News / National
Govt must give Chiefs mandate to deal with moral decadence
22 Mar 2016 at 05:31hrs | Views
Manicaland Senator Anthony Chimhini (MDC-T) has said government must give traditional leaders the mandate to deal with moral decadence that seems to be escalating in the country.
He called for the government to revisit policies that give Traditional Leaders their mandate so that they can effectively deal with issues of moral decadence, environmental pollution and degradation, children's rights among communal communities as well as other incidental issues that they may fall under the purview of the Traditional Chiefs' mandate".
"This is a mouthful and I want to believe that the debate that we held in this august Senate shows the direction we want to go. I think we have done a lot in the debate and what may be required now is to look at the translation of the Constitution. The Constitution has a very clear section on traditional leaders and I will ask, with your indulgence, the section that I think will help us in our debate. Section 282, Functions of traditional leaders, I will only refer to a few sections," he said.
"Clause (d) states that, "in accordance with an Act of Parliament, to administer Communal Land and to protect the environment." It is very clear in the Constitution but at times we get confused when there is competition between the District Administrator's office, the local authorities and traditional leaders but I think the Constitution is very clear. I think our debate should really focus on what is given in the Constitution so that there is no conflict between what the traditional leaders have to do and what the local authorities should do."
He said Section (2) of that 282 and states, "Except as provided in an Act of Parliament, traditional leaders authority, jurisdiction and control over the Communal Land or other areas for which they have been appointed, and over persons within those Communal Lands or areas."
He said this is very clear in the Constitution and I think, anybody in his or her right senses, if we follow this, then there is no confusion in terms of the role of traditional leaders.
"Section (3) states that, "In the performance of their functions, traditional leaders are not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority, except as may be prescribed in an Act of Parliament." Again, this is very clear," he said.
"I really thought that we need to remind ourselves that what we are debating here is within the Constitution. What is required is for us is to implement what is in the Constitution. In doing that, we avoid the confusion where we are fighting with the traditional leaders. They should not be pleading for their rights because it is in the Constitution and it is high time that the Executive allows traditional leaders to do their work as given in the Constitution. When we do that, we will move as a united country."
He called for the government to revisit policies that give Traditional Leaders their mandate so that they can effectively deal with issues of moral decadence, environmental pollution and degradation, children's rights among communal communities as well as other incidental issues that they may fall under the purview of the Traditional Chiefs' mandate".
"This is a mouthful and I want to believe that the debate that we held in this august Senate shows the direction we want to go. I think we have done a lot in the debate and what may be required now is to look at the translation of the Constitution. The Constitution has a very clear section on traditional leaders and I will ask, with your indulgence, the section that I think will help us in our debate. Section 282, Functions of traditional leaders, I will only refer to a few sections," he said.
"Clause (d) states that, "in accordance with an Act of Parliament, to administer Communal Land and to protect the environment." It is very clear in the Constitution but at times we get confused when there is competition between the District Administrator's office, the local authorities and traditional leaders but I think the Constitution is very clear. I think our debate should really focus on what is given in the Constitution so that there is no conflict between what the traditional leaders have to do and what the local authorities should do."
He said this is very clear in the Constitution and I think, anybody in his or her right senses, if we follow this, then there is no confusion in terms of the role of traditional leaders.
"Section (3) states that, "In the performance of their functions, traditional leaders are not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority, except as may be prescribed in an Act of Parliament." Again, this is very clear," he said.
"I really thought that we need to remind ourselves that what we are debating here is within the Constitution. What is required is for us is to implement what is in the Constitution. In doing that, we avoid the confusion where we are fighting with the traditional leaders. They should not be pleading for their rights because it is in the Constitution and it is high time that the Executive allows traditional leaders to do their work as given in the Constitution. When we do that, we will move as a united country."
Source - Byo24News
