Chipenzi Mourns Suspension of UPND MPs

UPND aligned political commentator MacDonald Chipenzi has staged a cyberspace funeral over the suspension of the 48 members of parliament.

Chipenzi formerly of the Foundation for Democratic Process (FODEP) has often sprung to the defence of UPND causes under the guise of civil society advocacy.



Having covered parliament proceedings as reporter for three years, I was surprised to hear the Speaker judge MPs by their political party affiliation.

From the practice, Speaker identifies MPs by their constituencies or members either on the right or left, or back benches and frontbenchers.

In the case at hand, the Speaker judged MPs based on their political affiliation and not on their membership to the National Assembly.

According to the amended National Assembly (Powers immunities and Privileges) Act. No. 13 of 2016 a “member” means any member of the Assembly and includes the Speaker” therefore, when in Parliament, MPs are regarded as members of the National Assembly and not of the sponsoring parties.

This is the principle law as it is defined as “an Act to declare and define certain powers, privileges and immunities of the National Assembly and of the members and officers of such Assembly; to
secure freedom of speech in the National Assembly; to regulate admittance to the precincts of the National Assembly; to give protection to the persons employed in the publication of the reports and other papers of the National Assembly; and to provide for matters incidental to or connected with the foregoing.”

To this end, for the Speaker to categorise the erring MPs based on the party affiliations seems to have gone against the principle act which does not demand that MPs will be disciplined based on party positions and rather than on the breakage of the laws governing parliament.

Under this Act, recognition of the President or boycott of the presidential address are neither offences nor crimes punishable under the law.

I wish to learn something from the gurus why for the first time, Members of the National Assembly were charged for their party decision and not by abrogating the laws of parliament as members of the National Assembly. Why was the Speaker so emphatic on the party affiliation and not on crimes and offences committed under the rules of parliament?


  1. chitamawe

    Does chipenzi imply that these MPs did not err in n way? Y diverting 4rm twisting mataz 2 suit one’s argument. Chipenzi would hv began by acknowledging de fact that the MP’s erred.

    • hummer where it hurts

      The culture of not wanting to know the true is growing like cancer.Many of our learned persons are Adapting street judgement. No wonder they are calling them cadres.

  2. Awa na moyo

    this chipenzi thing thinks anything done by UPND is always good #To be Tonga.

    • truth

      Mr trble sir,how many mps for ions do you know?

  3. Awa na moyo

    Chipenzi if the speaker had charged them on party grounds then all of them could have been affected dont mislead the people.only 48 of them you Tonga thing

  4. clive.

    Please ba Zambia report help heal my country by avoiding to publish anything that has tribal hatred in it. Like the comment ” you Tonga thing” should not have been published.

  5. JANDO

    mekn comments on tribal lines wil not addres our problms o else u shit in yo plate and serv yoself to eat.wen one raise issues of facts,lets admit.

  6. Tom T

    At first he was called electoral expat,now political commentator ? He is journalist of doom McDonald Chimpazi

  7. Moses

    Awe mwe Hope my president will come out sooner ??

  8. TJ

    Nobody gets paid for any period he or she has not worked

  9. Muzo

    If The Speaker Acted On Political Affiliation Grounds,why Were The Other Ten Not Suspended? Ba Ndundumwezi U Ar A Problem Katwishi Ngafisushi Fyafi Moooo… Fyalenga?

Comments are closed.