. Scott

By Austin Kaluba –
IN most developing nations where ordinary citizens do not have much power in governance, referendums are an expression of direct democracy.
Usually referendums are used selectively, covering issues such as changes in voting systems, where currently elected officials may not have the legitimacy or inclination to implement such changes.
Mechanisms of direct democracy are defined as a set of procedures allowing citizens to make political decisions directly through a vote, without the involvement of a parliament or a government.
Recently, Zambians were accorded this opportunity which however slipped through their hands not because it did not receive  affirmation but because of the technicality of the threshold.
According to available statistics from the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), there are 7,528,091 eligible voters and for the referendum to have succeeded, votes had to be at a threshold of 3,764,046.
The total number of votes cast were 3,345,471, out of which 1,853, 559  were “Yes” votes and the “No” votes were found to be 753,549. Rejected votes numbered 739,363.
Understandably, the news that the Referendum to usher the Bill of Rights in the amended Constitution and Article 79 has failed to meet the threshold, is very sad.
However, what is saddest is the semantics of statistics considering that a large number of Zambians voted ‘yes’ and normally their views should be respected despite the number falling short of the threshold.
Whenever a million people say ‘yes’ to something, their views should be respected since that is what democracy is all about.
The semantics of ‘yes’ votes reaching the threshold have somehow marred the citizen’s full enjoyment of the amended Constitution which is now operational.
What the opposition and some section of the community that lobbied for citizens to vote ‘no’ has lost since many citizens have no recourse to the Bill of Rights in the amended Constitution.
Some political parties that have a penchant for opposition, anything coming from the ruling party should have kept politics out of the Referendum whose intended goal was to benefit every Zambian.
The main opposition UPND party initially called for a ‘no’, but then changed its stance to ask its supporters to simply ignore the referendum.
The UPND believed the Bill of Rights is based on a flawed Constitution,  that people know very little about and instead demanded that the referendum should be a stand-alone election.
However, holding a referendum as a stand-alone activity is an expensive and cumbersome exercise.
Organisations like the Grand Coalition for a People-Driven Constitution even called for the referendum to be postponed to a later stage, arguing that the Bill of Rights was much too important to be coloured by the partisan ‘yes’ or ‘no’ atmosphere of the general elections.
This argument can be thrown back to the civil society since if the Bill of Rights was so important, that is the very reason ways should be found for people to access it.
And the just-ended general election was such a platform since it was a cheaper and less unwieldy exercise.
To remind the Zambians, and of course the retrogressive political parties and civil societies, the Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of democracy in any country since it protects the rights of all citizens, and ensures that government does not infringe on these rights.
Here are some of these rights :
Abortions remain practically illegal, as the life of a person begins at conception.
Death sentences remain legal, although they have not been carried out since 1997.
Personal rights: A person has the right to freedom, security, privacy, conscience, belief, religion, expression, access to information, political activities, association, assembly, demonstrate (peacefully), freedom of movement, to own property, employment, choice of language, equality before the law, access to justice and a fair trial. In addition, a person shall not be subjected to human trafficking, torture or degrading punishment, slavery or servitude, required to perform forced labour, held in custody without being charged, and must be brought before a court within 48 hours.
New rights: The Bill of Rights also gives a person the right to healthcare, decent housing, food of an acceptable standard, clean and safe water, decent sanitation, social protection and education. In addition, people now have the right to a safe, clean and healthy environment. These rights are new, and controversial , and former Vice-President Guy Scott was adamantly against them: “They are making a fantasy out of the Constitution. In the Constitution they are saying we want the right to food; that means if you don’t get breakfast you can go to court and say, ‘the government didn’t give me breakfast’,” he said in 2014, when these rights were first suggested.
However, the Bill of Rights also states that the State shall take reasonable measures for the progressive realisation of economic, social cultural and environmental rights, but that the Constitutional Court shall not interfere with a decision by the State concerning the allocation of available resources for the progressive realisation of economic, social, cultural and environmental rights.
The revised Bill of Rights generally includes more rights for vulnerable people:
Women: The Bill of Rights confirms that women and men have the right to equal treatment, opportunities, inheritance, land ownership as well as equal rights in marriage and in reproductive health. It also sets statutory law over customary law, as the Constitution itself specifies that traditional dispute resolution mechanisms shall not contravene the Bill of Rights.
Old  people: Are entitled to participate fully in the affairs of the society, personal development, independent living and social protection.
Children: A child has the right to nationality, birth registration, a name, parental guidance, free primary and secondary education, protection from sexual abuse, harmful ritual acts and to not be forced to marry. In addition, children must not be subjected to corporal punishment or other violence at home, school or institutions.
Youths are entitled to personal development, participation in governance, gainful employment, and to participate in national life.
A person with disability is entitled to education and integration into society.
As things stand, Zambians have to wait for years before they can be afforded another chance to exercise their right by voting in a referendum.
This is sad since a number of them voted ‘yes’ so that they can have enhanced access to the Bill of Rights.