RULING BY THE HON MADAM SPEAKER ON A POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON THURSDAY, 29TH JUNE, 2023 BY MR R K CHITOTELA, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR PAMBASHE CONSTITUENCY, AGAINST HON S MASEBO, MP, MINISTER OF HEALTH, FOR ALLEGEDLY IMPUTING IMPROPER MOTIVES AGAINST HIM

 

Hon Members, the House will recall that on Thursday, 29th June, 2023, when the House was considering Question for Oral Answer No 319, and Hon S Masebo, MP, Minister of Health, was responding to a supplementary question, Mr R K Chitotela, Member of Parliament for Pambashe Constituency, raised a Point of Order. The Point of Order was against Hon S Masebo, MP, Minister of Health. In his Point of Order Mr R K Chitotela, MP, cited Standing Order 65 (2) (a), which prohibits a Member who is debating from imputing any improper motives to the President, Vice President or any other Member.

 

In his Point of Order, Mr R K Chitotela, MP, explained that the Hon Minister had said that he was imputing wrong motives by stating that the government was distributing wrong medicines for administration in hospitals. He added that he had merely quoted information contained in the report of the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters.  He, therefore, asked whether the Hon Minister of Health was in order to accuse him of suggesting that the Government was distributing wrong medicines when, in fact, he was merely quoting information given to the Committee by the hospital administrators. 

 

Hon Members, in my immediate response, I reserved my ruling in order to verify the allegations that had been made.

Hon Members, the background to this matter is that Mr R K Chitotela, MP, when asking a follow up question, stated that Zambia was experiencing an increase in cancer diseases because of the continued use of a painkiller which had been done away with. He alleged that although the hospital administrators had recommended that the painkiller be replaced with morphine, the Government had continued to send the same painkillers to hospitals. In response, the Hon Minister of Health disputed his assertion and explained that the Government was guided by international standards under the World Health Organisation (WHO). It was against this background that Mr R K Chitotela, MP, raised his Point of Order. 

 

Hon Members, the Point of Order raises the following issues:

(i) First, a member imputing any improper motives on another member; and

(ii) Second, a member’s duty to ensure that the information he or she provides to the House, is factual and verifiable. 

 

Hon Members, I will address the above issues seriatim.

 

1. A Member Imputing an Improper Motive on another Member

Hon Members, the conduct of Members of Parliament is regulated by various laws and rules that seek to uphold the dignity of the House and also ensure the smooth transaction of business in the House. In this regard, Standing Order 65 (2) (a) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021, provides as follows: 

 

“(2) A member who is debating shall not – 

(a) impute any improper motives to the President, Vice-President or any other member…”

 

Hon Members, in studying this matter, I had recourse to the verbatim record of the statement by the Hon Minister of Health, on Thursday, 29th June, 2023, in order to ascertain whether she made any statement that imputed any improper motive on Mr R K Chitotela, MP.  The relevant excerpt of the Hon Minister’s statement is as follows:

 

“Madam Speaker, I thank the Hon Member for his follow up question, except to say that it is a completely new question and it will require a specific question to be put in. What the Hon Member is saying now, through his question which may not actually even be factual, is that we, as a Government, are distributing a drug that should not be distributed. Madam Speaker, you may wish to know that issues of drug management and even what drug to administer are not ones where one just gets up in the morning and decides to do away with. We follow international standards under the World Health Organisation (WHO)...When we change, a circular is issued. We change based on guidelines...”

 

From the verbatim record, it is evident that the Hon Minister of Health, in responding to Mr R K Chitotela, MP’s, question, stated that his question was a completely new one which would require a specific question to be asked. She explained that Mr R K Chitotela, MP’s assertion may not have been factual because issues regarding changes in drug administration were based on WHO guidelines. At no point did the Hon Minister impute any improper motive on Mr R K Chitotela, MP.Therefore, I find that the Hon Minister of Health did not impute any improper motives on Mr R K Chitotela, MP. Consequently, the Hon Minister of Health was not out of order. 

 

I will now proceed to consider the second limb of the Point of Order. 

2. A member’s Duty to Ensure that the Information He or She provides to the House, is factual and verifiable

 

Hon Members, let me hasten to state 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 restraint, is the requirement for a Member to ensure that the information he or she provides to the House is factual and verifiable.  Standing Order 65 (1) (b) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021, 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.”

 

Further, M N Kaul and S L Shakdher, in their book entitled: Practice and Procedure of Parliament, Seventh Edition, (New Delhi, Lok Sabha, 2016) state (from pages 244 to 246) as follows:

“The right to freedom of speech in the House is circumscribed by the constitutional provisions, and the Rules which also guard against making of unwarranted allegations against a person, and the procedure for inviting attention to incorrect statements made by Ministers or members is governed by Directions…. It is the duty of each member to refrain from any course of action prejudicial to the privilege of freedom of speech which he enjoys.” 

 

Hon Members, in raising his Point of Order, Mr R K Chitotela, MP, submitted that his assertions were contained in the Report of the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters on Public Procurement in Zambia. I had recourse to the report and a careful study of the report revealed that it did not contain any observation that the Government was supplying wrong medicine. It also did not contain any recommendation by hospital administrators, that the wrong painkillers be replaced with morphine. 

 

Hon Members, I had occasion to rule on a similar matter in the case of Mr MKafwaya, v Hon D Syakalima, (Daily Parliamentary Debates of 17thJune, 2022). In that matter, Mr M Kafwaya, Member of Parliament for Lunte Constituency alleged that Hon D SyakalimaHon Minister of Education, had accused the previous Government of operating in a haphazard manner without providing evidence to support his statement. In my ruling, I stated as follows:

 

“It is clear that the Hon Minister attempted to justify his statement by referring to a conversation he had had with some researchers who allegedly conducted a research in the country. However, this was not supported by any documentary or cogent evidence as envisaged by Standing Order 65. In view of this, the Hon Minister breached Standing Order 65 and was out of order.”

 

Hon Members, in this matter, Mr R K Chitotela, MP, made assertions which he claimed were contained in the Report of the Committee on National Economy. My review of the report established that his assertions were not contained in the report. His assertion was, therefore, not factual. In that regard, I find that by providing information that was not factual and verifiable in clear contravention of Standing Order 65 (1) (b)Mr R K Chitotela, MP was, in fact, out of order.

I thank you.