commissioner of Lands (Tonga)
  • Chief Legal Advisor to the President (Lozi)
    Minister of Justice (Tonga).

They are saying the key state institutions and the country’s justice system are basically is the hands of Tongas and Lozis (with very little or no meaningful participation from the rest)

They are saying the same about the key government ministries (Ministries that are not easily done away with by any government):

  • Home Affairs (Tonga)
  • Local Government (Tonga)
  • Education (Tonga)
  • Tourism (Tonga)
    -Justice (Tonga)
  • Foreign Affairs (Lenje)
  • Health (Soli)
  • Defence (Luvale)
  • Infrastructure (Lozi)
  • Finance (Lozi)
  • Lands (Lunda)
  • Governor of Bank of Zambia (Tonga).

The rest are, in the main, pushed to ministries that can easily be done away and receive very limited budgetary allocations.

They say the picture is the same for key defence and security agencies:

  • Zambia Army Commander (Lozi)
  • Zambia Air Force Commander (Kaonde)
  • ZNS Commandant (Luvale)
  • Inspector General of Police (Kaonde)
    Director General of Intelligence (Lozi)
  • Commissioner General of Correctional Services (Tonga)
  • Chief Immigration officer (Lozi)

They are saying in all these key command defence and security positions there’s no one from the East or the North as the political leadership to keep the tribal and regional balance the political leadership had promised.

They are also pointing to the Electoral Commission of Zambia:

  • chairperson (Lozi)
  • vice-person (Mambwe)
  • the other three commissioners are Tonga, Lozi and Lunda

There’s no one from the East or the North proper.

These concerns are raised about lower positions in these and other state, government and quasi government institutions and agencies.

These are the concerns they are raising and the response is to label them tribalists, divisive elements and prosecute or persecute them on charges of tribal hatred.

With these concerns and the debates they are generating our multiparty political dispensation is back on the spot. The concern is no longer the lack of political pluralism or diversity, but the hijacking of the political processes by tribal politics.

The challenge to our multiparty political dispensation is not the prevalence of ethnic diversity, but the use of identity politics to promote narrow tribal interests. It is tribalism.

But the African experience over the last six decades has
shown us the dangers of ethnic competition and underscore the importance of building nations around ideas rather than clan identities.

In the absence of efforts to build genuine political parties with clear ideologies that compete on the basis of ideas, we have reverted to tribal identities as foundations for political competition.

Leaders are often exploiting tribal loyalty to advance personal gain, parochial interests, patronage, and cronyism. How else can one explain the tribal or regional voting that was confirmed by a Commission of Inquiry following the 2016 elections?

We shouldn’t forget the fact that tribes are not built on multiparty democratic ideas but thrive on zero-sum competition. As a result, they are inimical to multiparty democratic advancement.

In essence, tribal practices are occupying a vacuum created by lack of strong multiparty democratic institutions. The political parties are unable to find common ground through coherent party manifestos and ideological positions.

Many members of our political parties often don’t even know that their parties have manifestos.

The manifestos are generally issued just before the elections because much of the effort goes into regional manoeuvring and building tribal alliances.

Tribal politicians are clever and calculating.
They are quick to dress in the latest fashion and co-opt emerging trends to preserve their identities. They buy influence and create convenient alliances.

Their sole mission is self-preservation, with the side effect of subverting multiparty democratic evolution.
For them tribal politics is a zero-sum game.

The way forward for our multiparty democracy lies in concerted efforts to build modern political parties founded on strong ideological foundations, clear development ideas and not tribal bonds.

Such political parties must base their competition for power on ideological and development platforms.

Defining party platforms will need to be supported by the search for ideas – not the appeal to tribal coalitions.

Political parties that create genuine ideological and development platforms will launch initiatives that reflect popular needs.

Those that rely on manipulating ethnic alliances will bring sectarian animosity into government business by appointing to key government positions people from their tribes and allied ethnicities.

Party manifestos should fundamentally be documents in which parties outline their principles and goals in a manner that goes beyond popular rhetoric and cheap promises. They should arise from careful discussion, compromise, and efforts to express the core values and commitments of the party.

But building clear party platforms requires effective intellectual input, usually provided through think-tanks and other research institutions. Most of our political parties lack such support and generally their manifestos are cobbled together with little consultation.

Tribal groupings see themselves as infallible but parties have to be accountable to the people.

By stating a vision for the future, political parties provide voters with ways to measure their performance on all fronts.

Forging platforms fosters debate within parties that transcend tribal differences. Such debates are a central pillar of multiparty democracy. Building modern political parties and associated think-tanks is, therefore, the most urgent way to counter tribal politics. Policy debate is a key element of multiparty democracy.

Specific manifestos would foster healthy political competition that would force parties to distinguish themselves from each other. Conversely, such debates would also help to illustrate areas of common interest.

Indeed, it is becoming clear that issues such as poverty, infrastructure – energy, transportation, agriculture and food, and telecommunication – and youth employment are emerging as common themes in our politics irrespective of ideological differences.

So long as multiparty democracy offers the best chance for sustained growth and prosperity, tribal politics must be replaced by genuine party platforms and modern democratic institutions like think-tanks.

Otherwise our road to doom will continue to be paved by tribal intentions.

Fred M’membe
President of the Socialist Party