- Home
- About Parliament
- Members
- Committees
- Publications
- Speaker's Rulings
- Communication from the Speaker
- Order Paper
- Debates and Proceedings
- Votes and Proceedings
- Budget
- Presidential Speeches
- Laws of Zambia
- Ministerial Statements
- Library E-Resources
- Government Agreements
- Framework
- Members Handbook
- Parliamentary Budget Office
- Research Products
- Sessional Reports
Ruling by the Hon. Madam Speaker - On a Point of Order raised by Mr. O Amutike, MP for Mongu Central, against Mr. L Simumba, MP for Nakonde, for allegedly misleading the House that Kenneth Kaunda International Airport was voted the best Airport in Africa
Submitted by leslie on Wed, 2023-07-19 16:43
RULING BY THE HON MADAM SPEAKER ON A POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON FRIDAY, 23RD JUNE, 2023 BY MR O AMUTIKE, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR MONGU CENTRAL CONSTITUENCY, AGAINST MR L SIMUMBA, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR NAKONDE CONSTITUENCY, FOR ALLEGEDLY MISLEADING THE HOUSE THAT KENNETH KAUNDA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WAS VOTED THE BEST AIRPORT IN AFRICA
Hon Members, the House will recall that on Friday, 23rd June, 2023, when the House was considering the Report of the Committee on Transport, Works and Supply and Mr L Simumba, Member of Parliament for Nakonde Constituency was debating, Mr O Amutike, Member of Parliament for Mongu Central Constituency, raised a Point of Order. The Point of Order was based on Standing Order 65 (1) (b) which requires a Member debating to ensure the information he or she provides to the House is factual and verifiable.
In his Point of Order, Mr O Amutike, MP, asked whether Mr L Simumba, MP, was in order to assert that Kenneth Kaunda International Airport (KKIA) was voted the best international airport in Africa, without laying evidence on the table to substantiate his assertion.
Hon Members, in her immediate response, the Hon Madam First Deputy Speaker reserved her ruling. I have studied the matter and will now render my ruling.
Hon Members, the Point of Order raises the issue of a Member’s duty to ensure that the information he or she provides to the House, is factual and verifiable.
Hon Members, I had recourse to the relevant verbatim record in order to ascertain whether Mr L Simumba, MP, made the statement as alleged. The relevant excerpt of his statement is as follows:
“Madam Speaker, the debt that each Hon Member on your right talks about can be attributed to the infrastructure, which they have seen, that the Patriotic Front (PF) left behind. The Kenneth Kaunda International Airport (KKIA) has been voted the best airport in Africa, ….”
Hon Members, it is that statement that was the basis of Mr O Amutike, MP’s Point of Order.
Further, Hon Members, I also had recourse to the relevant verbatim record of the statement made by Mr O Amutike, MP, when raising his Point of Order. The relevant excerpt of his statement is as follows:
“The Hon Member, who is on the Floor of the House, has just made a statement, which is aimed at misleading this House. He has claimed that the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport (KKIA) has been voted the best airport in Africa. The fact of the matter is that Cape Town International Airport (CPT) has been voted the best airport in Africa.”
Hon Members, I wish to reiterate that Members enjoy freedom of speech and debate in the House. However, the freedom is not absolute because it is subject to the law and rules of the House. One such rule is the requirement for Members to debate factually. In this regard, Standing Order 65 (1) (b) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021, is instructive. It provides as follows:
“65. (1) A Member who is debating shall –
(b) ensure that the information he or she provides to the House is factual and verifiable.”
Hon Members, Mr O Amutike, MP, informed the House that the statement by Mr L Simumba, MP, that KKIA was voted the best airport in Africa was not factual. He then went on to assert that Cape Town International Airport was voted the best airport in Africa. In so doing he also did not produce any evidence to substantiate his statement.
From the foregoing, it is clear that both Members did not provide any evidence to support their assertions. In view of this, both Members breached Standing Order 65 (1) (b) and were out of order.
Hon Members, regrettably, the tendency by Members on both sides of the House to make unsubstantiated statements has continued. This has the potential to mislead the House and the public at large. I, therefore, wish to remind you to avoid making unsubstantiated statements in the House.
I thank you.
Ruling Date:
Wednesday, July 19, 2023
Parliamentary Period:
- Log in to post comments