VIOLENT POLICE ACTION

      It is a good principle of justice that no one should be punished beyond what their action deserves. The punishment should be proportional to the kind of crime committed.  The recent level of violence at UNZA did not warrant such police brutality.

      I support the UNZA Senate’s categorical condemnation of “the unruly behaviour of a small number of students and the way in which they harassed their colleagues, disturbed and damaged motor vehicles on the Great East Road.”  Innocent citizens, who are taxpayers, suffered casualties.  But the Senate was also shocked by the “aggressive manner in which the police handled the situation, violating student’s human rights, causing physical harm and unnecessarily damaging property.”

      The behaviour of the police culminated in the premature closure of the university “because they exaggerated the extent of the riot and damage to private property.  They damaged more public property for which they must be accountable.”  The students were unarmed and could find no refuge but in their rooms.  Disgracefully, the students were pursued and brutally beaten.  Could Zambia justify such “excessive police force“ on its innocent citizens?  Such force is only reminiscent of a police state.

      The police brutality inflicted at UNZA students has left the institution with a K40 million debt,  “with a considerable share going towards the repair of 252 students doors.”  In terms of the human suffering caused, the magnitude hardly speaks well of so-called “police professionalism.”

     To give but a few examples, the stories of Tamiwe Mbewe and Inonge, both first year female students, are shocking.  Tamiwe Mbewe, a 23-year old student, suffered a backbone dislocation during the police raid after she was forced to jump from the third floor of student housing (Hostel October 2-27).  The fall coupled with the repeated brutal kicks by the police has left her partially paralysed.  The bitter truth is that Tamiwe might not walk again.

   The story of Inonge is especially shocking.  The police paraded Inonge naked.  Inonge today says, “I am traumatised and humiliated.” Inonge had gone to take a shower in a shower room, but a tear gas canister fired in the nearby room caused her to abandon the shower room.  She had only a towel on her. Unfortunately three policemen grabbed her, removed the towel off her and brutally whipped her with a sjambok. 

    I also talked to a second year Education student.  She said that she was slapped by the police and made to roll in sewage water.  As if that was not enough, she was then taken to Edwin Imboela stadium where she spent a night.  At the stadium, she underwent a dehumanising torture as the police forcefully soaked her in sewer water (together with other students). 

     An Agricultural student I talked to says he doesn’t want to think about all that happened. He feels demeaned by the police: “ I have lost my self-esteem.  I am afraid I might not recover it.  I don’t want to see the police.  They are not people but torturing state machines.”   Ms. Emily Sikazwe, executive director of the well-known NGO Women for Change, was also subjected to the same inhuman treatment, too excessive even for common criminals.   She had gone to the Edwin Imboela stadium to check on police action on students detained at the stadium.  There she was roughed up and severely beaten by police.

                                            CULTURE OF VIOLENCE

     It is shocking that the government has been almost silent about the recent UNZA impasse.  One statement made was by Mr. Peter Machungwa, Minister of Home Affairs, who has justified the police’s battering of students.  The country’s President has made no formal statement whatsoever.    But what does this mean for our country?  Can silence be taken to imply that the government approves the use of the police brutal force?  This is too much for a so-called “Christian nation”!   The silence by the government puts forward an image of Zambia as a “police state.”

    This is a very unhealthy situation for a country that professes to be a Christian nation as well as a nation still struggling to justify her democracy and good governance record.  The police in our country will continue to commit similar crimes in the future provided the government always keeps quiet.  It is indeed a pity that Dr. Machungwa could even publicly approve of the police’s excessive force against the UNZA students.

      Indeed, the police brutality at UNZA has flouted Zambia’s obligation under international law, such as the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as well as the International Convection on Torture.   The MMD government, in Governance: National Capacity Building for Good Governance in Zambia (26 April 2000), had promised that they would “introduce strict disciplinary and supervisory procedures as to restrain or, if need be, remove any officer inflicting torture on any prisoner or detainee; and intensify human rights training for all security/ police officers.”  But recent police action at UNZA raise questions whether the MMD government ‘s actions are louder than the documents they write or sign.

    Is it any wonder that MMD cadres can go scot-free even when they assault people, since the government appears to do nothing to restrain them?  The government has failed to put the Good Governance document into practice. It has failed to rise to both the expectations of the document and the international documents such as the ICCPR. Instead they continue actions that cannot help but promote in Zambia an ever-deepening culture of violence.

STRUCTURAL CAUSES

    The foregoing analysis gives the idea that the whole education sector is in a tottering situation.  In order to arrive at a clear understanding of this situation, one needs to take a critical cognizance of the complex situation surrounding UNZA.  Last year the university closed for four months “just before the scheduled end-of–semester exams, owing to unsatisfactory salary negotiations between the academic staff and management”, as reported by AFRONET in their 1999 Zambian Human Rights Report.

      The sad situation is that the university closures are caused either when student’s demands are not met or when the Lecturers and Researchers demands are not met.   A Commission of Inquiry last year looked into the persistent UNZA closures, and to make recommendations.  We were made to believe that the UNZA closures “would be a thing of the past upon the implementation of the recommendations from the Commission of Inquiry.”   As it was said, last year’s closure was a “closure to end all closures.”

    But was this year’s temporary closure a testimony to the superficial recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry?  In that case the Inquiry might be said to have achieved a “great infinite deal of nothing”!   Or perhaps, was the quick re-opening of UNZA a testimony to the fact that the prolonged UNZA closures are a thing of the past and therefore that UNZA is capable of running smoothly without disturbances to its academic calendar?

     In that case, this year’s temporary closure should be taken as a “momentary aberration.”  In any case, “we shall know a tree by its fruit.”   Then we can only ask, “Is UNZA re-opening to have the same saga replayed?”  or “Is it because all things have been made anew?“

MISTAKEN PRIORITIES

     The root cause of the conflicts at UNZA, I believe, is the MMD government’s lack of capacity to invest in human resources.  In fact, Brig, Gen. Godfrey Miyanda, Minister of Education, has acknowledged that 99% of the problems faced by UNZA are as a result of the government’s meagre resource allocation to the education sector.  Government has always failed to allocate adequate funds to the institutions of higher learning to help ease the severe financial strains that have brought about the deterioration of the learning environment.

     AFRONET, in the 1999 Human Rights Report, reports that the UNZA management last year “submitted a budget of K36 billion to the Ministry of Education, but Parliament only approved K17 billion to be shared between UNZA and Copperbelt University” (p. 29).     The university grant came to about K12.5 billion, a meagre allocation that “was barely enough to pay the net salaries of staff” (ibid).  What is even more shocking is that these grants are never transferred in time, causing serious delays in the payment of salaries.

    Conversely, UNZA fails year after year to honour its obligations to many companies.  Some time ago our national papers carried a report about the gravity of the financial situation of the university.  UNZA apparently owes some companies such as ZESCO, ZSIC and LWSC a total sum of about K36 billion.  This is a horrendous debt burden for an institution that is already ailing. 

    AFFONET also reports that Last year, UNZA management “fought off severe attempts to seize assets by bailiffs sent by companies, which the institution owed money” (30).  But why is there “inadequate resource allocation to education” institutions such as UNZA?  Let us not think it is because the government lacks resources; what the government lacks are priorities.  The “slush fund” attests to government failure to put education as priority in its manifesto.

    This year’s 2000 GRZ budget has allocated a huge sum of money to the “slush fund.”  Or consider last year, UNZA needed k36 billion to meet its basic requirements but received only K12.5 billion.  Yet it is reported that Government spent K100 billion on vehicles, K50 billion on servicing cell phones, and K20 billion for fuel and running cars of senior government officials. 

    To echo the Catholic Bishops Pastoral Statement on Solidarity in the Face of the Country’s Social Crisis (16 June 2000), “It is regrettable that even the meagre resources that are available for the common good and for the benefit of the most vulnerable members of our society are not directed towards priorities that answer essential needs; in other words essential needs are not provided.”

SHORTAGE OF STAFF

      As a result of financial binds, the UNZA offers unattractive career prospects for its workers and lecturers.  This is a major cause of the significant exodus of staff.   Some of the closures the University has faced are as a result of lecturers and researchers asking for a perk in their salaries, for example, during the 1999 UNZA closure.

    The lecturers and researchers were promised salary increments with effect from January 1999, but have to date been paid little of the promised arrears.  As a result, it is estimated that about 15 lecturers left their jobs between May and September alone last year.  No wonder the situation at UNZA remains so pitiable.

    Currently, the number of academic and research staff at UNZA is nearly half the recommended staff establishment for the institution.  As of 31 December last year, there were 292 academic and research staff, as opposed to the recommended staff establishment of 477, (National Monitor of August 4-10).

    The School of Mines had only 23 members of staff instead of the supposed 38 members; the School of Natural Sciences had 72 members of staff instead of the supposed 103 members; the School of medicine had 52 members of staff instead of the supposed 159 members; and the School of Humanities and Social Sciences had 81 members of staff instead of 91 members of staff.

    In addition, the UNZA retirees have not been given their full benefits since they retired.  The government has always said it has no money.  But the question to ask is “How does government explain expenditure of US$ 9 million to renovate Mulungushi International Conference Centre and the Lusaka International Airport as preparation for the 2001 OAU Heads of State Summit?   Or where did the money to pay District Administrators and purchase their vehicles come from if government says it has no money to pay retirees?” (National Mirror, August 5-11).

UNZA’S FUTURE?