I have a harder struggle to comprehend and I’m greatly disappointed to find, in Patrick matibin, the speaker of the national assembly, a man against whom all men (in particular the legal fraternity) tried to measure against themselves trying to live a life of integrity, impartiality and moral uprightness, whose persona gave many, especially the youths, a complete new outlook on humanity, how he can now sacrifice his hard earned reputation at the altar of political expedience to secure a mollycoddle of the select few.
In perhaps not the national’s best interest, the strange verdict, truly, is not deliberate but an outcome of the unprecedented state of affairs that have gone out of control in the country. However, even for this plain reason I will not refrain from but hastily advance to demean your irrational, irresponsible and emotional judgment passed on our representatives, the Mps.
The prior parliamentary session to the current, saw a number of unsettled propositions which need serious debate before they pass to be laws. But at this juncture, over 4.8 million bona-fide citizens of Zambia have been barred of legal representation in that parley of debacle you cowardly preside over.
1) In whose interest, surely, did you suspend the 48 Mps, whom you should have just suspended only their emoluments which we do not benefit as electorates or any other reprimand befitting them and establish a modus Vivendi to allow them debate on matters that benefit us, the populace?
2) Don’t you find that as both an indirect and direct indictment on the part of citizens particularly the 4 provinces represented by the mps?
3) And is it an insinuation that you will represent the interest of the 49 constituencies (48 plus mwikata’s constituency who is in detention) while adjudicating as arbitrator and in what accord?
4) Will the bills passed be fully representative of what all Zambians expect and or want?
5) Or are you going to put aside such bills of nation importance to hold until the other camp resume from their embarrassing suspension to be debated upon?
6) Or are those laws/instruments going to be abide by only by the respective recipients or constituencies of the attendees making them?
7) Should the issue of presidential interregnum, which is a quandary of the executive, jeopardise the progressive business of the legislature this much as well?
😎 How does the human rights, right to protest, right of assembly etc. Inscribed in the supreme laws of Zambia become incapacitated by your unbecoming verdicts contrary to the preambles of the constitution of Zambia (1996 and 2016 repealed) that renders directives of the constitution being the supreme law of land and any law inconsistent and parallel to the constitution to be null and void?
As can be inferred from my preamble in this specific addendum, I hope you detect my open discontentment some will suspect, otherwise, is hatred by my countenance as usual. It’s for peace’s sake otherwise you will find other people’s displeasure even hasher by far than those of your trouble makers, the suspended Familiars.
I have deliberately incapacitated myself, at this juncture, from furthering this article but truth be told, living has become a sought of a compendium in Zambia which aims to favour and enrich the rulers and a small elite of carders by taking advantage the decorum of their obscured machination we are not privy to, and its unacceptable. We need sanctity in this country of sinners and betrayers, liars and pretenders, deceivers and manipulators.
As I end, Mr. Speaker sir, I urge you to correct the mistake and refrain from further passing horrible judgments that can undermine the peace we’ve enjoyed only so far: for those are clear acts of provocation against the popular electorates and are tantamount to declaration of civil unrest.
BY MM (voter)