By Justin Mupundu
The debate on the need to probe into the privatization of State-owned enterprises has once again been revived: Either probing how MMD Government disposed off the national assets or establishing a prima facie case for particular individuals who took peculiarly advantage to personally benefit from privatization is a wrong route.
Whilst the former is fishing costly adventure not worthy understanding, the latter is will be perceived as persecution and prosecution as prosecuting corruption -related offences is the mandate of Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).
Needless to set up a Commission of inquiry!
Following the raging debate, I have decided to reproduce below my analysis that was published two years ago by various media outlets, including the Zambian eye and Daily Nation, to enable many Zambians read my fair comments on the subject in question:
“The proposed probe into the privatization of State-owned enterprises under the commission of a judge-led inquiry is costly venture not worth undertaking as it poses serious moral, political, economic and social implications.
The judge –led inquiry if constituted will gobble millions of dollars thus robbing the country’s much-needed meager resources to help strung off her woes.
But how would the ordinary Zambians benefits from the pep into how national assets such as State-enterprises were disposed off on their behalf?
Whilst Zambians have the right to know what transpired for them to appreciate the privatization exercise, it’s not necessary as it will not add value their well-being.
However, my great trepidation is that the proposed inquiry will be a repeat of the money –draining Task Force on Corruption and Plunder of National Resources constituted by the late Levy Mwanawasa in 2002:
The Mark Chona –led Task Force gobbled US$11.6 million in legal fees and undisclosed colossal sum of money in operation costs thus robbing the country the much-need resources for provision of social services.
The Task Force, which was allegedly branded as a form of persecution of Mwanawasa’s foes, has up to date not declared the assets recovered from the alleged plunderers.
More so, some of the cases of those alleged found wanting are still active in the Courts of law.
What lesson can we draw from the subject in question? I say so because Mwanawasa regretted having constituted the Task Force and threaten to disband it.
In my view, the inquiry should focus on reviewing the mistakes of privatization as it disadvantaged Zambians from accessing their national wealth, and on how Zambians could benefit from the country’s mineral wealth.
In short, the current Government’s 20 percent shareholding through ZCCM-IH denies the Zambian people’s right to benefit from the mineral wealth, and should be increased to 40 percent.
This will give the Government the leverage to generate sufficient non-tax revenues, a ‘Golden right ‘in decision-making in the mining firms, and minimize the perennial Government-Mines tax disputes.
For example, the ZCCM-HI, which declared a gross profit of over K900 million, would have raked K1.8 trillion non-tax revenue.
More so, the raging blame-game between Government and the Mines whenever a new tax regime is announced is a great concern for every right –thinking Zambian: The mining firms often respond by announcing the plans to lay off some workers as a result of the new tax regimes, and are often accused of arm-twisting and blackmailing Government.
The said tussle reveals that there is no meaningful engagement or dialogue between Government (as a minority shareholder,) and the mining firms (that are holding the majority 80 percent shares).
Government has lamentably failed to address the root of the problem because of the notion that they would generate sufficient tax revenues from the mineral royalties and other taxes.
Its’ worth noting that no country in the world could boast of having generated sufficient tax revenues to finance social and economic development programmes.
But every developed country could boast of having generated sufficient non-tax revenues to finance their robust development programme.
What do you think?”
President Edgar Lungu should not succumb to such demands to set up a commission of inquiry as doing so would have serious repercussions on his re-election bid in 2021 polls when Zambians will assess him.
The head of State should instead set up a Fund to help pay terminal benefits of many Zambians whose rights to terminal benefits has been trampled upon and livelihood shattered by a few greed tycoons who were entrusted to take care of their welfare.
In the same vein, President Lungu can extend his compassion to those either infected or affected by the Coronavirus pandemic: Set up a Presidential Relief Fund to mitigate the sufferings of many Zambians whose livelihood has been shattered by the coronavirus pandemic – triggered social and economic disruptions.
This is the best way to promote rights of those whose livelihood were shattered by the poorly managed privatization programme, and those negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The author is a media consultant and Human rights Defender
Nice and too late advice! There is claim “Zambians want to know” others are demanding that certain individuals “exculpate themselves” and “all that were assigned tasks and participated must be exposed and investigated” while some have already prosecuted and sentenced “the guilty of impropriety” thus it’s all twisted! Goal posts of demands keep shifting depending on the group of “Zambians” making the demand. Cost is not an issue until something arises that would need resources to the solution, in almost all cases its a disaster striking!