MYSTERIES OF THE BWILE

THE MYSTERIES OF THE BWILE PEOPLE AND THEIR BUILILE CEREMONY

Zambia is a beautiful country for any tourist. Every where in Zambia, there is something to offer to the outside world. But some parts of Zambia have distinctiveness that sustains an alluring force to ensure that it is a must visit and must know area. Chienge, the area where you find the Bwile People of Zambia is such an area.  It is full of mysteries that educate and enrich the mind while at the same time the people offer you the memorable entertainment that is defined by who they are : The Bwile people.

KNOW THE BWILE PEOPLE

If you are a curious tourist or student of anthropology or simply history, you would have learnt already about the large ethnic groups of Zambia. They are well studied and known.  But only the intensity of your curiousity can entice you into discovering a unique people, the Bwile.  After the Shila who surrounded the Lake Mweru, the Bwile were the second group of settlers into the Chienge area , a territorial District administrative centre that serves the North-Eastern part of the Lake after the Shila. Others came later. The Bwiles secured the North-Eastern end of the Lake Mweru from  Pweto District in the now Congo DRC into Chienge in the now Senior Chief Puta’s area in Zambia (formerly Northern Rhodesia)  from Kalobwa to Musungwishi without letting out blood.  It was land secured as legal compensation in customary traditions of the time after a Bwile princess Mulumbwa Mwanto Likolo who had been married to a Shila Chief Mchelenge, had a miscarriage. This was before colonial rule or the Berlin  Conference on the partition of Africa! The Bwile people  governed by the ANZA Clan under Senior Chief Puta has been a stable leadership since.  James Kasoma,II Tefwetefwe, the current Muanzankulu Senior Chief Puta is the 8^th from Mulolwa Chimputami, Mulubi, Munfinsa, Chipalabwe, Chongo, Kasoma I,  and Kaongwa Shebele. The name Puta is derived from the Praise name of the first Puta, “Chimpuntami”. It is a name designating the Chietaincy like Kazembe, Chitimukulu, Litunga.

 It is not  a royal family tree name even if in some instances some clan members have named their offsprings “Puta”. Like the names of all those who have reigned as Putas on the thrown, there are maternal and paternal clan names of the ANZA clan (The Monkey Clan): Natende, Mwanto, Chomba, Mutumpa, Sensele, Seya, Ng’aansa, Chisabi, Kalwa, Mpongwe,  Shebele, Chongo, Lukonde, Kasoma, Lupashya,  Lubasa,  who among  many others constitute the Royal College. There are some prominent clan names that come from the patrilineal lines who have now been fully integrated in the clan lineage. Other  clan names family lineage no longer constitute part of the Royal College for historical reasons which have been upheld by modern law. They were customarily debarred from the time of Puta Chipalabwe. Some Royal Houses while considered very senior before were also down- graded  or degazzetted under colonial rule for various reasons. However, these are considered as part of the Bwile Royal Houses even today. Others have been created through the mandate of Senior Chief Puta especially during the reign of Kaongwa Shebele.

For those who want to fully appreciate the Bwile Chiefdom  and its Royal Clan families in Zambia, they have to relate it closely with its descendancy from the Bwile Royal Houses of the Congo DRC like that of Mpweto, Chizabi, Kasama, Kapulo, Mwabu wa Ming’omba, Ching’onshi, Nzwiba, Ng’anye from where many of Zambian Anza Clan families trace their family roots. They are one people by and large. Mpweto is the Paramount Chief of all the Bwiles and exercises the power to install or approve the installation of certain Senior Royal Houses of the Bwile Chiefdom both in the Congo DRC and in Zambia. The House of Mpweto and Puta are closely interrelated in terms of Clan family ties and have customary law powers over each other on family issues and the general welfare of  other Bwile Chiefs. There have been ten Mpwetos since inception: Mpweto Chimamina Matipa who was the first followed in this order by: Mpweto Kayembwe, Mpweto Muntala, Mpweto Chipungu, Mpweto Shebele, Mpweto Lubasa Nkonde (Temporary),  Mpweto Musosa Augustin,  Mpweto Myolo Mukala Mathias, Mpweto Yuma Chikalipa, and the current Mpweto Mumba Medard Lulimi. It is important to state that Mpweto Muntala and Mpweto Chipungu were from the House of Nzwiba which originally was Shila but because of certain custodial and friendly historical events, were permitted to sit on the throne of MPweto. That is why the house of Nzwiba still remains part of the Royal House of Mpweto territorial authority.

If you have to characterize the Bwile people, you would certainly say they are a hospitable and fun-loving people who have a propensity for strategic mind games. Engage them in a conversation and you will be surprised at the complex structure of code switches in their language. They are just amazing. They love freedom, strategic thinking and self-reliance  in a way quite uncommon to many societies in Zambia. While their immediate  lineage goes to the Congo DRC and are proud to say so they, like many Luba-Lunda migrants, trace their origins from Angola. In fact they have closer affinity with Luba-Bemba lineage.

AND THE BATEMBO OF BWILELAND?

But wait! The Bwile’s are hospital in a very permanent way and are able to live side by side with people who may not even share a common language with them. It is only in Bwile land in Zambia that you will find another unique group of people called ABATEMBO

Like BaTWA and Sun people of South Africa, the Batembo people, as a general observation, live separate lives mainly in smaller bands and are generally “normadic” in their lifestyles. They are by and large light-skinned people who are identified by their elaborate tattoos on their stomachs and faces. They depend on hunting for their general welfare and speak a language incomprehensible to an ordinary Bwile or anyone speaking a Lunda-Luba dialect. They use bows and arrows and hunting dogs to catch their prey and are dependent on meat sources of protein. They used to help hunt down pigs and monkeys who ate local food crops in addition to their usual hunting  routines in the bush. Because of  depleted animal stocks in many parts of Chienge, they are found in or near the Mweru wa Ntipa Game park of Chienge and appear to eat anything that can provide protein like snakes, snails, among the more exotic.  Progressively they have become less “mobile” and settling somewhat. The greatest challenge for our policy makers is how to ensure services such as health and education reach them and have access to safe drinking water. They is some slow progressive integration of some Batembo children in schools. At least one is reputed to have finished grade 12 with a very good performance. Two or three incidents of marriage of Batembo women to Bwile men have been cited. But these are very rare. The Batembo do not respect international borders and can cross back and forth into Zambia and Congo. When provoked, their bows and arrows are terribly lethal. Otherwise , they remain a very peaceful even if an on-going mystery of Bwileland.

VIILAGES  BUILT FOR LIVING AND PLEASURE !

Bwileland in Chienge is simply this: beautiful like in breath-taking. Puta, which is composed of many villages or what in the City would be called “compounds”  is a large village built with town planning concept in mind. It is among the cleanest villages in Zambia. You do not have to park your car in the D79 Kashikishi-Lunchinda road and then walk with your luggage on your head to your destined house. You just drive  or are driven and dropped by the entry to your house’s court yard. It is simply organized to be live-able and easily accessible. Many villages are modeled around this concept. Bwile Houses like in many parts of Luapula are not hamlets or shacks, they are real two to three bed-roomed houses with other functional spaces like the living room inside. Most have the famous verandah or balcony.  A dirty environment is an insult to the Bwile concept of living.

 SCENIC BEAUTY THAT SMILES LIKE LADY MADONNA

There is a kind of scenic beauty in Bwileland that smiles a conspiracy of concealment.  You see, hear and feel that this is an extra-ordinarily beautiful place but something still telling you inside, there is more you have not seen yet!. There is a scenic beauty underneath a serene beauty. Something close to spiritual, something healing in and of  itself. You feel burnt-out, come here, you shall go back, if you choose to leave, feeling a whole-someness  you have not experienced before. Put a great body of water on one side, undulating green hills on another, 37 kilometers of sandy beaches along the lake shore, a giant plain of Lushiba of varied coloration under the northern gaze of Chankalamo Hills (Where lions reigned),  spectacular sunrises and sunsets, no crocodiles or hippos to swallow up your children in this giant Lake this part of the country, a buzz of life night-time or day and mosques, temples, churches, shrines etc, what do you get? Bliss!

MYTHS OR REALITIES?  WHY DON’T COME AND FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF!

·         A CHIEF THAT KEPT THREE LIONS AND USED THEM TO AVENGE HIS ADVERSSARIES?

It is part of Bwile Folklore that goes as far as Lunda and Bembaland that Chongo Shebele Puta V had three ‘golem’ lions that he bestowed on headman , now sub-chief  Swali to look after. In Bemba land they were known as :NaShitina Milongo, NaMweleu, Shila Inkampa. In Bwile land the names of these three lions still remain a well kept secret known only to special people. Can you extract their true identity?  A’golem’ in an old Jewish tradition is something that can be invoked or “made to exist and controlled” like “Ilomba” by the owner. It has what you may cal “virtual existence” but can perform required functions. Puta Chongo instructed Swali to unleash them on anyone who tried to take advantage of the Bwile’s social or economic welfare. Myth or Reality ? It is well documented but you can come and have a curious go at it from whichever angle: scientific, mythological or cultural- anthropological. It is an enlightening discovery.

·         KABWEKATENDA,  A STONE OR A SPIRITUAL SHRINE THAT USED TO ANSWER TO THE PRAYERS OF THE BWILE?

As you make the last sharp corner driving from Sub-Chief Kalembwe’s area on D79, and begin to descend into a stream known as Kabwe, try and look up right, resisting the temptation of the Lakeview scenery, you will be “greeted’ by the mighty KABWEKATENDA (The stone that never moves). Wait a minute, stones do not move anyway unless something moves them. Is that not so? Not really! Not with this one. This is not a mere stone but an inselberg with spiritual force. It is perched at the apex of a very steep hill on three small stones that can barely hold the weight of a ten ton Canter truck! But this is titan of a mystically shaped stone almost like a beacon cunningly pointing to some undiscovered realities. Underneath the smaller stones is a well cut tunnel that sits a band of spiritualist who prepare libations to Kabwekatenda. The spiritualist refer to Kabwekatenda in the male form because they say, there are two accounts. The most elaborate is that there was  Chibwe Chisosa, who is still there and  there was also the wife of Kabwe mulume. Because Chibwe Chisosa was preferred by Kabwe Mulume, Kabwe Kanakashi felt jealousy and left in a thunderous roll down the Lake to a point only spiritualists say they know. The second account says  when the people became arrogant and stopped paying the spiritual tribute to two Kabwes,  who in turn offered blessings and ensured the good health and welfare of the Bwile, the female Kabwe was very upset and decided to thunderously roll down into the lake leaving behind the tears of the Kabwe stream. ChibweChisosa used to speak before but following that incident, KabweKatenda and Chibwe Chisosa are silent. Others say Kabwekatenda has become permanently in grief for losing his wife and says nothing to the spiritualists just offers them residence for libation. Well, you have heard about Stone Henges of the UK and other similar stones in China etc. Could there been titans who moved stones and placed them in mystical  ways to hide certain realities. At Chansa Hills in Lambwe Chomba you may find intriguing stone formations. Stone age history?

·         DAVID LIVINSTONE BOWL AND THE MBOWA HE ATE AT KALEMBWE AND THE BOMA

Do you know that the other name of the ISENGA BAY or what is commonly called the Beach  was named by the colonial administrators who were early settlers at the PUTA POST  also known as RHODESIA  (the first place to be called such ) was named the DAVID LIVINGSTONE BOWL for its beauty and in memory of the fact that David Livingstone walked the beach and slept at Kalemwe where the Chief fed him with the tasty Mbowa. He noted this in his diaries of 1867. The Livingstone museum register the fact that Chienge or Puta Post was the first colonial administrative centre opened by the African Lakes Company on behalf of the British colonial administration. It was opened by a hunter sent from Nyasaland Mr Richard Chrawshay in 1890 before the 1894 Berlin Conference. Well that is real documented history. The First Colonial Post ? Why here? The First Rhodesia in honor of Cecil Rhodes by Sir Harry Johnston, what else can be done? David Livingstone, Cecil Rhodes, just thinking aloud on how to remember these facts!

·         HOTSPRINGS OR UTUPISHA: DO THEY HAVE HEALING POWERS?

There are than five  very active hotsprings in Bwile land. The most prominent are Kalembwe, Katete and  Chi Ng’aansa hotspring, Lushiba, .  Scientists say these hotsprings arise out of a combination of chemicals in the underground waters. Some one said they emerge when underground water hits molten rock deep in the earth. What do you know? For us these are shrines where our ancestors’ spirits keep their mysteries.

·         CHIPEPELO BRIDGE: A BRIDGE MADE BY THE GODS FOR HUNTERS?

It is called our gods bridge for hunters, ichilengwa na Lesa.

·         OKAY YOU ARE MORE THAN A TOURIST BUT A MINER TOO!

Did you know that much of Bwileland sits of a giant underground salt rock which is commercially ciable to mine and has been a key part of Bwile economy and diplomacy for more than two centuries now? Salt panning is a traditional art . But if you into thinking big on salt, think Big in Bwileland, you will not regret. It is more that occurrences of copper in Chimpatika but also salt which the country now imports which is plenty here.

·         CHINKULA WAS IT INFANTICIDE  OR PREVENTIVE MORAL MANAGEMENT?

Many young Bwiles wish to forget a part of the Bwile history. This is a time if a baby’s teeth started to grow on the “wrong” side of the mouth, it was surrendered to the spiritual authorities who sent it diving deep into the Chinkula falls un-redeemably. It was believed such babies when grown up became uncontrollable trouble makers. “Uli chinkula” here means someone who cannot listen or be advised. A  social suicide bomber who respects no custom.  This practice was stopped but has left a deep moral scar: was a great wrong done by our ancestors and has it been fully atoned? In the age of human rights, Chinkula is a reminder of what  can go wrong. Is it possible for a whole society to misdiagnose the causes of their social ills and plunge into a theory of “ Perception Management” where a lie becomes the truth and no one dare challenge it? Can it happen at higher levels of governance than just Bwileland? Is Chinkula a lesson in Human rights and the evils of perception management as an instrument of governance? Come and reflect over this tragic history.

·         LUSHIBA AND MPWETO KANYAMABUMBA

Bwile means a sense of strategy. Diplomacy was always the Bwile’s first line of attack when challenged. They tried to assess their adversaries menatal assets. How competent they were mentally to with stand the many strategic arsenals in the Bwile’s fighting armory. When diplomacy did not elicit the appropriate response, they circled the wagons around Mpweto, popularly known as “Kanyamabumba”.  He could instantly create warriors at night where there were none during the day. He preferred to dictate the time to fight and was able to mass produce figurines and plant them in the Lushiba, Folklore goes that this strategy was enough to scare off Lundas. Some tribal histories confuse identities for example between Mpweto Kashinge of Kilwa and the Bwile Mpweto. They even imply Mpweto was not Bwile or ANZA clan member. When the Shilas and Bwile of  Lunchinda whipped Kasumpa, Kazembe’s representative, they also whipped Kazembe’s Chief  Commander Mpweto Kashinge whom he dispatched from Kilwa to revenge. The Bwile’s were led by Mpweto Kanyamamabumba who was paramount to all the Bwiles. Like the Basanga Chief Mafunga who nearly annihilated the Lunda’s and were only saved by Mushima Kafwikamo (Akayafya ukuposa) a Kaonde also known as Chief Kaindu Mushima (Kasongo waile ku Lualaba) in NorthWestern Province,  whom the Lunda  had integrated into Lunda Chieftaincy, the Bwile’s diplomatic acumen also allowed them to call on many allies up to Ng’anye. Bwiles resisted Lunda subjugation quite successfully. Are you an historian? Why not come and study this tangled histories of the Valley people. AS earlier state the Bwiles used salt as a diplomatic strategy not tribute. Up to today Bwiles still use salt in their diplomatic interaction with other chiefdoms.

CHILEMA AT KALEMBWE

There is a very big stone close to the Lake and Ifuna stream at Kalembwe with a big hole inside with stone chairs and tables. Villagers can guide you there. It is said Livingstone sat on then.

MWANZANKULU SENIOR CHIEF PUTA KASOMA I KANUNGA (1937-1999)

The Bwile people on he Zambian side have had eight leaders  as Muanzankulu Puta inception. Kasoma II Tefwetefwe I is the 8^th. Yet in the reign of Putas there has been one outstanding Muanzankulu Puta whose record of reign on the throne is historically remarkable for its longevity. It was Hillier Kasoma I Kanunga Muanzankulu Puta VI  who reigned for 62 years! There are few Royal Monarchies in Zambia and perhaps the World who have reigned for that long. Queen Elizabeth of the United Kingdom would be celebrating her 60 year reign as a Royal Monarch. The Zambian government awarded Hillier Kasoma I Puta VI a national medal of honor (posthumously) by President Levy Patrick Mwanawasa for long service to his people, the only traditional leaders so honored  perhaps in the history of our country. He expired in 1999. He stands as a symbol of the House of Chongo Shebele who currently reign as Putas. He also stands out as fierce and intelligent leaders who knew how to stand for all the Bwile people, including those in the diaspora including in the now Congo Democratic Republic. He personally nurtured the current Muanzankulu  Paramount Chief Medard Mumba Mpweto X  Lulimi I from his early years wghen he was brought from the DRC into Kanunga Palace in the early 60s until he went and installed him as Mpweto on  17^th September1999 in the DRC,  just a few months before his own demise. He promoted enterprise and worked to resolve tensions. He knew our royal customs and respected them fully. He nurtured leadership among young members of the family. He stood firm against foes. He was generous, strategic and unifying. He epitomized all that a celebrated Bwile Chief should and must be. From their mother Shebele, Kasoma Puta had  his sisters Malita Lukonde (Natende wa Lushiba) (f), Emela Nabense (f) and his brother Jameson Shebele (m). This line remains the  House of  Chongo, who rule the Bwiles on the Zambian side.  In2017, it will be the 100 year anniversary, when the Bwiles all over will celebrate the Legacy of Kasoma I Puta VI . His Praise citation  nkafwa kuli aba, panga wauma ngesembe, ilyatumpa lyatobeka kuli mwana Chiseluka, Shichimpalapata umwaumebatasha ubulamba, Shichimputu uuputukila abatumpa,

Tobwe iyaweme mwana Chiseluka, Lumfu uwenda imiya, Shimunukula fishinte inkalamo ailalya amale abantu ngata bamina, Shimunukula mabwe ilyakosa lya lepuka…..

Puta Kasoma aishile pyanwa na Muanzankulu Puta VII Shebele II (1999-2007) Kaongwa akalumanya mishike, mpula mwiteshi, mubamba ng’oma  uulasa abamunina, muntalangwa mashindaubwema nimbwa ukutola

Uwaishile pyanwa na Muanzankulu Puta VIII Kasoma II Tefwetefwe uwibisha abafina nabamiya, Temfuma ubwaume kuilanga, cilalo cishipanguka pantu ngacapanguka ninshi bonse kuya, Shimukokota nsono,amabwe emubweemusunga apwila, Fumpa fumpa mwana owani ukafwila pangala shakwe, nchitwa cii finshi bengamucita, Chitwekoko icafinya akabwile, …tundungulu umutulwa nsengo no tuntu mukati. Chibinda mwana Chongo uwanukwile sensele peshinte aisangula butanda bwakunyantapokonse pe uko aya.

SUCCESSION RITES IN THE MMD WHEN LEVY P. MWANAWASA DIED

THE MACHIVELLIAN RITES OF SUCCESSION IN THE MMD WHEN MWANAWASA DIED

BY KATELE KALUMBA

The murky forces that were unleashed in the wake of the news that Zambian Republican President Levy Patrick Mwanawasa had collapsed in Egypt and was struggling for dear life in a French Hospital where he later died will perhaps not be fully documented for the public. But as former Chief Executive of the Ruling Party with the title of National Secretary and the custodian of the Constitution of the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (The MMD), I witnessed the most despicable acts of human folly in the process of finding a successor to Mwanawasa. I presided over this process while I was being stabbed front, back, sides and head. The abuses I was exposed to were principally authored by our then Vice President of the Republic of Zambia and our novitiate Party Trustee, Mr Rupiah Bwezani Banda in his cunning quest to be “allowed to complete the three years left by my brother” as he put it. Needless to say after three years, he sought another five year term and fell to the Patriotic Front’s machine of Michael Chilufya Sata in 2011 after a sympathetic vote in 2008 allowed him to serve the three years he pleaded for.

Rupiah Bwezani Banda or RB as he was fondly known, was a master at concealing his hand in schemes of deceit and political mayhem. His dreaded foe, he was made to believe, was the National Secretary, moi, who under our Party Constitution managed fully the day to day processes of the Party. Sensing challenge from Ngandu Magande, probably the former First Lady, Maureen Mwanawasa, and a hoard of other older MMD leaders, he established a cartel of political hitmen and women. Prominent among these were the late Ben Tetamashimba, Mike Mulongoti, and Catherine Namugala. By liberally promising political tokens he won the hearts of even the most ardent trustees of Levy such as the late George Kunda and now diplomat Bwalya Chiti. He completely castrated the power of the National Chairman Michael Mabenga. With tons of misinformation procured through this cartel and particularly from Madam Catherine Namugala, he hated me with a passion and I have never been surprised at the legal woes that had befallen me under his tenure. As my late friend Mambo Banda who educated me about the character of the man, RB, particularly his art of deception, and who tried to work with my uncle Senior Chief Nzamane to mediate, I had to prepare myself for the worst. Mambo revealed to me how RB, being a major critic of Mwanawasa during their Katuta Lodge Days(which belonged to Mambo and frequented by his two “friends” Dr George Chabwera and RB), the latter surprisingly disappeared and went to donate a Boran Bull to Levy Mwanawasa during a public political rally of the MMD in Kasenengwa. I had drawn up a program to take Levy through out the Eastern Province to win it over after a flurry of complaints from Eastern Royal Houses. RB , an anti-MMD and a proclaimed retired politician from the UNIP days, announced to the audience how, as an old politician , he had discovered very important virtues in Levy and why he thought the East should support him. The Bull was a token of his support. Levy was ready to reject it as he whispered to me because he knew from his intelligence sources the “crap” this old man had been saying about him. But since we were canvassing for support for our 2006 elelctions and sensing the decline of support for Levy in the Northern and Luapula Provinces, I was not ready to risk an electoral loss because of my candidate’s delicate ego. I persuaded him to accept as measure of his magnanimity. Needless to say we won the East, lost Luapula and Northern to PF but the national “trophy” was ours, Levy was re-elected for the second time. And Rupiah Bwezani Banda was appointed his Vice President with his quite very young and unassuming wife Thandiwe as the Second Lady of our Republic. I reproduce the letter below as part of a series of battles I had to fight against Banda’s hitmen during the succession crisis of 2008. Banda’s dread was realized and confirmed why he had to hate me when I allowed to open the applications to any candidate who was a member and had not served a three year term in a party position. The legal reason was that three years only applied to Party offices. This allowed me to re-admit Enock Kavindele and Nevers Mumba who had been expelled by Levy and allowed them to contest. It also allowed me to accept RB who had not served three years in the Party. All in all all, I allowed 18 applicants amongst whom, one Hikaumba, President of the ZCTU was not publicly announced by me as per his request and speculation in the media was buzzing whether it was Maureen or indeed myself. 

Having been told by Catherine that I had said “he lacked balls to be a leader” (an insult I never levelled at him in that way), he had enough reason to be suspicious of me. In my personal encounter on this particular grudge when Mambo organized a mediation, I confronted him and urged to stand up to the punches that Magande and Masebo were throwing if he really wanted to succeed Mwanawasa. That too confirmed the reported insult. 

But I and RB went far in history in ways we both recalled different episodes. I remembered him in early 1970s as a General Manager of a NAMBoard that was corruptly and nepotistically run, where tons of fertilizer wagons disappeared and I was tasked by the State then to investigate under the guise of a Staff Development Officer under a Scottish “dog minder”. I reported to her and State House through Senior Officers of State. He was removed there and relegated to some low level parastatal and succeeded by a noble gentleman Dominic Mulaisho, now late. On his part he remembered a violent young man who “nearly killed us during a campaign in Feira" when General Fara was standing on a UNIP ticket. My recollection of that was quite the opposite. I was a lone ranger surrounded by violent old wounded UNIP buffaloes.Not even the small police post could protect me. I had to protect myself. We lost that violent by-election to UNIP. Nevertheless, these narratives may have fed into the heat that RB unleashed on me during that fateful period when Zambia lost a President. My letter of complaint to Mabenga reveals my preoccupation to try and defend the tenets of the MMD against a Man whose membership to the Party was even suspect. RB was never on my Register as a member the same way Clive Chirwa was not despite his carrying a hastely bought Party card from someone. The National Secretary was the registrar of members and he authenticated them. I am not sure whether RB even knew where the Party Headquarters was. I never recall him visiting. At his core, I believed, he was anti-MMD and UNIP if not born-again FDD.

July 30,2008

Dear Chairman Mabenga,

Re:      THE PARTY POLICY, ADMINISTRATION ISSUES AND THE CASE AGAINST BEN TETAMASHIMBA

I have been briefed by my Deputy National Secretary about the meeting that was convened by the National Trustee, His Honor the Vice President Mr. Rupiah Banda at Government House on 22^nd July 2008 to discuss matters related to the Party’s image of late, a meeting I did not attend. I was not clear who convened the meeting in question but I understood from you that you were just invited to it. I assume then it was by our senior trustee who also wanted to brief members on the President’s health as reported in the media and the solidarity statement to which I render my support. Please recall that the Secretariat has sent a formal letter to the First Lady on behalf of the Party.

I therefore want to address some issues that appear to have vexed the minds of our members as reported to me.

1. PARTY POLICY:  As I informed you in my SMS text which I equally availed to the VP and my DNS, I considered the consultation an informal matter which I did not want to be misconstrued as a NEC meeting discussing Policy matters.  I have had numerous queries from other NEC members who did not attend the meeting. My position has been consistent: that it was an informal consultation on a disciplinary matter by the National Chairman, to whom the Secretariat had written, to convene a disciplinary committee after charging Hon. Ben Tetamashimba. As you are aware, the full NEC in consultation with the Party President is in charge of Policy direction. (Article 19 (b) and Article 41(b) and in his absence, the Vice President of the Party. Article 45 (2) gives power to the National Chairman. In the absence of both the President and Vice President to provide Policy leadership.

2. ADMINISTRATION.  Sir, our constitution is clear, the National Secretary is the Chief Executive Officer of the Party for supervision, co-ordination and efficient administration of the day to day activities of the Party (Article 46 (1)) with the clear mandate to organize and mobilize the Party (Article 46 (2)).  In addition, the Constitution is clear that issues of discipline are an administrative matter. In terms of day to day administration of Party discipline, this is vested  in the National Secretary by article 52 (3) and I quote: “The power to ensure discipline and take disciplinary action among the officers, Members and employees of the Party shall lie with the National Secretary”. This clause is unequivocal on the definition of “powers” to ensure discipline and to “take disciplinary action”. That power is not vested in any other Office of the Party defined in article 41 and 42. In doing so of course the National Secretary is guided by the Rules and Regulations and conventions derived from this Constitutional Article. Yet any such Subsidiary Rules and Regulations are not designed to render incompetent the powers vested in the National Secretary on Discipline. This is so because the term “ensure” carries the notion of “guarantee” as a “matter of honor”. It is a “promise” the National Secretary has to make to the Party as a “word of honor”. No other officer in the Party NEC has that burden on his or her shoulders. 

In the event of doubt regarding the status of the New Party Constitution (as Hon Tetamashimba had tried to suggest that it was not effective), the President agreed with the Secretariat that the Convention is the highest organ and NEC cannot “re-approve” the amended constitution. He directed the Secretariat to publicize it in his letter dated 10^th August 2007. The attempt to re-amend the Constitution proposed in a petition letter to His Excellency by Hon Tetamashimba regarding President Mwanawasa continuing as MMD President dated 13^th August, 2007 and the President’s reaction to it dated 27^th August 2007 was never tabled to the NEC after appropriate consultations at the highest level. Therefore, our document is the authentic constitution as amended in 2005.

I heard about the arguments proffered by Chairman Chiti and others about the limits of the powers of the National Secretary, over the discipline of NEC members. The regulation derived from Article 52, defines disciplinary authorities including the NEC. And he was right in quoting clause 5 (a) which defines the NEC as a disciplinary authority for NEC members. What Chairman Chiti did not bring to the attention of the meeting, and which independent legal persons would clearly point out, is that Clause 6 of the disciplinary Rules and Regulations is very clear. I quote: “The National Secretary shall have power to direct (emphasis is mine) any disciplinary authority to initiate disciplinary action against any erring party member”. This Clause does not exclude NEC and that is why only the National Secretary can proffer charges and constitute the Disciplinary Committee to examine a case of an erring NEC member for the NEC to take disciplinary action.

3. THE CASE OF HON. BEN TETAMASHIMBA

The history of insubordination, arrogance, and malicious publicity has characterized the Office of the Party Spokesperson. In fact quite recently, on May 5^th, 2008, our Party President wrote Chairman Tetamashimba on his characteristic behaviour to my office and I quote “ Your letter to Hon. Dr Katele Kalumba, MP., National Secretary of the Party dated 16^th January, 2008 was extremely hostile, rude and unnecessary.” Previous communications from the President have restricted Tetamashimba as spokesperson to clear his public statements with the NEC and the National Secretary. He has ignored this many times.

Chairman, in the context of recent events, the question is: What is the problem? In my view, it is not whether or not there has arisen a crisis in the Party as such, but rather the following:

1.    Tetamashimba’s remarks on the health of the President and the need for a new leader in the press

2.    Tetamashimba’s public attack and gravely false information regarding the National Secretary publicized in the media during a press conference

3.    Tetamashimba misrepresenting a Party program on Women and the Youth in relation to (2) above not only to the public but to all national Party organs

4.    Answering the question of whether a disciplinary case exists

5.    Who has constitutional authority to proffer a charge against a member, including a NEC member

6.    What are the Regulations, conventions and procedures followed in a disciplinary case.

7.    Are there exceptional political considerations to avoid specific disciplinary actions

8.    Who decides on exceptions

9.    What are the political costs of any course of action

10.  Is the Party willing to bear any such costs?

Chairman, arising from the discussions in Part 1 and 2 of this letter, I have answered most of the issues in points 5 and 6 in the above list of issues. I address the remaining 8 issues.

The charge letter signed by my Deputy National Secretary on behalf of my Office clearly sets out the issues in 1, 2, 3, and 4, 5 and 6. No one else but Tetamashimba made an “insensitive” statement at a wrong time in the press which created a perception of crisis and consequently ridicule to the Party. It angered party members, including the women members of Lusaka province who demonstrated but were calmed down by the Secretariat. Party leaders including Hon. Mangani, Hon Mpombo, Hon Magande and Hon Mulongoti speaking in their various capacities condemned the statement. The Post Newspaper carried an editorial that disregarded anyone else’s sentiments, but supported Tetamashimba in their usual characteristic and irrational attacks on Katele Kalumba whom they had asked to react to what they considered a rather unusual call.  That I believe bolstered Tetamashimba to play to the gallery and proceed further to create and publicise falsehoods about the National Secretary having “bused into Lusaka Women and Youths from all provinces” to demonstrate against him. Thus, this National Secretary who was calming people down and calling for prayers was “involved in sinister schemes” against Tetamashimba and by derivation the Party and President Mwanawasa.

Chairman, I quote the sentiments of our Party President on such falsehoods and insults as in the case of Findlay’s MMD DOES NOT BELONG TO LEVY’s RELATIVES,-POST “The statement certainly brings the name of the Party into disrepute in that it suggests that Senior leadership of the Party including myself are allowing my relatives to run the Party as a family enterprise” (Letter to NS dated Nov 19^th, 2007). Further on the same issue following a misunderstanding that I had not written to Findlay on his statement asking him to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken, His Excellency wrote “…if we are going to treat offenders with kinder gloves, then the Party has a wrong man for its President”. You agree Chair, these were strong sentiments magnified in the Moonga case which you are all too familiar with.

In the case of Tetamashimba, my Office has clearly defined the injuries and put it to the correct “Disciplinary authority” through the provisions established by Rules and Regulations and by Conventions, the setting up of a disciplinary committee and therefore answered issue 5 and 6 in particular.

The question of issue 7 and 8 can also be addressed through the case of Chairman Chumbwe. Considering both the political and diplomatic implications and the charges proffered by the Secretariat, NEC only asked Chumbwe to apologize for the embarrassment caused and the Party President who was offended as a Republican President, accepted the apology in a letter to Chumbwe dated 12 May 2008. Tetamashimba has refused to apologize to the Party, the nation or to me as National Secretary, although he appears to have apologized to the Mwanawasa family. He has continued to misrepresent the Party and undermine my person and office by false and malicious statements including efforts to try and destabilize the Party organs in Solwezi District. I find it hard to define an exceptional circumstance which would not require specific sanctions including a public apology to the Nation, the Party and to my Office.

This matter is in your hands Chairman as per the Constitution, articles which I have referred to thus answering issue 7 and 8. But in addressing yourself to these two issues, please try and answer the implications of inaction raised in issue 9 and 10. However, I would like to inform you that as National Secretary and as an individual member of the MMD and a Citizen of Zambia, I reserve the right to react should there appear to be a “conspiracy of a dark convenience” designed to undermine my person and my political authority in MMD.

Having put the Secretariat’s case at length against the background of what my DNS briefed me about and what I learnt in my telephone conversation with Chairman Chiti, my discussions in person with you and Hon treasurer Suresh Desai, we have rested our official case and await the Disciplinary process of NEC to act. In the meantime, our Party organs are being informed in a public statement that until NEC decides on the charges proffered by the Secretariat on Hon Ben Tetamashimba, he shall not speak on behalf of the Party effective from the date the charge letter was signed and delivered. This action is common practice. As Party Chairman who is acting in the absence of the President (and as we have no vice Party President) you can direct us or act arbitrarily to reconstitute the Disciplinary Committee so that when the matter is brought to the full NEC, at some point, and if our Party President would still be indisposed, you would not be rendered unable to preside over the NEC meeting discussing a matter you chaired as Chairman of the adhoc Disciplinary Committee.

Yours Sincerely

Katele Kalumba MP

National Secretary

cc.       Trustee and Republican Vice President

Vice Chairman

Deputy National Secretary

            Treasurer

Vice Treasurer           

Chairman, Legal

            Chairman, Security

            Chairman, Elections

Chairperson, Women

Chairman, Youth

HEALTH LEADERSHIP IN AFRICA

Professor  Monnekosso

Regional Director

WHO (AFRO)

c/o WHO Assembly,

Geneva

May 1994

Your Excellency

Re: AFRO'S TOWARDS HEALTH FOR ALL REPORT: A CONFIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT.

On behalf of the Zambian delegation to the 47th World Health Assembly I wish to officially acknowledge receipt of your report on your Office's work over the past ten years presented  to Afro Region  delegates during a briefing session on 3rd of May, 1994 at the Palais des Nations  Salle VII.

I wish first, to express my delegation's appreciation of the verbal presentation in which you personally highlighted, in impressive graphics, the tremendous amount of work being undertaken by AFRO under your leadership. May I in the same breath register, as I did  verbally during my intervention on your presentation,  my disappointment at the time allocated to a discussion by  AFRO Ministers on this very important matter. While conceding that Afro Health Ministers will hopefully be given ample time to study this report during region-specific meetings, it is nonetheless  disturbing, that an opportunity offered by your office to Ministers during the World Health Assembly was scheduled in such a way that ample time was only available to receive the presentation and not to fully react to its substance there and then.

As you personally acknowledged in response to my very brief remarks (constrained as I was by  the time allocated), a decision to present such an important document to AFRO Ministers who were delegates to the World Health Assembly required that your office secured  adequate time during the session for sincere and informed discussion. Of course, I am assuming that your primary intention of scheduling that session was consistent with your current role as Regional Director and hence your mandate to inform Regional delegates on your Office's activities! My fear is that starved of time as the session was, we as Afro Ministers and delegates were merely treated as recipients of a product we were not allowed to critically and constructively engage you sir, in a healthy dialogue, on our concerns regarding the key elements of your Office's activities.

I would be insincere to your Excellency, if I did not state, on behalf of my Zambian delegation as a whole, that the substance (saying nothing about the format) of the presentation raised more questions than it answered. Even more confusing for anyone who understood your presentation were your verbal responses to questions posed by delegates during that session (which I had opportunity to electronically record and attempt to appreciate after the session...a practice I find better than writing notes). Specifically, I refer to your response to my interventions.  Please recall that in unison with remarks by previous speakers from Swaziland and Kenya who expressed concern on inter-agency collaboration on health programmes, particularly contradictory instructions from AFRO on initiatives by other developmental agencies, I wanted to know at least three things:

1. What has been the specific role of AFRO in influencing the process of consensus-building in the case of the UN-joint programme on AIDS? I elaborated by specifying Zambia's role in this during the 11-14th March meeting of UN programme Directors in Lusaka, and I expressed concern that AFRO's role could have been significantly represented at such a meeting given the priority nature of the problem of AIDS in Africa and the potential impact the Joint program may have on existing programmes in the region.

YOUR SUBSTANTIVE RESPONSE

As I said there is a problem in joint programmes. Each one wants to protect his territory, this or that mandate. I agree there is more to be done on this...you and me can discuss this in detail sometime...

MY FOLLOW-UP REMARKS

It is precisely because of the knowledge that there are problems in inter-agency  collaboration that more proactive leadership is necessary...leadership who will help build consensus where none exists. Leaders who will act beyond agency turf-politics and provide a vision of the common purpose. That is why the Lusaka meeting was called. It was an opportunity to reconcile differences. Inter-agency networks which act beyond the unproductive restrictions of their  'mandates' are needed in an African regional health strategy. They will not emerge by accident, they must be deliberately constructed. That requires a shift in leadership styles among those whose responsibility it is to act in the service of health development in the region. It is the only way partnership for health in Afro can be enhanced.

2. The Dakar Declaration by African Heads of State represented in my judgement, one of the most significant events on the AIDS calendar in Africa. For once, Heads of State were unanimous on an Agenda for Action on AIDS. As a person who ( with the OAU, ADB and GPA) has had to  work on that agenda following the declaration , to give it more concrete operational meaning, I wanted to know why AFRO has not taken further initiatives to actualise the implementation of that Declaration. I cited the Government of Tunisia which, with the direct support of GPA (Geneva) has gone further in elaborating on specific issues such as AIDS and the African Child which I had the opportunity to contribute to among other fellow Ministers?

YOUR RESPONSE

On the Dakar Declaration, this is why I say that some Declarations are not worth the attention of African Heads of State. Often, there are products of people outside the health field, like Foreign Ministers...leaving out those in charge of the health field...Heads of State are dragged into making declarations on this and that.... This is one issue delegates may wish to discuss in detail sometime as we have run short of time....

MY FOLLOW-UP QUESTION

If this is the official status on the Dakar Declaration on the Agenda for Action on AIDS in Africa my questions now are: (a) how come during its discussion in May 1992 in Geneva by African Health Ministers, you personally talked about your involvement in that initiative? (b) Why does it appear in your report presented to Afro delegates to the 47th World Health Assembly briefing as part of your Office's contributions in 1992 to 'Shaping African Health Policies'?  (c) Is it accurate that health experts or sectors were not involved when the initiative was lively debated in Geneva in May 1992, and further, the then Health Minister of Nigeria Professor Ransome-Kuti and a select number of Health Ministers were in fact the political engineers of the initiative?

(c) Specifically, what makes that Declaration and follow-up operational strategies not worth the attention of either African Heads of State or your Office for follow-up?  If future declarations won't suffer the same fate, this is an important question.

3. The Third point I raised is the question of resources. The world is facing dwindling resources. The 'Health Package' concept that appears in your District strategy, and as you stated in your earlier remarks, is derived from the World Bank Initiative, is not a cheap one. I must state that I have also contributed conceptually through my reform work in Zambia and critically in my participation on the Bank-sponsored Expert panel on Better Health Reforms for Africa. For those of us who are working with this concept on the ground will admit that it calls for considerable resource mobilization for capacity-building and package implementation at the District level. What substantive initiatives or rather what capacity exists at AFRO for aiding member countries in resource mobilisation in support of this initiative?

NO DIRECT RESPONSE

MY OUTSTANDING CONCERN

1.                  As the package concept is central to the Regional Director's current strategy as discussed recently in Yaounde by various country representatives of AFRO and WRs in the AFRO region (a meeting I had some opportunity to witness); and noting your earlier remark to a similar concern on 'Better Health package' as a World Bank Initiative to which you have rendered conceptual clarity, I have the following remarks on the compatibility problem in the AFRO strategies. First, I wish to remind your Excellency that during the Paris meeting of the Bank-sponsored panel, your representative Dr. Elias Lambo ( who came as an observer), expressed and I shared in his concern during the debate, that the Bank concept of 'package' was designed in some substantive respects using the device of “cost-effective catchment population”, to reduce the  number of layers or levels of health interventions. This would in turn, eliminate certain  interventions at the community or health centre level. This measure, when applied to maternal issues, could prove retrogressive as referrals from health centres to the District hospitals let alone from the community to the health centre in the region are real constraints. The point is, what degree of flexibility exists in such packaging technology ? What is the cost assessment of packages? How  can packaging reflect not only the cost factors but the epidemiological peculiarities of each country, regions within countries or indeed special vulnerable populations within each region of a country? In other words , what is the Regional Strategy for Better Health in Afro?

2.                  Your Excellency , I have many more questions specific to your report but I would  be unfair to register them publicly if I have not given you prior opportunity to reflect on them as I did in the case of the above.  I wish to remind you of my closing remarks during my intervention that my questions or comments were directed at three main issues pertinent to the work of Afro: What leadership must be provided at this level as we enter the threshold of the twenty-first century bearing in mind Africa's  poor prognosis on major health and economic indicators ? What systems of accountability must be institutionalised at AFRO to afford confidence building among member countries and other interested partners in initiatives taken by AFRO such as the Africa Health Fund which you and me had opportunity to briefly discuss in Yaounde? And lastly, what capacity exists at AFRO region Office now to construct sustainable partnership for 'Better Health' in the Region today?

My sincere hope, your Excellency, is that you will afford member countries more  opportunity to provide you with feedback on your efforts in less contested times and circumstances than you afforded us during the session in question. I am ready and able to engage you in a systematic dialogue on Health Strategy based both on the conceptual and practical experiences of a member country such as Zambia where we are seriously reconstructing our health field in the interest of our future generations. I wish to state on behalf of my delegation, that our interests is to see greater capacity at Afro that will bring out the best out of a cadre of staff that Africa can boast about.  My belief in the potential that exists at Afro is derived from a comparative assessment of similar resources in other regions of WHO that I have opportunity to interact with. They is no doubt in my mind that our experts at Afro and within member countries across various health sector disciplines, can excel and compete in their quality of products with any other from the rest of the world if a will exists to bring this potential out by those in positions such as you hold.

Your Excellency, I wish once more, to thank you sincerely for the time you took to brief us and hope that my delegation's reactions are consistent with the intentions that underpinned your presentation to delegates on the performance of AFRO.

Yours sincerely

Dr Katele Kalumba, MP

Zambian Delegation to the 47th World Health Assembly

Deputy Minister of  Health,

Government of the Republic of Zambia.