Objection To Munshya Wa Munshya’s Personal attack

Filed under: Politics |

godfrey-miyanda-zambia-reportsBy Brigadier General Godfrey Miyanda – 26th September 2013

I object very strongly to one Munshya was Munshya’s statement in the Friday Edition of the Daily Nation dated 20th September 2013. I quote the relevant parts on page 6: First “When Chiluba and his cohorts – Michael Sata and Miyanda to be exact – found great solace in the barbaric use of the Public Order Act, it is gallant judges who held that some sections of this law should be ruled as unconstitutional…”; Second “Further, when Chiluba, Sata and Miyanda amended the 1996 Constitution”. This is mischievous, malicious, unfair and untrue. For one claiming to be an analyst this is rather casual and careless.

Apart from not being factual the quoted phrases expose the ignorance of Mr Munshya wa Munshya about what is modern government and how it functions. If Mr Munshya is not ignorant then he has a secret political agenda to stigmatise Miyanda. I challenge him to give one example when I personally used the Public Order Act in a barbaric manner or took solace in it. I have never “amended the 1996 Constitution to exclude the likes of Kaunda based on the parentage”. Nowhere in the democratic world do individuals amend constitutions!

‘Cohort’ has a derogatory connotation which Mr Munshya intended. If Mr Munshya, a busy analyst-cum-commentator is not aware of the political “relationship” between me and Mr Sata then he should hang up his pens. While we served together in the MMD, I never partnered nor agreed with Mr Sata’s ways and methods. In fact I am one of the victims of his ways. How is it that Mr Munshya does not know this when Mr Sata’s trail is so clear?

Apart from his well-known Machiavellian ways, Mr Sata was the mastermind behind the fraudulent MMD so-called extraordinary convention of 2001 which saw 22 of us prevented from participating in the convention of which we were bona fide delegates (I was then an elected Vice President of the MMD). Who told you, Mr Munshya, that I have ever been in cahoots with Mr Sata for anything?
This stigmatisation gibberish has to stop. As an analyst or academic show your worth by avoiding personalisation. I am fed up with these endless innuendos. If you have an issue with me be specific, instead of birthing and perpetuating rumours. Not so long ago Bishop John Mambo, a shepherd close to me, alleged on Radio Phoenix that I prevented Dr Kaunda from using the same door as Dr Chiluba at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross – I hurt. Of all places the Cathedral of the Holy Cross? This is a clerical fib!

Mr Munshya has introduced other red herrings in his paper. Why did he bring up Dr Guy Scott in the paper when his topic was about contracts for judges? Does he want to be noticed by the powers that be? If his agenda is to show that I am inconsistent in the fight for the judiciary and good governance then his record is miserably wrong and uninformed. I have fought some of these battles almost single-handedly. What he has written about Chief Jumbe and other chiefs I wrote long before him. If he searches the archives of the Law Association of Zambia (and even the internet) he is going to find a plethora of my papers, some to do with chiefs, election dates, tribunals, even constitution-making. I do not know how many of Mr Sata’s argued papers he found to link me with him!

What is the difference between what I wrote earlier about Chief Jumbe and what Mr Munshya has just written? What about my writings to the Law Association of Zambia over the years? Why must these be ignored? What has Miyanda not said about acting Chief Justice Lombe Chibesakunda? All the issues you have raised I raised them starting last year. In fact, several years ago, when the Government improperly dragged late DPP Mukelabai Mukelabai to a tribunal I was one of the opposition leaders, if not the only opposition leader, to write to the Chief Justice and Chairman of the Tribunal, querying the unconstitutional procedure used by the President who was himself a lawyer. I had prophetically hinted that that secret tribunal would raise its ugly head later as a bad precedent. And one of the victims today is Mr Justice Dr Philip Musonda who served on that ill-conceived tribunal but is himself facing another irregular tribunal!

Through my “fights”, even though a layman, I have contributed a lot to the development of the Zambian jurisprudence. Where was Mr Munshya in the Second Republic when it was taboo to sue the Kaunda regime which victimised citizens? I did so and won some and lost some. You cannot just rubbish me when it suits you.

I am NOT ashamed nor am I regretting participating in the debate and legislation whose prime purpose was to enshrine the limitation of presidential terms. For now this is really necessary until we mature and can prevent despots from exceeding their constitutional powers. Dr Kaunda, whose interrupted term you are lamenting, had been in power for 27 years and introduced the dreaded One Party State, allowing hyenas and frogs to stand as candidates but preventing human beings from challenging him! Why are you defending such a legacy and keeping quiet on the atrocities of the One Party State? Where have you been? Do not change or bury our history. NO, Mr Munshya, rewrite your article by leaving my name out. You are double wrong to put me in the same league as PF President Sata.




6 Responses to Objection To Munshya Wa Munshya’s Personal attack

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Start: 2019-07-01 End: 2019-07-31