The House met at 1430 hours

 

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM

 

PRAYER

 

_______

 

RULING BY MR SPEAKER

 

POINT OF ORDER RAISED BY MR G. G. NKOMBO, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR MAZABUKA CENTRAL PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY ON WHETHER THE HOUSE WAS IN ORDER TO DELIBERATE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA (AMENDMENT) BILL N.A.B. NO. 10 OF 2019 WHICH CONTAINED A CLAUSE WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF LITIGATION IN THE MATTER OF DIPAK PATEL AND THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL – CAUSE NO. 2020/CC/005

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, when the House adjourned yesterday, Tuesday, 23^rd June, 2020, I was still rendering a ruling on the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Mazabuka Central on Wednesday, 18^th March, 2020 as to whether the House was in order to continue debating the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, N. A. B. No. 10 of 2019, when there was a clause in the Bill which was the subject of litigation in the matter of Dipak Patel vs the Minister of Finance and the Attorney-General. I will now proceed to complete rendering the ruling. If I may extend your indulgence, I will do so while seated.

 

Hon. Members, when we adjourned yesterday, I was addressing the third part of the ruling, namely consideration of the point of order in question vis-à-vis the concept or doctrine of sub judice. I was actually in the middle of a quote from the book by the learned author’s, M. N. Kaul and S. L. Shakdher, and I was quoting on page 1191. For completeness’ sake, I will begin from the beginning of this quote, which states as follows:

 

“The rule whether a Motion which relates to a matter which is under adjudication by a court of law should be admitted or discussed in the House has to be interpreted strictly while on the other hand the Chair has to ensure that no discussion in the House should prejudice the course of justice, the Chair has also to see that the House is not debarred from discussing an urgent matter of public importance on the ground that a similar, allied or linked matter is before the court of law. The test of sub judice, in my opinion, should be that the matter sought to be raised in the House is substantially identical with the one on which a court of law has to adjudicate.”

 

My final quote from M. N. Kaul and S. L. Shakdher still on page 1191 goes on to state as follows:

 

“If the rule of sub judice were to be made applicable to legislation, it would not only make legislatures subordinate to the courts in that matter, but would make enactment impossible because numerous cases concerning a large number of statutes await adjudication at all times in one court or the other. Parliament’s main function to make laws will thus come to a standstill. Legislatures are supreme and sovereign in the matter of making laws and there is no bar on their work in the field of legislation. The law making power of Parliament is unfettered with regard to legislation even when the subject matter of legislation is sub judice. Whatever be the case, and the merits of the case, Parliament can make any law.”

 

Hon. Members, from the discourse of the various learned authors in Parliamentary Practices and Procedures outlined above, the following propositions may be distilled:

 

(I)       a matter can only be considered sub judice when it is actively before the courts of law and is substantially            identical with the matter before a court;

(ii)       the sub judice rule is a self-imposed convention by Parliaments not to discuss matters that are actively                being adjudicated upon by the courts, if it appears that there is a real and substantial danger of prejudice            to the court proceedings. The purpose of the sub judice rule is, therefore, to protect court proceedings                  from being prejudiced;

(iii)   the determination of whether a matter is sub judice and the application of the sub judice convention is the            sole discretion of Mr Speaker. Meaning that, depending on the merits of each case, Mr Speaker can set it            aside;

 (iv)    parliaments are not debarred from discussing urgent matters of public importance;

 (v)    if the rule of sub judice were to be made applicable to legislation, it would not only make legislatures                    subordinate to the courts in that matter, but would make enactments impossible because numerous                      cases  concerning a large number of statutes may have to await adjudication; and

(v)    parliaments are supreme and sovereign in the matter of making laws, and there is no bar on their work in            their field of legislation.

Hon. Members, at this juncture, I will proceed to demonstrate how this House has applied the sub judice rule in the past.

         

Application of the Sub Judice Rule

 

Firstly, on 22^nd July, 2009, a point of order was raised on whether some hon. Members were in order to abrogate the law and continue sitting in the House instead of attending the sittings of the National Constitutional Conference (NCC). To this end, the National Constitutional Conference Act No. 7 of 2007 provided that all hon. Members of Parliament were to be members of the NCC. Meanwhile, there was a pending action before the court regarding the NCC. My predecessor, Speaker Amuusa Mwanamwambwa, ruled that until the court determined the outstanding matter, it remained sub judice and he could, therefore, not rule on the point of order. 

 

Secondly, on 15^th March, 2012, a point of order was raised on whether hon. Members of the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) were in order to continue occupying seats in the House, following the de-registration of the MMD party by the Chief Registrar of Societies, under the Societies Act, Cap 119 of the Laws of Zambia.

 

Hon. Members, in a ruling on the matter, I stated that the question of de-registration of the MMD and the consequential action by the Chief Registrar of Societies to nullify the fifty-three seats of the MMD hon. Members was before the courts of law. Therefore, I could not rule on the matter because it was sub judice, until such a time that the matter was determined by the courts of law.  Therefore, I ruled, in essence, that the status quo should be maintained. 

 

Thirdly, on 15^th March, 2013, a point of order was raised on whether the House was in order to proceed to debate a Motion for the removal of the legal immunity against prosecution extended to the former President, Mr Rupiah Bwezani Banda, when an action had just been commenced in the courts of law after the Motion had been placed on the Order Paper.  In response, I ruled, in effect, that in keeping with the doctrines of separation of powers and exclusive cognisance, the House had the freedom to determine and discharge its internal proceedings. Consequently, I allowed the Motion to be debated.

 

Fourthly, on 9^th March, 2016, a point of order was raised on whether Mr G. Monde, then Minister of Livestock and Fisheries, was in order to remain in the House when his expulsion from the United Party for National Development (UPND) had been confirmed by a Supreme Court judgment. In rendering my ruling, I informed the House that what the courts had ruled on and dismissed was Mr G. Monde’s interlocutory application for an interim injunction to restrain the UPND from expelling him from the party. I pointed out that the main action relating to the expulsion of Mr G. Monde from the UPND was yet to be determined.  I further pointed out that in any event, Article 72(5) of the Republican Constitution required an hon. Member’s expulsion from his/her party to be confirmed by the courts for it to be final. Therefore, based on the sub judice rule and Article 72(5) of the Constitution, I could not conclude the status of Mr G. Monde in the House. It was subject to determination by the courts of law. 

 

Fifthly, on 25^th October, 2017, a point of order was raised asking whether Dr C. Kambwili, the erstwhile Member of Parliament for Roan Parliamentary Constituency, was in order to be in the House as a Member of Parliament for the Patriotic Front (PF) granted that he had been expelled from the party. In my ruling, I indicated that since the expulsion was being adjudicated upon by the courts of law, Dr C. Kambwili was, in keeping with Article 72(5) of the Constitution, entitled to remain in the House, pending confirmation or otherwise of the expulsion. Therefore, I ruled that Dr C. Kambwili, MP, was in order to remain in the House. (National Assembly Parliamentary Debates, Wednesday, 25^th October, 2017).

 

I have already noted that following the expulsion of Dr Chishimba Kambwili from the PF, he launched proceedings in the High Court challenging the expulsion. In the course of the proceedings in the High Court, Dr C. Kambwili’s action was dismissed for want of prosecution. Following the dismissal of the action for want of prosecution, I received a letter from the Secretary-General of the PF, Mr Davies Mwila, on 6^th November, 2018, requesting me to declare the Roan Parliamentary seat vacant. The basis of the request was that the High Court had dismissed the matter for want of prosecution.  Mr Davies Mwila further argued that Dr C. Kambwili’s appeal to the Court of Appeal had no bearing on his expulsion from the party and, therefore, could not prevent me from declaring the Roan Parliamentary seat vacant.

 

In my response to Mr Davies Mwila’s request, I explained to him that since the High Court had not yet decided the matter on its merits, as envisaged by Article 72(5) of the Constitution, I could not proceed to declare the seat vacant. I further indicated that the outcome of Dr C. Kambwili’s appeal in the Court of Appeal against the High Court’s dismissal of his case for want of prosecution could eventually have a bearing on the original cause of action in which Dr C. Kambwili was challenging his expulsion from the PF. Therefore, on the basis of Article 72(5) of the Constitution, the doctrine of separation of powers and the principle of sub judice, I declined to declare the seat vacant. Ultimately, the PF elected to challenge my decision not to declare the seat vacant in the High Court. I have already pointed out that this challenge was unsuccessful because the High Court held that it had no power or jurisdiction to interpret constitutional provisions.

 

Finally, to revert to the case of Robert Chabinga and Henry Mulenga vs Attorney-General, which I introduced and discussed in the first part of this ruling, hon. Members, the House has been unable to consider the Impeachment Motion because the Motion became sub judice the moment Mr Robert Chabinga and Mr Henry Mulenga commenced court action to challenge the ruling of the hon. First Deputy Speaker that the Impeachment Motion complied with the relevant constitutional provisions.

 

Hon. Members, granted the various authorities that have been hitherto considered and the precedent set or laid down by the House, it is clear that there is no hard and fast rule regarding the application of the doctrine of sub judice. Each case has to be considered on the basis of its peculiar facts and merits.

 

Hon. Members, I will now proceed to render my decision on the point of order.

 

Decision on the Point of Order

 

Hon. Members, in order to address Mr G. G. Nkombo’s point of order as to whether it is sub judice for the House to proceed with consideration of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, I will advert to Mr Dipak Patel’s petition before the Constitutional Court. In the said petition, Mr Dipak Patel alleges that following the 2016 Amendment to the Constitution, the Government, through the Minister of Finance, was not permitted to contract any public debt without the prior approval of the National Assembly, as provided in Article 63(2)(d) of the Constitution. Mr Patel further averred that despite this, the Ministry of Finance has continued to contract loans without obtaining the prior approval of the National Assembly. In the premises, he seeks the following court reliefs:

 

        (i) “a declaration that the failure by the 1^st and 2^nd Respondents to present all loans contracted and sought               to be contracted on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Zambia, which constituted public debt                 to the National Assembly for prior approval, is in breach of the Constitution of Zambia as it is an illegal                 abrogation of the Constitution of Zambia;

        (ii)  a declaration that the Loans and Guarantees (Authorisation) Act, Cap 366 of the Laws of Zambia and                 any other law, by-law, subsidiary legislation or gazette notice dealing with debt procurement/contraction              for and on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Zambia must be interpreted in line with the                        provisions of Article 63(2)(d) as requiring prior approval from the National Assembly and that any                         provision in any existing law that circumvents, contradicts or is inconsistent with the Constitution of                        Zambia is null and void to the extent of such contradiction or inconsistency and ought to be struck                        down  accordingly;

            (iii)   an order compelling the 1^st and 2^nd Respondents to present to the National Assembly of Zambia                         within fourteen days of the judgment of the court or within such other time frame that the court may                      prescribe a full and complete statement of the state of public debt contracted from 2016 to date,                            including the terms and conditions of the loans;

            (iv)  an order directing that from the date of the judgment of the court, all public debt, whether local or                          foreign, sought to be contracted on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Zambia must be                          presented to the National Assembly for prior approval;

               (v)  costs incidental to the proceedings; and

                (vI)  such other declaration or order that the honourable court may deem fit.”

 

Hon. Members, it is instructive to note that the objects of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, as contained in its memorandum and, as articulated by the hon. Minister of Justice, Mr G. Lubinda, MP, when presenting the Bill for Second Reading on Tuesday, 17^th March, 2020, are to amend the Constitution in order to, among other matters:

         (i)   revise the preamble in order to re-affirm the Christian character of Zambia;

         (ii)  revise the principles and values of the Constitution;

         (iii)  revise the electoral system for election to the National Assembly;

         (iv)  revise the period for the dissolution of the National Assembly;

          (v)  revise the period of hearing and determination of the Presidential election petition;

           (vi)  revise the manner of election of Mayors and Council  Chairpersons;

           (vii) establish the office of Deputy Minister;

           (viii)  revise the composition of Cabinet;

            (ix)  revise provisions relating to the establishment of commissions;

             (x) revise provisions relating to the payment of pension benefits and retention on the payroll;

             (xi) provide for the membership of Members of Parliament in district councils;

             (xii)  establish the Drug Enforcement Commission as the Anti-drugs, Economic and Financial Crimes                            Agency and re-define its function as a national security service;

               (xiii) revise the functions of the Public Protector;

               (xiv)  revise the functions of the Bank of Zambia; and

               (xv) revise the functions of the Auditor-General.

 

Hon. Members, it is self-evident from the cause of action of Mr Dipak Patel’s petition that his bone of contention relates to the alleged contraction of public debt by the Executive arm of the Government without the prior approval of the National Assembly and, therefore, is allegedly in contravention of Article 63(2)(d) of the Constitution.

 

The Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019 contains seventy-six clauses amending numerous constitutional provisions to, among other matters, address the lacunae identified by various stakeholders following the 2016 Amendment to the Constitution. The fact that one clause in the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, and specifically Clause 13, proposes to amend Article 63(2)(d), which requires the National Assembly to approve public debt before it is contracted cannot warrant the National Assembly not to proceed to consider the Bill, which contains a wide range of legislative proposals. To put it plainly, the action before the Constitutional Court in the Patel case is substantially different from the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019.

 

In any case, even assuming or granted that the petitioner was challenging a particular provision in the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, the Constitutional Court in the recent case of The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) and Chapter One Foundation vs the Attorney-General 2019/CCZ/0013, construed and explained the law regarding actions challenging Bills. It will be recalled in the LAZ case that the petitioners commenced an action in the Constitutional Court challenging the proposed constitutional amendments stipulated in the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019.  The Constitutional Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to impeach a Bill. 

 

The Constitutional Court observed ON pages 16 to 17, in its abridged judgment, as follows:

 

“From the above, it is clear that what the 1^st Petitioner is asking us to do is to delve into Bill No. 10. The 1^st Petitioner’s submission that what they are challenging is not the contents of the Bill, but the decisions, is at variance with their own pleadings and evidence which requires this court to delve into the contents of the Bill itself. We have already stated that Article 128(3)(b) gives this court jurisdiction. However, this jurisdiction does not extend to questioning the contents of a Bill.”

 

Therefore, since the Constitutional Court has no jurisdiction to impeach or question a Bill, it cannot in any way be prejudiced by the National Assembly proceeding to debate the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019. 

 

Further, hon. Members, in keeping with the diverse authorities on sub judice that I referred to earlier on, the National Assembly is not debarred from discussing urgent matters of public importance such as the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019. At any rate, the authorities referred to above also laid down that if the sub judice rule were to be made applicable to an enactment of legislation, it will not only make the National Assembly subordinate to the courts, but also make enactments impossible because of pending court actions. Needless to state that the National Assembly is supreme and sovereign in the exercise of its legislative power. Thus, in the exercise of my discretion as Speaker, I rule that it is not sub judice for the National Assembly to proceed with consideration of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, notwithstanding the action commenced by Mr Dipak Patel in the Constitutional Court against the Ministry of Finance and the Attorney-General.

 

That is the end of my ruling.

 

_______

 

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

 

The Vice-President (Mrs Wina): Mr Speaker, I rise to acquaint the House with the business it will consider this week. However, before I proceed, let me start by welcoming all hon. Members to the Third Meeting of the Fourth Session of the Twelfth National Assembly. I am glad that all of us are back safely and in good health, despite the prevalence of the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic, which disrupted the second meeting of the fourth session.

 

Sir, I realise that some hon. Members are representing constituencies that experienced severe flooding and that the livelihoods of our people were disrupted. As we debate matters under Covid-19, we should always be reminded that our obligations to our people stretch beyond the Covid-19 pandemic.

 

Sir, let me now turn to the business the House will consider this week. Today, as indicated on the Order Paper, the Business of the House will start with Questions for Oral Answer. Thereafter, the House will debate the Motion to adopt the Report of the Committee on Media, Information and Communication Technologies. The House will, then, consider the Second Reading stage of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019. After that, the House will resume the debate on the Motion of Thanks to His Excellency the President’s Address on the Progress Made in the Application of National Values and Principles.

 

Mr Speaker, on Thursday, 25^th June, 2020, the Business of the House will start with Questions for Oral Answer. This will be followed by presentation of Government Bills, if there will be any. Then, the House will debate the Motion to adopt the Report of the Committee on Parastatal Bodies on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Accounts of Parastatal and Other Statutory Institutions for the Financial Year ended December 2017.

 

Mr Speaker, on Friday, 26^th June, 2020, the Business of the House will begin with the Vice-President’s Question Time. This will be followed by Questions for Oral Answer. Thereafter, the House will deal with presentation of Government Bills, if there will be any. Then, the House will debate the Motion to adopt the Report of the Committee on Local Government Accounts on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Accounts of Local Authorities for the Financial Years Ending 31^st December 2015, 2016 and 2017. After that, the House will conclude debate on the Motion of Thanks to His Excellency the President’s Address to the House.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

______

 

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

 

MBATI RURAL HEALTH CENTRE

 

245. Dr Malama (Kanchibiya) asked the Minister of Health:

 

1. whether the Government is aware that the residents of Mbati area in Chief Kabinga’s Chiefdom in Kanchibiya Parliamentary Constituency are unable to access health services due to the closure of Mbati Rural Health Centre following the damage caused by floods;

 

       b.  if so, what urgent measures are being taken to ensure that the residents continue to access health                      services; and

        c. when the rehabilitation of staff houses, which were also damaged by floods, will commence.

 

The Minister of Health (Dr Chilufya): Mr Speaker, the Government is aware that Mbati Rural Health Centre in Chief Kabinga’s Chiefdom in Kanchibiya Parliamentary Constituency was closed due to damage caused by floods. However, access to health services was re-established immediately by changing the purpose of use of two rooms at Mbati Primary School on 20^th March, 2020, which was the material day of the tragedy. Mbati Primary School is within a radius of a kilometer from where the community lives. Therefore, health services have continued to be provided in Mbati area in Kanchibiya Constituency.

 

Mr Speaker, the urgent measure that I referred to in (a) was shifting health services to Mbati Primary School for residents to continue accessing health services.

 

Sir, the rehabilitation of staff houses, which were damaged, is due to commence next week. On 12^th June, 2020, an assessment of the damage caused by the floods on the infrastructure was carried out by a combined team of officers from the Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure Development and the Ministry of Health all under the provincial administration.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Dr Malama: Mr Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for that response. Before I ask a follow-up question, let me appreciate our health workers for their vigilance, especially in this time of the Corona Virus Disease-2019 (Covid-19). Realising that schools have now re-opened and that learning activities need to take place, what immediate action is being put in place so that there is no further disruption as the classrooms have now been reclaimed by the school?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, I acknowledge the fact that schools are reopening in a phased approach, beginning with examination classes. Therefore, the schools in Mbati have only been re-opened to pupils who are in examination classes. It has not been difficult for the Ministry of General Education, in a whole Government approach, to allocate two rooms to the Ministry of Health for continuity of health services. So, that has not been a constraint at all.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Dr Malama: Mr Speaker, when His Excellency the President visited Kanchibiya Constituency on 14^th February, this year, and further when the hon. Minister himself visited Kanchibiya Constituency, there was a pronouncement made after noting the inadequacy of healthcare provision in the constituency that a mini-hospital would have to supplement the health services for the people of Kanchibiya, in general, and the people of Mbati in particular.

 

Therefore, would the hon. Minister be able to state to the people of Kanchibiya, particularly of Chief Kabinga, that his ministry, in its robust response, would actualise the Executive pronouncement of His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, whom the people of Zambia want even beyond 2021? Further, can the hon. Minister confirm that his pronouncement of having a mini-hospital built in Chief Kabinga’s area would be actualised?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, remains committed to his agenda for universal health coverage and expansion of infrastructure in all parts of the country and leaving no one behind is a high priority in order to create access to primary healthcare services and beyond. Therefore, the people of Kanchibiya are not exempt from this agenda and I would like to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to the construction of a mini-hospital in Mbati area or Kanchibiya in general, whose health service will be upgraded to that of a first level hospital.

 

Sir, this robust expansion of infrastructure is happening not only in Kanchibiya, but also in all parts of the country and I would like to confirm that contractors are already in Muchinga Province to continue with this programme.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Kabamba (Kafulafuta): Mr Speaker, my question has been overtaken by events.

 

Dr Chanda: Mr Speaker, I think I will pass because I did not indicate. Maybe, it is a system issue.

 

_______

 

MOTIONS

 

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON MEDIA, INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

 

Ms Kucheka (Zambezi West): Mr Speaker, I am the Vice-Chairperson of your Committee. The Chairperson is not feeling well enough to move this Motion.

 

Mr Speaker: Very well, proceed.

 

Ms Kucheka: Mr Speaker, I beg to move that this House do adopt the Report of the Committee on Media, Information and Communication Technologies for the Fourth Session of the Twelfth National Assembly, laid on the Table of the House on Tuesday, 16^th June, 2020.

 

Mr Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

 

Mr Ng’ambi (Chifubu): Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.

 

Mr Kucheka: Mr Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order No. 157(2), your Committee undertook a study on implementation of the Electronic-Government (e-government) programme in Zambia. For the benefit of the House, e-government can be summed up as the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the execution of Government processes and functions to achieve efficiency in the provision of public services.

 

Sir, as you are already aware, governments the world over have turned to ICTs to facilitate efficient public service delivery, improved quality of service delivery and development of good governance. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Zambia has since been implementing the e-government programme.

 

In this regard, this inquiry is premised on the fact that the Government has undertaken to implement the e-Government Programme, which aims at providing Government products and services through electronic technologies for effective public service delivery.

 

Mr Speaker, as part of the e-Government agenda, initiatives such as the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) Project, and the Payroll Management and Establishment Control Project are being implemented within the public sector. To effectively implement such building blocks, the Government is also building local area networks which are central to the implementation of the e-Government Programme. This notwithstanding, the programme is being implemented in the public sector with very little co-ordination and integration within existing systems at operational level. Given this backdrop, the subject is quite topical and your Committee felt that it was opportune to delve into it at this time.

 

Sir, to acquaint itself with the topic under review, your Committee interacted with several stakeholders who tendered both written and oral submissions before it. I am aware that hon. Members have already had sight of the content of your Committee’s report. Therefore, I shall endeavour to highlight only a few salient issues that emerged during your Committee’s deliberations.

 

Mr Speaker, one area that your Committee looked into is with regard to the adequacy of the policy framework for the implementation of e-Governance in Zambia. Your Committee is appalled to note that the programme that is supposed to improve Government service delivery is being governed by the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Policy of 2006, which is sadly out of date. Your Committee is particularly concerned that despite the sector being dynamic, the policy has not been reviewed to bring it in line with modern international trends in the ICT sector. In this regard, your Committee strongly recommends that the Government reviews the 2006 Information and Communications Technology Policy, as a matter of urgency in order to bring it in tandem with the global trends and norms in e-Government service delivery.

 

Sir, another matter that your Committee delved into is the legal framework governing the ICT sector in Zambia. Your Committee notes, with concern, that there is no dedicated piece of legislation to govern the implementation of e-Governance in Zambia, which has negatively affected the process. As a result, the programme is being governed mainly through legal provisions contained in the various pieces of legislation such as the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act No. 21 of 2009 and the Information and Communications Technology Act No. 15 of 2009. In this vein, your Committee recommends that the Government takes urgent measures to put in place a consolidated stand-alone piece of legislation that will ensure effective implementation of the e-Government Programme in the country.

 

Mr Speaker, another key issue relates to the development of ICT infrastructure. While acknowledging the measures the Government is putting in place to scale-up ICT infrastructure such as the Zambia National Data Centre Phases I and II, the Government National Data Centre Tier I with disaster recovery sites and the establishment of the Ndola ICT Centre of Excellence at the Zambia ICT College for capacity building, your Committee notes that the Government Wide Area Network (GWAN) has only connected about 124 Government institutions.

 

Sir, your Committee also agrees with stakeholders that this infrastructure is largely located in urban areas and has not covered all the 118 districts. This is negatively affecting the implementation of the e-Government Programme countrywide. This challenge is further compounded by the lack of adequate devices such as computers and laptops for effective and efficient provision of e-Government service delivery, especially in newly created districts.

 

Mr Speaker, in this regard, your Committee strongly recommends that the Government should, as a matter of urgency, conclude the projects that are currently being implemented to ensure that all districts are covered. Your Committee also urges the Government to adequately fund the Smart Zambia Institute, which has been established to spearhead the programme in order for it to procure the required electronic devices for distribution to all districts.

 

Sir, while your Committee appreciates the efforts that the Government is making in designing a programme to link the Government Payroll Management and Establishment Control (PMEC) to the Biometric Identification System to enhance payroll integrity, it is concerned that the Government is not implementing the project with the requisite urgency, especially that IFMIS recently revealed that 4,000 civil servants on the Government payroll were unaccounted for on the Copperbelt Province.

 

Mr Speaker, in view of the foregoing, your Committee recommends that the Government speeds up the implementation process aimed at linking the Government Payroll Management System to a Biometric Identification System to clean up the Government payroll countrywide.

 

Sir, let me express your Committee’s gratitude to you and the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and services rendered to it throughout its deliberations. Your Committee also pays tribute to all stakeholders who interacted with it and whose input was invaluable to its work.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker: Thank you very much, hon. Member of Parliament for Zambezi West and not Nalolo, lest I cause problems for you in the constituency.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Does the seconder wish to speak now or later?

 

Mr Ng’ambi: Now, Sir.

 

Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you for affording me the opportunity to second the Motion moved by the Vice-Chairperson that this House do adopt the Report of the Committee on Media, Information and Communication Technologies for the Fourth Session of the Twelfth National Assembly laid on the Table of the House on 16^th June, 2020.

 

Sir, in seconding the Motion, let me take this opportunity, on behalf of your Committee, to thank the Chairperson and, indeed, the stakeholders who appeared before it for the deliberations.

 

Mr Speaker, let me begin by augmenting the sentiments tendered by most stakeholders that the Government is spending colossal sums of money through licence fees and renewal of licences that are being used in the implementation of Electronic Government (e-Government) programmes. However, your Committee is elated to learn that the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) and the National Pensions Scheme Authority (NAPSA) worked in collaboration with the Copperbelt University (CBU) to develop home-grown solutions that helped to cushion the cost of buying and renewing licences for Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) systems in their institutions. This House will agree with your Committee that this collaboration has created jobs for graduates and also accorded them the opportunity to nurture their skills so as to become experts in their respective fields. Needless to say that this is the kind of job creation that the Government has focused on.

 

Sir, in this regard, your Committee recommends that the Government ensures that all public and private institutions endeavour to work in collaboration with local service providers to develop ICT solutions that will be used to implement the e-Government Programme. Both the private and public sectors should be encouraged to use locally developed solutions as this will reduce the cost of renewing licences as well as create job opportunities for the graduates in Zambia.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee also delved into the issue relating to public awareness of the e-Government Programme and whether the public appreciates its objective. Regrettably, most of the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee stated that there is inadequate public sensitisation regarding the e-Government Programme. They stated that the research conducted by the Zambia Institute for Public Analysis and Research (ZIPAR) revealed that some people were completely unaware about the e-Government Programme and its purpose. Unfortunately, this is limiting chances of accessing e-Government services.

 

Sir, therefore, your Committee recommends that the Government should embark on a vigorous campaign on both radio and television to sensitise the public on the importance and purpose of the e-Government Programme. It is the view of your Committee that this will encourage Zambians to access Government services on websites.

 

Mr Speaker, as I conclude, let me take this opportunity to thank you most sincerely for affording your Committee an opportunity to study in detail, the implementation of the e-Government Programme. Indeed, the study could not have come at a better time than this because it has revealed that there is a need for much to be done in order to successfully implement the e-Government Programme, which will benefit all Government departments, including this House. However, on pages 20 to 26, the report reveals some of the challenges that need to be considered.

 

Sir, allow me to join the Chairperson in thanking all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee for their invaluable contributions. Last, but not the least, your Committee also expresses its gratitude to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the services rendered to it during its deliberations.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Ms Subulwa: On a point of order, Sir.

 

Mr Speaker: Before I invite further debate on this report, a point of order is raised.

 

Technical Malfunction

 

Mr Speaker: I am afraid that for the time being, the point of order will pass, with the liberty to restore it.

 

Mr Ng’onga (Kaputa): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving the people of Kaputa the opportunity to debate this important Motion moved by the Chairperson of the Committee on Media, Information and Communication Technologies on the important subject of Electronic Governance (e-Governance).

 

Mr Speaker, I will limit myself to just two challenges, among the many challenges that have been highlighted in the report. One of the challenges is the lack of citizen awareness and this can be seen almost everywhere, especially in rural areas. The lack of awareness can be seen in the lack of knowledge of how to use ICT equipment in order to access e-Government services. Further, most of the people do not even know that there are Government institutions that provide e-Governance services and products, especially the young generation in rural areas which could use these platforms to access services. However, they are not able to because their schools do not even have computers and there are no qualified people who can teach them, and this is extremely disheartening for those of us who represent the children and young generation in rural areas. However, this report has brought out very salient points that the Government must work on to ensure that nobody is left behind. Going forward, this is an era of e-Governance. Therefore, the children in rural areas will be left out.

 

Mr Speaker, the other challenge I would like to briefly talk about is the cost of internet access. It is very difficult for most people in urban centres to access the internet even if they have the gadgets because of the high cost of internet connectivity.

 

Mr Speaker, the other challenge is the lack of Wi-Fi or points where people can access such a service because they are not only expensive, but also not available. Even in places like Lusaka, there are limited places where one can have access to public internet. It is only mostly found in private places where there is a cost attached if one has to have access to the internet.

 

Sir, this report is timely, and I urge the Government to ensure that much more is done to sensitise the people on their ability to access Government products using e-platforms. For example, when the Electronic Voucher (e-voucher) System was introduced in the agriculture sector, instead of the people working closely with the Government to ensure that the product was improved, they were resistant to use it. This is something that is embedded in people. New developments always face challenges, but it is incumbent upon the Government and institutions entrusted with the responsibility to offer services to ensure that people are sensitised so that, going forward, nobody is left behind.

 

With these few words, I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Mung’andu: (Chama South): Mr Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to contribute to the debate on your Committee’s report. I will be very brief as I will only look at two issues.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee’s report has indentified the inadequate legal framework governing the implementation of Electronic Government (e-Government).  Indeed, when one looks at the proper usage of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in our country such as e-Governance, your report has pointed out that the Information and Communications Technology Act, which was enacted in 2009, and is in place, is outdated. Furthermore, your Committee’s report has identified that the many uses of–

 

Mr Bwalya: On a point of order, sir.

 

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Bwalya: Mr Speaker, I recognise the fact that as hon. Members of Parliament, we have an opportunity to walk out of Parliament and converse outside.

 

Sir, my point of order is on the hon. Members of the United Party for National Development (UPND). Here, in the amphitheatre, where I am, all the UPND hon. Members stood up and walked out. That left me wondering what was going on. I wondered whether the hon. Members are here to represent their electorate and perform their functions as legislators and also whether they are here to promote good governance and the democracy that we, as Zambians, enshrined in the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, are the UPND hon. Members in order to walk out of the Assembly Chamber, the Amphitheatre and other designated areas where they are seated, immediately after beginning deliberations after a long holiday due to the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19)? Are the hon. Members in order to deny their electorates a chance to hear them and to also deny themselves an opportunity to participate in the affairs of this country?

 

Sir, I need your serious ruling.

 

Mr Speaker: Thank you hon. Member for Lupososhi. As you can imagine, we are all seated in different locations, and it is very difficult to form a clear and immediate impression as to why that has happened. However, I have representatives from my office in all the rooms. Therefore, in due course, they will be able to supply me with a full account as to what is happening. Thereafter, I will be able to render a much more meaningful ruling. For the time being, it is very difficult for me to react ex tempore, at least. In short, I reserve my ruling.

 

 

Mr Mung’andu: Mr Speaker, looking at the existing legal framework regulating the use of social media, as Parliamentarians, we have a lot to do. If you look at the abuse by users of ICT, particularly mobile phone platforms and desktop computers, you will see that youths and many others post all sorts of insults aimed at leaders, particularly women. This is unacceptable considering that the country is still struggling with the attainment of the 50 per cent women representation in decision-making positions. If youths or, indeed, any other citizen continue insulting women through the use of ICT, it will be very difficult for the country to attain gender equity.

 

Mr Speaker, another issue I would like to quickly comment on is the mention of the Government having already put up more than 1,000 communication towers, a move aimed at improving infrastructure. Let me hasten to thank the Government of the Patriotic Front (PF), led by His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu. Those of us who come from villages know that for the first time, our people will be connected not only to the country, but also to the rest of the world.

 

Mr Speaker, as I add my voice, on behalf of the people of Chama South Parliamentary Constituency, to the debate on your Committee’s report, let me take this opportunity to urge the hon. Minister of Transport and Communication to ensure that the communication towers that have been erected in many constituencies and Chama South, in particular, are commissioned.  I know that many other constituencies have also received these towers. For example, I know that Sesheke has more than fifteen towers and recently, the hon. Minister of Transport and Communication was in Sesheke and Sioma to commission the installed towers. Chama South Constituency also received about seven communication towers. Unfortunately, these towers have not yet been commissioned or switched on. My appeal is that it too be connected so that the people in areas such Chikwa, Mangwere, Manga, Tembwe and many other areas can communicate using the erected towers. Therefore, it is my appeal to the hon. Minister, who has already indicated that the installed towers will be operational by the end of the month, that this be done.

 

Mr Speaker, these are programmes that will be able to make e-Governance possible because Government workers such as teachers, clinical offices and other health workers in most rural parts will be able to access Government services though the e-platform.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

The Minister for Northern Province (Mr Bwalya): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me an opportunity to contribute to the debate on your Committee’s Report, which I support. Your Committee did a good job in bringing out the issues that are in the report.

 

Mr Speaker, Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is, indeed, the way to go because the world is becoming a global village. Therefore, we need to interact using ICT. A case in point is exactly what is happening in your Chambers, where, as a result of the ICT, we are able to sit in the manner we are sitting in different rooms. We are able to transact Government business and also ensure that we carry out our functions, as legislators.

 

Mr Speaker, ICT requires a lot of support. His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, as far as I know, has been very keen on ensuring that we move into Electronic Governance (e-Government). Sooner rather than later, we should be able to move into what is called Electronic Trade (e-Trade) so that we can carry out various transactions and trade amongst ourselves and, indeed, across the borders. This way, the people who manufacture the various items can be able to deliver them to us using the information folders via the ICT platform.

 

Sir, the higher education sector is also up to the task. I know that the Zambia ICT College in Ndola is providing the much needed information and training to the Zambian people to enable them to handle the fast moving technological advancement in the ICT world. As a country, we need to move at a faster rate because issues in the ICT world move very fast because there are a lot of changes that go with ICT. Therefore, I am appealing to Hon. Dr. Brian Mushimba, the Minister of Higher Education, to lobby for various incentives in our economy so that we can be up to speed in ensuring that we compete with the rest of the world in as far as ICT issues are concerned. 

 

Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Transport and Communication must be up to the task as well because it has managed to spread the communication towers. It is on the communications towers that the internet issues are anchored. This Government of His Excellency Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu wants to ensure that every corner of this country has means of communication so that people can get the much needed information timely, efficiently and effectively. This way, they too can make informed decisions.

 

Mr Speaker, I want to support this particular report. In due course, we, as a Government, through collective efforts with the rest of the nation, should be able to attend to the various challenges that have been highlighted in your Committee’s Report.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

The Minister of Information and Broadcasting (Ms Siliya): Mr Speaker, let me also add my voice to the debate on the Report of the Committee on Media, Information and Communication Technologies. First of all, I wish to thank the mover and the seconder of the Motion. I recognise that most of the report was limited to issues to do with the Ministry of Transport and Communication, specifically the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) with emphasis on the internet. However, in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as well as traditional media, we have migrated to issues of Electronic connectivity (e-Connectivity) because most media houses now are using the internet to operate.

 

Mr Speaker, I just wish to assure my colleagues that as the Government implements the Electronic Governance (e-Governance) programme, it is not being done in a haphazard manner. It is extremely co-ordinated and that is because we believe this is where the efficiencies will come from. We do take note that it is important that we continue to create awareness in the country in terms of the values and efficiencies of using the ICT. We have seen Dr Mtonga of Smart Zambia Institute going around the country to work not only with the Public Service, but also to ensure that the private sector embraces the use of ICT. Now in the times of the Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) and post COVID-19, we recognise that the ICT sector is one of the sectors that is poised for growth and it is creating immediate jobs for our young people. Yes, we need to find local e-solutions so that we avoid paying high license fees for the usage of these services. 

 

Mr Speaker, just to take note of the issues that were raised, at the centre, indeed, is appreciation, education and awareness on the importance of the usage of ICT and how to use it positively.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

The Minister of Home Affairs (Mr Kampyongo): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to also make a few remarks on the report which was ably moved by the acting Chairperson of the Committee and ably seconded by the hon. Member of Parliament for Chifubu.

 

Mr Speaker, three years ago in 2017, when His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia came to this august House to tell the nation that he was going to ensure that his Government embarked on a Smart Zambia journey, as a way of delivering public services, many people, including our hon. Colleagues from the Opposition, where sceptical about what the President meant. Today, it is a different story. I am just wondering what could have happened had we sat back and not embraced the ICT platforms to use in this august House during this COVID-19 pandemic which has ravaged the entire world.

 

Mr Speaker, my ministry, like many other ministries, has also embarked on the transformation agenda of ensuring that it migrates from the manual way of delivering services to its people. You will recall that last year, when His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, came to this august House, he was able to cite one of the departments under the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the Immigration Department, as one of the success stories in the implementation of the ICT platforms. At the moment, the department has implemented what it is calling the Management System 3.0, which now entails that all the border or entry points of the nation are on ICT platforms. We are now able to tell how many people could have entered and exited the country. We are also able to tell the figures of non-tax revenue in real time. Now, in the comfort of a home, for example, in Paris, someone is able to apply for a visa, pay for it and arrive here. Had it not been for COVID-19, we could have witnessed a large number of tourists coming into our country.

 

Sir, we are also in the process of automating the civil registration processes. You may wish to know that from the time we attained Independence in 1964, the identification of citizens has remained manual. You can imagine how many files we have now with more than 17 million citizens. You can imagine how we need to stock pile the files and also enter details of citizens. We are now in the process of ensuring that we migrate the civil registration processes from the historical manual processes to digital platforms.

 

We should, therefore, not look back. It is a cost, but one worth investing in. I want to commend you, Mr Speaker, the Clerk of the National Assembly and her deputies as well as the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) team for the hard work done in order for us to conduct business as we are doing now. It has been a challenge, but I think you need to be supported and encouraged to continue building capacity because this institution has equally transformed from the way it has been doing things to what we are doing today. Facilitating the sittings under these difficult times is a challenge, but there has been concerted effort. I think that the Ministry of Finance must also be commended for ensuring that it made resources available to facilitate the acquisition of the equipment we have been accorded.

 

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, we do not have to look back. We should commend His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, who spearheaded the vision of ensuring that we embraced ICT as a way of delivering various services to the people of Zambia.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Ms Kucheka: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the seconder, the hon. Ministers and other hon. Members who have contributed and supported the report.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Question put and agreed to.

_______

BILL

 

SECOND READING

 

THE CONSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA (Amendment) BILL, 2019

 

(Debate resumed)

 

Mr Mawere (Chipata Central): Mr Speaker, I thank you most sincerely for giving me the opportunity, as a loyalist Member of Parliament for Edgar Chagwa Lungu, the Patriotic Front (PF) Party and the Chipata Central Constituency, to open a very important debate this afternoon, as we envisage to amend our Zambian Constitution through the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019.

 

Mr Speaker, this amendment of our Constitution is not an unusual thing because, as legislators and hon. Members of Parliament, it is the primary objective of why we are here. We are here to enact, formulate and amend laws, which we feel need to be amended to be in tandem with our current situation.

 

Mr Speaker, as people of Zambia, we have identified many lacunae in our Constitution and all of us have agreed on the need for us to amend it. As per procedure, there is no other arm of the Government apart from this Parliament, which has the mandate and the jurisdiction to amend this Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, allow me to go further by stating that your Parliament and your procedures in the Standing Orders are very categorical and well stipulated that they do not leave anyone behind in our quest to pass laws in this House. For example, the Standing Orders allow interested individuals, whether in this House or outside, groupings and organisations, to have the opportunity to contribute towards any law which is about to be passed in this country.

 

Mr Simbao: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, just like you appealed yesterday to be seated while delivering a ruling because of its length and were allowed, I want to ask that the ruling on my point of order should not be deferred to another day, but be made immediately I finish raising the point of order.

 

Mr Speaker, my point of order is against Members of the Select Committee who were privileged to scrutinise the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019 on our behalf and for our consumption as a whole House.

 

Mr Speaker, I note that the Select Committee sat for twenty days plus, which is unprecedented in terms of Select Committee sittings. What I know is that traditionally, Select Committees do not sit beyond ten days.

 

Mr Speaker, in those twenty days, I did not hear the voice of the Church or, indeed, the Opposition, particularly the United Party for National Development (UPND), that is now in the forefront of stopping the progression of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019 in the House. For twenty days, hon. Members of the UPND on the Committee continued to deliberate the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019. I wonder why the hon. Members were not pulled out of the Committee during that time.

 

Mr Speaker, I have also heard views from other sources of repute like Prof Ndulo arguing that we operate on similar lines as the British Parliament in an attempt, I believe, to hoodwink the masses in Zambia that we are doing something wrong.

 

Mr Speaker, I refer you to the Standing Orders of 2016. I am not aware of any revisions that were later made to the Standing Orders other than this. I am sorry I do not have the Standing Orders, 2016, with me right now. However, on the authority of Standing Order 145(3) on page 58, which talks of a Member of a Committee not dissenting from or voting against the report that the Committee has presented to the House, are the Members of the Select Committee, therefore, in order to abandon their report, which they had panel beaten so heavily and removed all the things that were really important? They removed the metal of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No.10 of 2019 and only left the filler. All the controversial issues have been purged and only issues not worth creating anarchy about were left. Are your Select Committee Members in order not to support their own report when Standing Order 145(3) compels them to do so?

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Senga Hill, although you have indicated that you would prefer my ruling to be rendered immediately, in view of the many issues that you have raised in the point of order, it would be inadvisable for me to render an ex tempore ruling. There are a number of issues you have raised. Therefore, I need to consider them carefully. For that reason, I will reserve my ruling.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mawere: Mr Speaker, I was saying that the Standing Orders of the House allow interested individuals, groupings and organisations an opportunity to contribute to the enactment of any law that passes through Parliament. This is normally through Select Committees which you, Mr Speaker, set up. In this case, you did just that through the Nakacinda led Committee where all interested groups were able to bring out their concerns on the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019. You also allowed us and other stakeholders to come up with the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, through the National Dialogue Forum (NDF). Today, we have another opportunity, through hon. Members of Parliament, to bring out all issues which we feel we need to deal with in this Constitution amendment process.

 

Mr Speaker, where I stand, as a representative of the people of Chipata Central Constituency, the people have told me categorically that the women of Chipata Central Constituency want to represent themselves here in this House. Surely, who will be against that? The youths of Zambia are saying that they want to represent themselves in this House. Surely, who does not want that good gesture to be actualised? The differently abled people are also requesting to be represented here. What else can we do for them? Furthermore, men of this great nation, Zambia, are saying that they want to be represented here in this Chamber. So, surely, this is a good gesture which all of us need to embrace.

 

Mr Speaker, Zambia is, indeed, a Christian nation. So, enshrining the clause on Christianity in our Constitution is a matter which should not be debated. We, as Zambians, need to embrace it. For those who are walking away from this process, it means they have a different agenda which is not being supported by the people of Zambia.

 

Ms Siliya: Wind up!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mawere: Mr Speaker –

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Chipata Central, I am sure you have seen that your time is out.

 

The Minister of Justice (Mr Lubinda): Mr Speaker, it is with a very heavy heart that I seek leave of the House to defer consideration of the Bill to a later date albeit within the current meeting.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Speaker: Very well.

 

Hon. Minister, you are obviously aware that this Bill has had a long traverse since its first publication. As we speak now, we are in the last meeting of the Fourth Session of the National Assembly. As you have rightly pointed out, any deferment to be allowed can only be in the course of this meeting. Therefore, I would like you to ensure that, through your office and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly, you closely co-ordinate your efforts and indicate in good time the day when you will be ready to proceed and conclude this particular matter. As you have already implied yourself, that cannot be on a day later than the last day of this meeting.

 

Question put and agreed to. Leave granted.

The debate on the Bill, by leave, accordingly deferred.

______

 

MOTIONS

 

Mr Ngulube (Kabwe Central): Mr Speaker, I thank you most sincerely for this opportunity to continue with my debate, which was disrupted the day we adjourned.

 

Mr Speaker, I wish to state that the people of Zambia have wanted us to give them a Constitution that is going to help the Judges of the Constitutional Court in their determination of many disputes.

 

Mr Speaker, we are aware that, at the moment, out there, we have several non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and political parties that are misleading the people of Zambia. When the President of this country came to this House, he made it very clear that the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019 should be embraced by all.

 

Mr Speaker, we are also aware that there is the issue of retirees. All of us civil servants, including those who are serving in the Government, at the moment, and those in rural areas, want a Constitution that will guarantee their pension.

 

Mr Speaker, we are also aware that if the Constitution is not cleaned up, the same people who cried foul when we went to the Constitutional Court will still cry again because all the confusion in the Constitution still remains therein.

 

Mr Speaker, we actually want to thank His Excellency the President of Zambia for the approach that he took on the issue of the Constitution.

 

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, we are aware that most of the time when the people of Zambia want to amend the law, some disgruntled individuals cry on mountain tops accusing the Government of trying to subdue democracy or the rights of the citizens. In the event that the people of Zambia allow these disgruntled people to derail the constitutional making process, it will be very difficult for them to wake up and complain.

 

As I conclude, we would like to thank His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, who listened to the cries of the Zambians, for opening up the Constitution. This gave an opportunity to anyone who had an issue with the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016 to make a submission and have a say.

 

Sir, I would like to support the statement by the hon. Member of Parliament for Chipata Central that, as we sit in this Chamber, the women, youths and the differently abled have very few spaces. The reason is that the Constitution does not guarantee that every general election will have enough women, more youths or that we will have enough interest groups represented in Parliament.

 

Mr Speaker, let me spend my last minute by urging the youths, who are being incited to go and riot on the streets as a way of showing their grievance, that there is no country in the world that has ever developed by running to the streets. Therefore, we want to urge the youths of Zambia to join the campaign for the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 10 of 2019, and create more spaces for themselves in this Parliament so that come 2021, we will have youths speaking for themselves. As such, there will be no youth to protest on the streets because their fellow youths will be before this Chamber championing their cause.

 

Mr Speaker, with these few remarks, I thank you for being generous by allowing hon. Members to debate this issue. For the benefit of doubt, I would like to repeat that the amendments to the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016 were initiated by the United Party for National Development (UPND). Today, they keep running away from the Constitution making process that they wanted. I want to urge the people of Zambia to see for themselves who is sincere in this matter and who has been standing with them in these troubled times.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you and may God bless you.

 

Mr Speaker: The hon. Member for Sioma has come on the screen.

 

Ms Subulwa (Sioma): Mr Speaker, is it on that point of order that I had wanted to raise earlier?

 

Mr Speaker: Very well. Since I had given you the liberty, I will allow you.

 

Ms Subulwa: Mr Speaker, my point of order was on the hon. Member of Parliament, who was on the Floor of the House – the seconder of that Motion. It was agreed in the House that any one seconding a Motion should only refer to notes and not read them. The hon. Member of Parliament for Chifubu read his notes throughout his presentation. I seek your serious ruling on this matter so that we know whether we are reverting to the old system where notes were read or we just have to refer to the notes.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker: The position has not changed. If you have to refer to any written material, it has to be in a form of an aide-memoire. That still remains the position. That is my ruling.

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

The Vice- President (Ms Wina): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

_______

 

The House adjourned at 16 36 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday 25^th June 2020.

 

____________