|
Government is working on its numbers in Parliament in a plan to repeal Section 65 of the Constitution during the current session of the House.
Uladi Mussa, vice-president of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), on Wednesday said government has support from most MPs in the House. He declined to say the exact day when the bill will be introduced.
“Section 65 contravenes other provisions. It denies freedom of association. [This is] our general concern and the best way is to remove Section 65 because we believe it will improve efficiency and improve leadership and even most MPs in UDF support this move,” said Mussa.
Government has a total of 74 MPs in the House. MCP has 60 the UDF 30. The others are either independent or undecided in the 193-chamber House.
Mussa argued that the section defeats the free spirit of sections 32 and 40.
Section 65 gives powers to the Speaker to declare an MP’s seat vacant after joining another party represented in Parliament other than the one that sponsored him or her. But sections 40 and 32 give individuals freedom to associate or join any other party.
Section 32 says every person has the right to freedom of association, which includes freedom to form associations and Section 40 says every person shall have the right to form, to join, to participate in the activities of , and to recruit members for, a political party.
Leonard Mangulama, the UDF chief whip in Parliament, laughed off Mussa’s claims that they have support from the opposition.
“We have all heard about this bill to repeal Section 65 but we have not seen it in the Business Committee but what is interesting is the claim that they have support. They cannot even manage a simple majority,” he said.
Mangulama said that the DPP has already lost three MPs from the 74 they had on their side during the opening session.
“Honourable [Maxwell] Milanzi [is still UDF], Michael Sato has gone back as opposition independent and [MacJay] Salijen [is not with government]. This is a turning point for them,” Mangulama said.
Last month President Mutharika opened the Constitutional Conference and asked delegates to remove Section 65 because it contravened other provisions.
DPP stands to lose over 17 MPs if the Speaker were to evoke the section.
The Speaker’s personal assistant Henry Kamata said he had not seen any such bill.
“But this does not mean that it is may not come because there are many ways of introducing it like by a private member’s motion and then later a bill,” said Kamata.
The last session was suspended after government got a court injunction against the Speaker and later the President asked the High Court to give its own interpretation of the section using his Presidential Referral powers as the custodian of the Constitution.
When asked that some people fear that if the government succeed to remove the section the DPP will go on an MP-buying spree, Mussa brushed the issue aside, saying the DPP is not in that habit.
“DPP has not bought any MP and will not do that because the section has been removed,” he said.
Boniface Dulani, political analyst from Chancellor College, described the DPP’s intentions as a mockery of the Constitutional Review Conference.
“These intentions make the mockery of the whole Constitutional Review process…Laws should be made to bind the country and not in the interest of individuals,” he said.
The conference held last month looked at the possible review of the presidential age limit and Section 65, among other issues.
Dulani feared that if the DPP succeeds in removing Section 65, it would affect the whole electoral process because it will take away the power that the electorate have on their MPs.
“This section gives power to the people to stop politicians from abusing them [the people] because if you want to join another party you have to go back to them and seek a fresh mandate,” he said.
Parliament is meeting for four weeks.
|
