By GERSHOM NDHLOVU
I COULD not help but chuckle when a friend on Facebook asked if the funeral of the late second president of Zambia, Frederick Chiluba was a roll call of those who loved him and those who hated him.
The way a certain section of society, particularly clergy aligned to the ruling MMD and the party’s supporters have been coming out against opposition PF leader Michael Sata from the time Chiluba died, one would think Sata switched off the former president’s life support machine.
All sorts of characters, aided by certain sections of the media, want to vilify Sata for the manner he mourned or did not mourn Chiluba, someone who gave him an opportunity to serve at very high levels of government including the position of Minister Without Portfolio, de facto third in the hierarchy of government. Sata also served as MMD national secretary when Chiluba was party president.
Political observers, however, ought to know that there was no love lost, at least politically, between Chiluba and Sata from the time the incumbent president, Levy Mwanawasa died in 2008 when Chiluba declared his support for the then Vice President Rupiah Banda who contested the resultant by-election. Of course, all the time Chiluba was appearing in court for cases of the plunder of national resources when Mwanawasa was alive, no one wanted to be seen near him including George Kunda, now Vice President, who was in the forefront of prosecuting Chiluba’s cases at home and abroad.
Sata and the PF membership was always on hand giving Chiluba all the support he needed, welcoming him home at the Lusaka International Airport coming from South Africa for treatment or when appearing in court. However, this camaraderie nose-dived when Chiluba threw his weight behind Rupiah Banda’s presidential candidature, leaving Sata in a political lurch. Chiluba’s support to anyone was, rightly or wrongly, perceived to guarantee the delivery of the Copperbelt, Luapula and Northern vote.
Whatever deal was struck behind the scenes for Chiluba to suddenly stop supporting the PF which he had publicly supported between 2003 and 2003 is a matter of conjecture, but this was no longer a matter of doubt when Chiluba was suddenly acquitted and other court cases, notably the registration for local enforcement of the London judgment which found him liable for plunder, just stalled.
Sata’s friendship with Chiluba clearly hit rock bottom when the latter started campaigning for Banda, but equally, Chiluba’s support for the so-called rebel PF MPs did not help matters in their friendship. Even up to a few days before Chiluba’s death, Sata was threatening to re-start the court cases once elected president.
Sata’s non-appearance at the funeral house and subsequently at the burial at Embassy Park can be linked directly to the threats issued by Lusaka Province MMD chairman William Banda and other party cadres that those who “insulted” Chiluba when he was alive would be manhandled if they turned up at the funeral house. These threats could not be taken lightly because less than two years ago when a former MMD MP, Lameck Chibombamilimo died, people who were not in good books with Rupiah Banda were manhandled. Former Finance Minister Ng’andu Magande was badly manhandled.
Whatever the circumstances, Sata’s would have just been seen as shedding crocodile tears. However, the wily politician he is, Sata turned up at Mulungushi International Conference Centre where Chiluba’s body lay in state and viewed his body. Obviously, the schemers of the violence they were threatening against him were probably still sipping tea in the comfort of their homes. Of course there could be other reason why Sata did not visit Chiluba’s Serval Road house, Belvedere Lodge and, indeed, Embassy Park burial site. For me that Sata turned up at Mulungushi, was enough to mourn his erstwhile political colleague.
It is just political morbidity that some people want to link Sata’s future political fortunes to straight forward matters of Chiluba’s funeral. The rent-a-crowd mob baying for Sata’s blood need to grow up and understand, first and foremost, that funeral matters are private and two, no one wants to expose himself or herself to violence or the threats of it. It would have been gullible for Sata to walk into William Banda’s trap hoping to come out a hero with a broken nose and a tattered jacket like Magande.
Friday, 1 July 2011
Wednesday, 15 June 2011
HOW PREVALENT IS HOMOSEXUALITY IN ZAMBIA?
By GERSHOM NDHLOVU
The self-confession by Mazabuka resident, Joseph Mfula, of his homosexual dalliances with a Portuguese expatriate, Francisco Vasco Dubrito Vale in the 1980s, once again brings the issue of homosexuality in the Zambian society to the fore. Whether Mfula’s confession is a bid to link opposition Patriotic Front (PF) leader Michael Sata to homosexuality and his support for it as being historical is difficult to tell.
Before I go into what is generally known about homosexuality in the Zambian society, I woud like to state what Chapter 87, the Penal Code of the Laws of Zambia, says about homosexuality.
Section 155 (c) states that any person who permits a male person to have carnal knowledge of him…the order of nature commits a felony and liable, upon conviction, to imprisonment for a term not less than fifteen years and may be liable to imprisonment for life.
Section 158 (1) states that “…any male who, whether in public or private, commits any act of gross indecency with a male…person, or procures a male…person to commit any act of gross indecency with him, or attempts to procure the commission of any such act by any male person with himself or with another male…person, whether in public or private, commits a felony and is liable, upon conviction, to imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years and not exceeding fourteen years.”
Subsection (2) states the same as Subsection (1) but in respect of females. By virtue of the above sections of the Penal Code, Mfula has committed or did, indeed, commit an offence at the time he used to have sex with Vale regardless of whether Mr Sata witnessed the sexual activities.
It is imperative to state, however, that this is not a legal write up arguing about the merits or demerits of the case but neither is it a political treatise in support of any politician or political group. This write up, as stated above, is the perception and knowledge, if any, that people have about homosexuality in Zambia.
Apart from knowing that homosexuality is unlawful in Zambia, I doubt that a lot of Zambians know the specifics of the law on the practice. I will, however, safely bet that most Zambians have an idea about what the bible says about homosexuality. The oft-quoted book in the bible on the subject is Leviticus, in particular chapter 18 verse 22 which states: “…do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”
The issue of homosexuality has arisen publicly in Zambia at various times but most notably in the mid-1990s when then outspoken Zambia Independent Monitoring Team (ZIMT) president Alfred Zulu attempted to register Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Association better known by its acronym LEGATRA whose object was to speak for the people who were practicing homosexuality.
One or two people came out to publicly admit their homosexuality and portraying that they were representative of a number of others who were forced to live a sheltered sexual life because of the Zambian culture which does not tolerate or even admit homosexuality.
Zulu at the time said although few had come out in the open, "we have statistical evidence to the effect that there are over 500,000 homosexuals in Zambia, some of them are senior public figures. But they are too jittery to identify with LEGATRA openly." (Read related story here)
The social and political pressure proved too much in this constitutionally proclaimed Christian nation. Blame was, as usual, put on the western donor community for sponsoring LEGATRA with claims that the concerned western countries where homosexuality is legal, wanted to import foreign cultural practices into Zambia. LEGATRA did not last long. It had come with a bang, it fizzled out not even with a whisper.
Another time when homosexuality became a public issue was when Vice President George Kunda as leader of government business in parliament, accused some people he did not name who were critical of the MMD government of being practising homosexuals.
But it is what the PF leader said in an interview with a Danish media team that has taken the homosexual debate to another level leading to the MMD distributing pictures of males kissing and being in sexually compromising positions. The ruling party and sympathetic Non-Governmental Organisations sympathetic to it vilify Sata on homosexuality at every opportunity as a result.
The icing on the cake came this week when Mfula publicly confessed that he used to be engaged in homosexual activities with Vale who was a friend of Sata’s.
The question to ask is, should homosexuality be reduced to Mr Sata (read related story here) , or is it a bigger problem than it is being presented? As stated above, over 15 years ago, ZIMT through LEGATRA had established that there were 500,000 homosexuals in the country. The population was smaller then but with the population at over 13 million, the figure could even be higher.
For as long as I have been conscious of socio-cultural issues, I have heard stories of sodomy in prisons, a matter that is never officially acknowledged. What is equally not known is what support is given to ex-convicts who had been exposed to sodomy while in prison or if they go on into society to practice their new sexual orientation. (Read related story here).
But, equally, there is always chatter about homosexuality in society. For a long time, there have been rumours of homosexuality involving a named late Lusaka businessman of Greek origin who was into property development who is alleged to have been luring male students for sex by lavishing them with cash and other presents. Unfortunately, no one has ever come out publicly to admit same sex liaisons with the businessman.
In Ndola in the 1990s, there were rumours among people working in the crude oil/fuel industry complex of Bwana Mkubwa area of an Italian expatriate they called Santo Petro who is alleged to have had a passion for same sex liaisons. Again, no one ever admitted to have been sexually involved with Santo Petro apart from pub talk about his activities.
As much as homosexuality is a touchy subject, maybe Zambia needs more Joseph Mfulas to come out and share the stories so that citizens get an idea of the depth of the practice.
The self-confession by Mazabuka resident, Joseph Mfula, of his homosexual dalliances with a Portuguese expatriate, Francisco Vasco Dubrito Vale in the 1980s, once again brings the issue of homosexuality in the Zambian society to the fore. Whether Mfula’s confession is a bid to link opposition Patriotic Front (PF) leader Michael Sata to homosexuality and his support for it as being historical is difficult to tell.
Before I go into what is generally known about homosexuality in the Zambian society, I woud like to state what Chapter 87, the Penal Code of the Laws of Zambia, says about homosexuality.
Section 155 (c) states that any person who permits a male person to have carnal knowledge of him…the order of nature commits a felony and liable, upon conviction, to imprisonment for a term not less than fifteen years and may be liable to imprisonment for life.
Section 158 (1) states that “…any male who, whether in public or private, commits any act of gross indecency with a male…person, or procures a male…person to commit any act of gross indecency with him, or attempts to procure the commission of any such act by any male person with himself or with another male…person, whether in public or private, commits a felony and is liable, upon conviction, to imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years and not exceeding fourteen years.”
Subsection (2) states the same as Subsection (1) but in respect of females. By virtue of the above sections of the Penal Code, Mfula has committed or did, indeed, commit an offence at the time he used to have sex with Vale regardless of whether Mr Sata witnessed the sexual activities.
It is imperative to state, however, that this is not a legal write up arguing about the merits or demerits of the case but neither is it a political treatise in support of any politician or political group. This write up, as stated above, is the perception and knowledge, if any, that people have about homosexuality in Zambia.
Apart from knowing that homosexuality is unlawful in Zambia, I doubt that a lot of Zambians know the specifics of the law on the practice. I will, however, safely bet that most Zambians have an idea about what the bible says about homosexuality. The oft-quoted book in the bible on the subject is Leviticus, in particular chapter 18 verse 22 which states: “…do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”
The issue of homosexuality has arisen publicly in Zambia at various times but most notably in the mid-1990s when then outspoken Zambia Independent Monitoring Team (ZIMT) president Alfred Zulu attempted to register Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Association better known by its acronym LEGATRA whose object was to speak for the people who were practicing homosexuality.
One or two people came out to publicly admit their homosexuality and portraying that they were representative of a number of others who were forced to live a sheltered sexual life because of the Zambian culture which does not tolerate or even admit homosexuality.
Zulu at the time said although few had come out in the open, "we have statistical evidence to the effect that there are over 500,000 homosexuals in Zambia, some of them are senior public figures. But they are too jittery to identify with LEGATRA openly." (Read related story here)
The social and political pressure proved too much in this constitutionally proclaimed Christian nation. Blame was, as usual, put on the western donor community for sponsoring LEGATRA with claims that the concerned western countries where homosexuality is legal, wanted to import foreign cultural practices into Zambia. LEGATRA did not last long. It had come with a bang, it fizzled out not even with a whisper.
Another time when homosexuality became a public issue was when Vice President George Kunda as leader of government business in parliament, accused some people he did not name who were critical of the MMD government of being practising homosexuals.
But it is what the PF leader said in an interview with a Danish media team that has taken the homosexual debate to another level leading to the MMD distributing pictures of males kissing and being in sexually compromising positions. The ruling party and sympathetic Non-Governmental Organisations sympathetic to it vilify Sata on homosexuality at every opportunity as a result.
The icing on the cake came this week when Mfula publicly confessed that he used to be engaged in homosexual activities with Vale who was a friend of Sata’s.
The question to ask is, should homosexuality be reduced to Mr Sata (read related story here) , or is it a bigger problem than it is being presented? As stated above, over 15 years ago, ZIMT through LEGATRA had established that there were 500,000 homosexuals in the country. The population was smaller then but with the population at over 13 million, the figure could even be higher.
For as long as I have been conscious of socio-cultural issues, I have heard stories of sodomy in prisons, a matter that is never officially acknowledged. What is equally not known is what support is given to ex-convicts who had been exposed to sodomy while in prison or if they go on into society to practice their new sexual orientation. (Read related story here).
But, equally, there is always chatter about homosexuality in society. For a long time, there have been rumours of homosexuality involving a named late Lusaka businessman of Greek origin who was into property development who is alleged to have been luring male students for sex by lavishing them with cash and other presents. Unfortunately, no one has ever come out publicly to admit same sex liaisons with the businessman.
In Ndola in the 1990s, there were rumours among people working in the crude oil/fuel industry complex of Bwana Mkubwa area of an Italian expatriate they called Santo Petro who is alleged to have had a passion for same sex liaisons. Again, no one ever admitted to have been sexually involved with Santo Petro apart from pub talk about his activities.
As much as homosexuality is a touchy subject, maybe Zambia needs more Joseph Mfulas to come out and share the stories so that citizens get an idea of the depth of the practice.
Thursday, 5 May 2011
DO US A FAVOUR MR PRESIDENT, ANNOUNCE ELECTION DATE
By GERSHOM NDHLOVU
Granted, the current Zambian constitution gives the President the prerogative to announce an election date in an election year. However, going by the history of the nation, this prerogative has been taken to ridiculous levels by the presidents that have led Zambia at one time or another.
Zambia’s presidents keep the date so secretively it is almost treasonous to even speculate on it. It appears, especially in the multi-party dispensation of the last 20 years, an incumbent president wants to keep his opponents in the dark and spring the date as a surprise when the ruling party, in this case the MMD, has put its logistics in place.
As the nation hurtles towards the 2011 elections, everyone except the president and perhaps his closest circle of advisors, are just speculating on the date. For opposition parties that want to start campaigning are being told it is illegal to do so while the ruling party’s candidate and head of state, Rupiah Banda has been in campaigning mode since the elections that brought him into office in October of 2008.
In advanced democracies such as America, presidential elections are held on a fixed date every four years such that it is easy for all the players to prepare for elections years in advance. In the UK, while elections can be called at any time, the usual time table is that elections, local government or parliamentary elections, and this year a referendum, are held at the beginning of May.
But even as the constitution stipulates in the Zambian case, there could and in fact there should be an administrative arrangement where an election date is “fixed” say at the end of October when historically most of the national elections have been held before.
The MMD, PF, UPND, NAREP, other political parties and, most importantly, the citizens who constitute the electorate, are important players in the electoral process who should have an idea about what is going on at every stage. This does not in any way make the president who announces the date any more important than all these entities and citizens. This is the more reason who should, by the beginning of the year, indicate when polls would take place in an election year.
The argument that the delay to announce the poll date is to allow the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) to put logistics in place for “ smooth” polls does not hold water because the commission has five years from one election to another, save for occasional by-elections that occur in between.
It is these deliberate hurdles that lead to perpetual accusations of rigging of elections by both opposition parties and voters. There is absolute need to curtail such presidential excesses even in such otherwise straightforward matters when the Constitution comes up for review again. So do us a favour Mr President, announce the election date now!
Granted, the current Zambian constitution gives the President the prerogative to announce an election date in an election year. However, going by the history of the nation, this prerogative has been taken to ridiculous levels by the presidents that have led Zambia at one time or another.
Zambia’s presidents keep the date so secretively it is almost treasonous to even speculate on it. It appears, especially in the multi-party dispensation of the last 20 years, an incumbent president wants to keep his opponents in the dark and spring the date as a surprise when the ruling party, in this case the MMD, has put its logistics in place.
As the nation hurtles towards the 2011 elections, everyone except the president and perhaps his closest circle of advisors, are just speculating on the date. For opposition parties that want to start campaigning are being told it is illegal to do so while the ruling party’s candidate and head of state, Rupiah Banda has been in campaigning mode since the elections that brought him into office in October of 2008.
In advanced democracies such as America, presidential elections are held on a fixed date every four years such that it is easy for all the players to prepare for elections years in advance. In the UK, while elections can be called at any time, the usual time table is that elections, local government or parliamentary elections, and this year a referendum, are held at the beginning of May.
But even as the constitution stipulates in the Zambian case, there could and in fact there should be an administrative arrangement where an election date is “fixed” say at the end of October when historically most of the national elections have been held before.
The MMD, PF, UPND, NAREP, other political parties and, most importantly, the citizens who constitute the electorate, are important players in the electoral process who should have an idea about what is going on at every stage. This does not in any way make the president who announces the date any more important than all these entities and citizens. This is the more reason who should, by the beginning of the year, indicate when polls would take place in an election year.
The argument that the delay to announce the poll date is to allow the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) to put logistics in place for “ smooth” polls does not hold water because the commission has five years from one election to another, save for occasional by-elections that occur in between.
It is these deliberate hurdles that lead to perpetual accusations of rigging of elections by both opposition parties and voters. There is absolute need to curtail such presidential excesses even in such otherwise straightforward matters when the Constitution comes up for review again. So do us a favour Mr President, announce the election date now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)