By Mwansa Kalumba
State House has said that apprehended former Petauke-Central member of parliament Emmanuel Jay Jay Banda will answer for the charges he faces before a competent court of law.
And State House says only bogus organisations can question the apprehension of Banda, and catalogued his alleged crimes, including urinating in the mouth of a journalist, calling for President Hakainde Hichilema’s assassination and the genocide of the people he hails from.
In a press statement, State House denounced the local and regional civil society organisations concerning the apprehension of Banda.
”The statement contains a fundamental contradiction which its authors must answer. It expressly states that it is not declaring the apprehension unlawful, yet concludes by calling upon the international community to condemn ‘these acts of lawlessness’,” State House Chief Communication Specialist Clayson Hamasaka stated.
He stated that while civil society was entitled to demand transparency, its credibility, however, depended on applying to its own conclusions the same rigour it demands of government.
”It is only bogus organisations that can question the apprehension of a suspect who made a public call for the assassination of a democratically elected Head of State and for the genocidal annihilation of the ethnic group from which the President hails. No genuine human rights defender can excuse such incitement and remain credible,” Hamasaka stated. “We appreciate that civil society organisations must justify continued funding from their financiers, but there is a moral way of sourcing money. Human rights advocacy cannot be reduced to a commercial enterprise in which outrage is manufactured for sale to the highest bidder. Appeals for support must rest on verified facts and consistent principle.”
He questioned where there same concern was for human dignity when Banda committed dehumanising acts of urinating in the mouth of a journalist carrying out his duties.
”At no point did these organisations raise a sustained voice to condemn that alleged act of torture, nor to enquire into the trauma and welfare of the journalist and his family,” Hamasaka stated. “Where was this concern when Mr. Banda is alleged to have raided a police station, assaulted officers in lawful uniform at one of the biggest police station in the country? There was no defence of the rights of those officers or of the sanctity of a law enforcement institution.”
He charged that their selective morality was revealing.
”Their description of Mr. Banda’s broadcasts as merely ‘vulgar’ is wholly inadequate. Alleged calls for assassination and for the elimination of an entire community are threats to human life, not merely offensive political language. If authenticated, they require explicit condemnation and urgent investigation,” Hamasaka stated. “The statement also ignores material questions. Was Mr. Banda lawfully present in the foreign country from which he was apprehended? What, in the view of these organisations, is the lawful means of securing the return of a fugitive who fled prosecution for attempted murder and aggravated robbery and who continued to commit serious offences from abroad?”
He stated that Zambia was a sovereign state governed by the Constitution and the rule of law, and a fugitive did not acquire immunity by crossing a border. Hamasaka stated that cooperation between sovereign states in securing the return of wanted persons to face justice was a legitimate exercise of sovereign responsibility and mutual legal assistance.
”Mr. Banda is in custody and will be presented before a competent court to answer the charges he faces. He will be afforded medical care, access to counsel and family, and all rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Justice will be done according to the law,” stated Hamasaka. “Those who seek to turn a fugitive into a victim and a law enforcement operation into lawlessness should reflect deeply on whose human rights they truly serve.”
