By Gershom Ndhlovu
“A ZAMBIAN woman has been arrested in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia for wearing ivory bracelets. Ruth Mwale aged 46 was arrested at Bole International Airport Tuesday morning upon her arrival from Bangkok, Thailand en-route to Zambia.”
When this story broke out on various Zambian internet forums including Facebook and other social media networks, the arguments for the arrest and against that ensued bordered on separating the patriotic from the unpatriotic. The “patriotic” thought the arrest was wrong as the Ethiopians apparently did not “understand” the Zambian cultural dynamics while the few “unpatriotic”—I was one of those—supported the arrest.
To reiterate the question that was asked, were the Ethiopian authorities right to arrest Mwale for just a piece of ivory on her wrist? Put it in another way, would the Zambian government through the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) arrest anybody wearing an ivory bangle?
For all those who care to remember, around 1992, a few months into the new MMD administration, the then Minister of Tourism, Lieutenant-General Christon Tembo, now late, led government, non-government organisations (NGOs) officials and ordinary citizens, in torching a bonfire of ivory, rhino horns and guns seized from poachers held by ZAWA which was then known as National Parks and Wildlife Service. This public event was held at the service headquarters in Chilanga.
The ivory burning event in Zambia followed on the heels of a similar event in Kenya which was led by none other than that country’s then president, Daniel arap Moi in Nairobi’s Uhuru Park. Both these events were largely supported by World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) with a promise for further funding and logistical support of wildlife management in the countries involved. Whether that was fulfilled or not is a different issue altogether.
These two events were born from the recognition by the two countries and the wider international community of depleting elephant populations in Eastern, Central and Southern Africa wrought by widespread and heavily commercialised poaching that was taking place then. In Zambia, heavy poaching was going on in the Mulobezi and Kaoma/Itezhi Tezhi precincts of the Kafue National Park, Luangwa North and South National Parks and Lower Zambezi National Park.
Brazen Zambian poachers were even crossing into Zimbabwean national parks such as Matusadona, Mana Pools and Hwange national parks where, unfortunately, a lot of suspects lost their lives from uncompromising wildlife rangers who had no mercy for armed poachers.
Although 20 years ago these issues were very much in the media limelight with what was the then Species Protection Department of the Anti-Corruption Commission, I don’t know if it is the case these days as, admittedly, I only read Zambian newspapers on the internet which only post political stories.
Again, those who care to remember will know that in the last three years or so, outgoing Minister of Tourism, Catherine Namugala has been at the forefront of trying to have trade in elephants and ivory downgraded from Appendix III of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) which totally bans such trade, to Appendix II which allows partial trade.
Zambia is supported by Zimbabwe, Namibia and Tanzania, all of which claim to have substantial stocks of ivory that they need to dispose of. But opponents of the proposal such as the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), an independent campaigning organisation committed to bringing about change that protects the natural world from environmental crime and abuse, argue that the downgrade will allow contraband ivory find its way into the legitimate system and consequently fuel poaching.
Other critics of the proposal believe that Zambia is being pressured by China, one of its largest trading partners with huge investments in the country, whose noveau riche seek ivory and products of other exotic and equally endangered wildlife species like rhino and tiger as status symbols of their newly found wealth.
It is unimaginable that there is no illegal trade going on in ivory or xanja as the Chinese call it when there are so many Chinese nationals in Zambia than at any other time. It obviously goes on in the streets of Lusaka as it did all those years ago when the onus to export the contraband was left to the Zambian contacts. Poaching with the heavy stakes involved, fuels corruption at many levels—from low level wildlife guards, to policemen manning roadblocks to customs officials who allow the goods out at ports of exit.
Ivory is a proscribed item and therefore Mwale or whoever has possession of it commits an offence under the ZAWA Act. There is no cultural excuse for wearing a proscribed wildlife animal part. If such an argument were to hold, then the Ngonis—of the fwaka yachiNgoni fame—and the old women of Gwembe must be allowed to smoke cannabis at will as they have done so since time immemorial. Here I have in mind my Lozi relatives some of whom are my mulamus, nieces and nephews to desist from wearing ivory for any reason.
Only elephants, and no one else, should wear ivory. As such, not only the Ethiopian authorities should arrest Zambians wearing ivory bangles on their territory, Zambians should also play their part for as long as elephants and elephant products remain on CITES Appendix III.
Saturday, 30 July 2011
Saturday, 23 July 2011
MKHONDO LUNGU, BESA CHIMBAKA ILLEGALLY IN OFFICE
By GERSHOM NDHLOVU
ON Saturday July 23, I was going through my twitter messages when I saw a message story in which Home Affairs Minister Mkhondo Lungu was deriding former Solicitor-General Sebastian Zulu as a frustrated individual for allegedly attacking President Banda in the hope of getting favours from the opposition Patriotic Front (PF) if it forms government after the forthcoming elections.
Apparently, Zulu, a former Secretary-General of opposition UNIP, some 10 days before, had charged that President Banda’s administration was condoning plunder of national resources which Lungu described as baseless.
Whatever spat was there between the former—mark the word former—UNIP members was there between the two of them was not my concern, but rather that Lungu inadvertently crossed the floor, that is he changed political parties but still remains an MP and a minister, contrary to the Constitution.
The ruling MMD announced its list of parliamentary candidates earlier in the week and among them was Lungu, who together with a PF rebel MP Besa Chimbaka, had been appointed cabinet minister and deputy minister, respectively, from opposition ranks early this year.
Others on the MMD list of aspiring candidates are PF “rebel MPs” Peter Machungwa for Luapula Constituency Bahati’s Besa Chimbaka who is also Luapula Province Minister, Dr Jacob Choongo (Mwense), Faustina Sinyangwe (Matero), Majory Mwape who was MP for a Kantanshi constituency and Elizabeth Mulobeka Chitika (Kawambwa). Machungwa and Mwape will now run in Kabwata and Munali, respectively.
Other serving opposition MPs who have turned up on the MMD candidate list are none other than opposition Nchelenge National Democratic Focus (NDF) MP Ben Mwila and United Party for National Development (UPND) Namwala MP Robby Chizyuka.
Apart from Mwila who is president of the NDF, all the above MPs have been in trouble with their parties principally with issues related to the National Constitution Conference (NCC) which PF president Michael Sata did not want his MPs to attend but they defied him. As for Chizyuka, the problems he had with his party were internal disciplinary matters.
The choice on which party ticket people stand is entirely a personal matter but the problem I have with Lungu who hold constitutional offices of minister and deputy minister, respectively, and the other MPs in general is that they have knowingly or unknowingly crossed the floor—they have changed political parties without relinquishing their seats.
On the part of the MMD, it announced its candidate list without ensuring that parliament was dissolved first. If the ruling party’s list did not have opposition members on it, it would not have been a problem at all.
The Constitution is clear in article 71 (c) which says that “ in the case of an elected member, if he becomes a member of a political party other than the party of which he was an authorised candidate when he was elected to the National Assembly or, if having been an independent candidate, he joins a political party or having been a member of a political party, he becomes an independent…”
For the eight opposition MPs now cavorting with the MMD, the most honourable thing to do now is to cease, on their own, from enjoying the benefits of an MP and in particular for Lungu and Chimbaka to give up their offices which they are now occupying illegally. Unfortunately for the two, even if parliament is dissolved now, they just have to wait until they are reappointed in the new post-election government.
They can also not be nominated after parliament is dissolved but more so because the Constitution states in article 68 (3) that “a person may not be appointed as a nominated member if he was candidate for election in the last preceding general election or in any subsequent by-election.”
As it is now, Lungu cannot superintend over law enforcement wings of government because he is illegally in office.
ON Saturday July 23, I was going through my twitter messages when I saw a message story in which Home Affairs Minister Mkhondo Lungu was deriding former Solicitor-General Sebastian Zulu as a frustrated individual for allegedly attacking President Banda in the hope of getting favours from the opposition Patriotic Front (PF) if it forms government after the forthcoming elections.
Apparently, Zulu, a former Secretary-General of opposition UNIP, some 10 days before, had charged that President Banda’s administration was condoning plunder of national resources which Lungu described as baseless.
Whatever spat was there between the former—mark the word former—UNIP members was there between the two of them was not my concern, but rather that Lungu inadvertently crossed the floor, that is he changed political parties but still remains an MP and a minister, contrary to the Constitution.
The ruling MMD announced its list of parliamentary candidates earlier in the week and among them was Lungu, who together with a PF rebel MP Besa Chimbaka, had been appointed cabinet minister and deputy minister, respectively, from opposition ranks early this year.
Others on the MMD list of aspiring candidates are PF “rebel MPs” Peter Machungwa for Luapula Constituency Bahati’s Besa Chimbaka who is also Luapula Province Minister, Dr Jacob Choongo (Mwense), Faustina Sinyangwe (Matero), Majory Mwape who was MP for a Kantanshi constituency and Elizabeth Mulobeka Chitika (Kawambwa). Machungwa and Mwape will now run in Kabwata and Munali, respectively.
Other serving opposition MPs who have turned up on the MMD candidate list are none other than opposition Nchelenge National Democratic Focus (NDF) MP Ben Mwila and United Party for National Development (UPND) Namwala MP Robby Chizyuka.
Apart from Mwila who is president of the NDF, all the above MPs have been in trouble with their parties principally with issues related to the National Constitution Conference (NCC) which PF president Michael Sata did not want his MPs to attend but they defied him. As for Chizyuka, the problems he had with his party were internal disciplinary matters.
The choice on which party ticket people stand is entirely a personal matter but the problem I have with Lungu who hold constitutional offices of minister and deputy minister, respectively, and the other MPs in general is that they have knowingly or unknowingly crossed the floor—they have changed political parties without relinquishing their seats.
On the part of the MMD, it announced its candidate list without ensuring that parliament was dissolved first. If the ruling party’s list did not have opposition members on it, it would not have been a problem at all.
The Constitution is clear in article 71 (c) which says that “ in the case of an elected member, if he becomes a member of a political party other than the party of which he was an authorised candidate when he was elected to the National Assembly or, if having been an independent candidate, he joins a political party or having been a member of a political party, he becomes an independent…”
For the eight opposition MPs now cavorting with the MMD, the most honourable thing to do now is to cease, on their own, from enjoying the benefits of an MP and in particular for Lungu and Chimbaka to give up their offices which they are now occupying illegally. Unfortunately for the two, even if parliament is dissolved now, they just have to wait until they are reappointed in the new post-election government.
They can also not be nominated after parliament is dissolved but more so because the Constitution states in article 68 (3) that “a person may not be appointed as a nominated member if he was candidate for election in the last preceding general election or in any subsequent by-election.”
As it is now, Lungu cannot superintend over law enforcement wings of government because he is illegally in office.
Sunday, 17 July 2011
WHAT WENT WRONG WITH STATE-OWNED NEWSPAPERS
By GERSHOM NDHLOVU
“A lot of people are busy saying the MMD government is abusing ZNBC because ZNBC only covers the MMD government. Yes, ZNBC has to cover us because it shows government developmental projects...Even when Sata comes into power, ZNBC will be covering him alone. This time is our time. Those who want to be feeling bad about themselves when they wake up every day, they should be buying The Post newspapers because it always talks about negative things, saying things are bad in the country when the economy is doing well...”
Dora Siliya, Education Minister and former journalist is quoted by the Post as saying in defence of the dismal performance of state-owned and controlled media.
The view that state-owned media is supposed to toe the government, and worse, the ruling party's line is one I have often heard from government officials and, surprisingly, some journalists working for the Times of Zambia, Zambia Daily Mail and the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation. It appears to me, however, that the people purveying such a despicable view have very little understanding of the history of Zambia's media.
Equally puzzling is Siliya's position on the matter. She is one person who should know better as a University of Zambia Mass Communication graduate who should have read the media history in her first, or is it second, year of study.
Talking about the the history of Zambia, I must hasten to say that it is aptly captured in late Francis P Kasoma's seminal book, The Press in Zambia. It captures the development of the media in Zambia from 1900 up to about 1980. Nowhere in it does it say that state-owned media was created to portray government's development projects or, indeed, government's views on issues.
Sadly, state-owned media has been reduced to the ruling MMD's public relations unit. Anyway, first things first, I will not discuss the history of broadcasting, neither will I discuss the privately-owned press represented by the Post which was born in 1991.
The Zambia Daily Mail was the first newspaper the UNIP government acquired in c1969 from Dr Alexander Scott, father of politician and Patriotic Front (PF) vice president Dr Guy Scott. The weekly African Mail as it was known and started in the late 1950s tended to portray the views of freedom fighters fighting for Zambia's independence. Some of the early journalists to have emerged on this paper were Kelvin Mlenga and Bill Saidi.
The Mail transformed into the Zambia Daily Mail around 1970. Along the way it introduced the Financial Mail (1990/1) and the Sunday Mail (1992) to its portfolio of newspapers. For some reason, the Financial Mail was discontinued but the Sunday Mail, the paper I joined as a Senior Reporter in 1992 has continued as a flagship of the company.
I must say that during my time at the Zambia Daily Mail, both papers were quite critical in their reportage and feature writing. Some of the critical journalists to have walked the corridors of the Zambia Daily Mail in recent times include the late Jowie Mwiinga, late Moses Mbewe and late Nigel Mulenga, an uncompromising lot when it came to journalism principles.
As for the Times of Zambia, its history goes back to a bit earlier than that of the Mail. It was started as the Northern News under Lonrho and it was pro-colonial in its outlook serving mostly the white community on the Copperbelt. It was later to change to the Times of Zambia. Government acquired the paper in 1974.
Vernon Mwaanga served at the paper as editor-in-chief around 1972 and 1974. Even though he was appointed by President Kaunda to serve at the newspaper from the diplomatic service, he was surprisingly one of the most liberal editors who allowed journalists express themselves to the full. Actually, the outlook of the Times never changed much from the Vernon he took over from.
Mwaanga took over from Vernon Wright who was deported by the Kaunda administration after some misunderstanding between them. One strange phenomenon is that at some point, even though the Times was privately-owned, Kaunda got to appoint editors-in-chief.
Even then, the Times produced some great journalists among them the late Patu Simoko, the late Bandawe Banda, the late Desmond Mubiana, Arthur Simuchoba and even the iconic “Kapelwa Musonda”, a satire-columnist who wrote under a pseudonym.
In the current environment of fear of loss of jobs in which the ruling MMD has usurped the operations of state-owned media, the journalists I have mentioned above could not have done their jobs as they did. I suppose not even the Zambia Congress of Trades Unions (ZCTU) and its leadership led by the late Frederick Chiluba who went on to become Zambia's second republican president, could not have been covered as to be known and become a factor in Zambian politics.
Because both the Daily Mail and the Times were not quite the papers they are being made to be by the MMD government, both UNIP in government at the time and the MMD in its first days in government, ran their own newspapers which were short-lived. UNIP started the Eagle and the MMD the Herald (if I get the name right).
Things for the Zambia media started going pear-shaped in 1999-2000 when Chiluba started hankering for an unconstitutional third term. Unfortunately, there was a lot of money being thrown around to journalists and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to skew people's views in support of the political manouvre. Incidentally, this unprecedented hold on the media by a government and a ruling party has continued just over a decade later.
The media under Kaunda was very critical considering that there was only one party in power and constitutionally, no other party was allowed to exist alongside UNIP. Journalists, between 1979 and 1980, even defeated government's moves to introduce a Press Council Bill that was going to let government control the practice of journalism in Zambia. I am sure the current generation would have allowed themselves to be roughshod.
“A lot of people are busy saying the MMD government is abusing ZNBC because ZNBC only covers the MMD government. Yes, ZNBC has to cover us because it shows government developmental projects...Even when Sata comes into power, ZNBC will be covering him alone. This time is our time. Those who want to be feeling bad about themselves when they wake up every day, they should be buying The Post newspapers because it always talks about negative things, saying things are bad in the country when the economy is doing well...”
Dora Siliya, Education Minister and former journalist is quoted by the Post as saying in defence of the dismal performance of state-owned and controlled media.
The view that state-owned media is supposed to toe the government, and worse, the ruling party's line is one I have often heard from government officials and, surprisingly, some journalists working for the Times of Zambia, Zambia Daily Mail and the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation. It appears to me, however, that the people purveying such a despicable view have very little understanding of the history of Zambia's media.
Equally puzzling is Siliya's position on the matter. She is one person who should know better as a University of Zambia Mass Communication graduate who should have read the media history in her first, or is it second, year of study.
Talking about the the history of Zambia, I must hasten to say that it is aptly captured in late Francis P Kasoma's seminal book, The Press in Zambia. It captures the development of the media in Zambia from 1900 up to about 1980. Nowhere in it does it say that state-owned media was created to portray government's development projects or, indeed, government's views on issues.
Sadly, state-owned media has been reduced to the ruling MMD's public relations unit. Anyway, first things first, I will not discuss the history of broadcasting, neither will I discuss the privately-owned press represented by the Post which was born in 1991.
The Zambia Daily Mail was the first newspaper the UNIP government acquired in c1969 from Dr Alexander Scott, father of politician and Patriotic Front (PF) vice president Dr Guy Scott. The weekly African Mail as it was known and started in the late 1950s tended to portray the views of freedom fighters fighting for Zambia's independence. Some of the early journalists to have emerged on this paper were Kelvin Mlenga and Bill Saidi.
The Mail transformed into the Zambia Daily Mail around 1970. Along the way it introduced the Financial Mail (1990/1) and the Sunday Mail (1992) to its portfolio of newspapers. For some reason, the Financial Mail was discontinued but the Sunday Mail, the paper I joined as a Senior Reporter in 1992 has continued as a flagship of the company.
I must say that during my time at the Zambia Daily Mail, both papers were quite critical in their reportage and feature writing. Some of the critical journalists to have walked the corridors of the Zambia Daily Mail in recent times include the late Jowie Mwiinga, late Moses Mbewe and late Nigel Mulenga, an uncompromising lot when it came to journalism principles.
As for the Times of Zambia, its history goes back to a bit earlier than that of the Mail. It was started as the Northern News under Lonrho and it was pro-colonial in its outlook serving mostly the white community on the Copperbelt. It was later to change to the Times of Zambia. Government acquired the paper in 1974.
Vernon Mwaanga served at the paper as editor-in-chief around 1972 and 1974. Even though he was appointed by President Kaunda to serve at the newspaper from the diplomatic service, he was surprisingly one of the most liberal editors who allowed journalists express themselves to the full. Actually, the outlook of the Times never changed much from the Vernon he took over from.
Mwaanga took over from Vernon Wright who was deported by the Kaunda administration after some misunderstanding between them. One strange phenomenon is that at some point, even though the Times was privately-owned, Kaunda got to appoint editors-in-chief.
Even then, the Times produced some great journalists among them the late Patu Simoko, the late Bandawe Banda, the late Desmond Mubiana, Arthur Simuchoba and even the iconic “Kapelwa Musonda”, a satire-columnist who wrote under a pseudonym.
In the current environment of fear of loss of jobs in which the ruling MMD has usurped the operations of state-owned media, the journalists I have mentioned above could not have done their jobs as they did. I suppose not even the Zambia Congress of Trades Unions (ZCTU) and its leadership led by the late Frederick Chiluba who went on to become Zambia's second republican president, could not have been covered as to be known and become a factor in Zambian politics.
Because both the Daily Mail and the Times were not quite the papers they are being made to be by the MMD government, both UNIP in government at the time and the MMD in its first days in government, ran their own newspapers which were short-lived. UNIP started the Eagle and the MMD the Herald (if I get the name right).
Things for the Zambia media started going pear-shaped in 1999-2000 when Chiluba started hankering for an unconstitutional third term. Unfortunately, there was a lot of money being thrown around to journalists and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to skew people's views in support of the political manouvre. Incidentally, this unprecedented hold on the media by a government and a ruling party has continued just over a decade later.
The media under Kaunda was very critical considering that there was only one party in power and constitutionally, no other party was allowed to exist alongside UNIP. Journalists, between 1979 and 1980, even defeated government's moves to introduce a Press Council Bill that was going to let government control the practice of journalism in Zambia. I am sure the current generation would have allowed themselves to be roughshod.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)