RULING BY THE HON MADAM SPEAKER ON A POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON TUESDAY, 19TH MARCH, 2024, BY MR R K CHITOTELA MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR PAMBASHE CONSTITUENCY, AGAINST MR B KAMBITA, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR ZAMBEZI EAST CONSTITUENCY, FOR THE ALLEGED USE OF UNPARLIAMENTARY AND DEMEANING LANGUAGE AGAINST HIM AND OTHER OPPOSITION MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. 

Hon Members, the House will recall that on Tuesday, 19th March, 2024, when the House was considering Question for Oral Answer No 312, and Hon F C Mutati, Minister of Technology and Science, had just finished 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 premised on Standing Order 203 of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021, which provides for the conduct of members.
In his Point of Order, Mr R K Chitotela, MP, stated that at the beginning of the sitting, when the Hon Madam First Deputy Speaker had suspended business, Mr B Kambita, Member of Parliament for Zambezi East Constituency, walked from his seat, stood at the centre and used unparliamentary language towards him and other senior Members of Parliament. Mr R K Chitotela, MP, further stated that Mr B Kambita, MP, referred to the said Members as “lumpens”, which he found very provocative.  He, therefore, inquired why Mr B Kambita, MP, should not be disciplined for referring to Hon Members of Parliament as “lumpens”.
Hon Members, in her immediate response, the Madam First Deputy Speaker reserved her ruling to study the matter.  I have since studied the matter and will now render my ruling.
Hon Members, I had recourse to the verbatim record of the proceedings of the relevant day and note that the Point of Order relates to a period when I had suspended the Business of the House for about ten (10) minutes to restore order and decorum in the House. This was as a result of the disorder occasioned by Mr J E Banda, Member of Parliament for Petauke Central Constituency, and his failure to heed to my directive to leave the House.
Hon Members, our Standing Orders are instructive on the issue of points of order. A Point of Order is defined as an assertion made by a Member that a rule of procedure or privilege of the House has been breached. Further, Standing Order 139 (7) provides as follows:
“139…
(6) A Point of Order shall only be raised in relation to the conduct of business of the House being transacted at the time the Point of Order is raised.”
Additionally, Audrey O Brien and Marc Bosc in their book entitled House of Commons, Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, (Quebec, Thomson Reuters, 2009), define a point of order in the following terms at page 632: 
“A Point of Order is an intervention by a member who believes that the rules or customary procedures of the House have been incorrectly applied or overlooked during the proceedings.  Members may rise on Points of Order to bring the attention of the Chair any breach of the relevance or repetition rule, unparliamentary remarks or lack of quorum.”
Hon Members, based on the authorities cited above, it is clear that a Point of Order must be raised on the Floor of the House in respect of an alleged breach of the rules of procedure or privilege. Further, the Point of Order must be in relation to business being transacted at the time it is raised. Therefore, for alleged breaches that occur outside the House, the same can be brought to my attention using other avenues such as through a letter of complaint.
Hon Members, in the current matter, Mr R K Chitotela, MP, alleged that Mr B Kambita, MP, used unparliamentary and demeaning language towards him and other Members during the period when Business of the House was suspended.  Therefore, in line with the above authorities, the Point of Order is inadmissible.

I THANK YOU.