Ruling by the Hon. Madam Speaker - On a Point of Order raised by Mr. D Mung'andu, MP, on the use of Unparliamentary language by the House

RULING BY THE HON MADAM SPEAKER ON THE POINT OF ORDER RAISED BY MR D MUNG’ANDU MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR CHAMA SOUTH CONSTITUTENCY ON THE USE OF UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE BY THE HOUSE
Hon Members will recall that on Thursday, 9th June, 2022, when the House was considering the Ministerial Statement on the Teacher Recruitment exercise and Hon D Syakalima, Minister of Education had just finished responding to a follow-up question, Mr D Mung’andu,Member of Parliament for Chama South Constituency, raised a Point of Order. In the Point of Order, Mr D Mung’andu, MP, stated that the House had ruled that people should not behave as if they were at the market, which he found to be a very offensive expression. He, in that regard, asked whether the House was in order to use offensive expressions or unparliamentary language contrary to Standing Order 65(2) (e) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021.
In his immediate response, the Hon Mr Second Deputy Speaker reserved his ruling. 
Hon Members, I reviewed the relevant verbatim record to ascertain whether the statement complained of by Mr D Mung’andu was made and, if so, by whom. The review revealed that Mr D Mung’andu’s Point of Order was on a statement made by the Hon Mr Second Deputy Speaker who, in guiding members on how to raise a Point of Order, stated that the House was not a market place. The Hon Mr Second Deputy Speaker was at the time presiding over the House.
Hon Members, Standing Order 132 sets out the admissibility criteria for Points of Order.  In particular, Standing Order 132(1)(d) states as follows:

“132 (1) A Point of Order may be admissible if-

(d) It is not raised against a decision of the presiding officer.”
Additionally, Standing Order 132(2) (b) states:

“132 (2)(d). A member shall not raise a Point of Order –
(d) on a presiding officer or an officer.”

The foregoing rules of the House clearly indicate that a Point of Order cannot be raised on a presiding officer or a decision of a presiding officer.

In the instant case, Mr D Mung’andu’s Point of Order was raised against a statement made by theHon Mr Second Deputy Speaker who was presiding over the House at the time. This was clearly in violation of the admissibility criteria provided under Standing Order 132. The Point of Order was, therefore, inadmissible.

Hon Members, I wish to seize this opportunity to urge Members to acquaint themselves with the rules of the House in general and the admissibility criteria for Points of Order in particular.

I thank you.

Ruling Date: 
Friday, June 17, 2022