Walking out of Parliament

Last week opposition MPs walked out of Parliament in protest at the proposal to restore the controversial Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 10 to the Order Paper.

This is not the first time the opposition has resorted to such measures, but was it simply a publicity stunt or was it the right thing to do?

There are several factors to consider. Firstly, when it comes to Bill No.10 the stakes are high. Among the most contentious and concerning provisions in the Bill are the re-introduction of deputy ministers, the permitting of ministers to stay in office during elections and scope for interference in the appointment of judges. The Bill also contains some worrisome provisions relating to Government’s economic and financial management, giving the President the power to contract debt without requiring parliamentary approval. If such tactics are ever to be used then surely they should be used in the case that proposed constitutional changes are perceived to benefit the ruling party.

The second factor to consider is the PF’s approach to law making. Constitutional amendments should not be controversial or seemingly partisan in nature. If the ruling party alone is championing such proposals then surely this is a clear warning sign that all is not well. As Socialist Party leader Dr M’membe has stated, “Constitutional matters are not for bulldozing”, and as former Attorney General Musa Mwenye has explained it, “This Constitution should be made by the people in our villages, in our compounds and suburbs and not a few politicians. That is why the Constitution starts with the words ‘we the people’ and not ‘we the ruling party!’”

It is worth noting that while it was opposition MPs who registered their displeasure as the matter came before the House last week, they are not alone in opposing the legislation. Mwenye is on record as describing the contents of the Bill as “worrisome”, while the Law Association of Zambia and Chapter One have launched legal challenges against its provisions.

Thirdly, publicity stunts become more important in cases where there is a biased media landscape. In order to secure sufficient attention among civil society and the public, it is necessary for politicians to take bolder and more dramatic action. After all, how else will they make the news?

Walking out of Parliament is certainly not the ideal course of action. In a well functioning democracy reasoned argument and debate in the House should be sufficient. However, in the case that serious constitutional proposals have been tabled that appear to be designed to strengthen the hand of the Government against and not on behalf of the people it becomes clear that the problem lies with the Bill itself.