Is Mliswa on point on Makandiwa? asks Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri

Mr Tichaona Mupasiri, a member of the 10,000 Points of Light (POL), asked: “Is Mliswa on point on Makandiwa?” in response to Hon Mliswa’s tweets in response to the association between President Mnangagwa and Mr. Makandiwa.

Mupasiri said: “I have been in a small group called Friends of SMM (FOSMM) with Hon Mliswa who is eloquent in his silence but his propensity to sell promote is legendary with his constant and consistent shares of his works in parliament or attacking the conduct of others with opinions that portray an unparralled ego.

Zimbabwe is a divided society and the people who are elected like Mliswa should ordinarily help in building bridges and exposing corruption.

There are far too many of us who are bamboozled by political actors bent on dividing the people to diflect and divert people to look into trivialities rather than the core issues.

Ir is instructive that the august house is daily being abused into some Twitter space yet the umbilical cord that must exist between elected representatives and the people who elected them is exposed for its non-existence when Makandiwa and other faith practitioners become targeted simply because they are followed by willing congregants.

In any constitutional dispensation, consent is the operative word and as such, no rational person would be concerned about the proximity of Makandiwa to President Mnangagwa or not.

Why prejudice do I suffer if President Mnangagwa attends Makanfuwa’s service.

Public power is not the same as private power The true owners of public power are the people and their MPs exist as the conscience of the people in whose name governments exist and operate

I was surprised that when ideas were battling ideas on how best to take the next step after the revelation that Mliswa took the unusual step of admonishing Mr. Collins Charumbira for asking him why he was hypocritical and contradictory on issues related to the constitutional validity of a law that allows rights and freedoms of shareholders to be divested and deprived by an act of state.

On Makandiwa, Mliswa who believes his insights are the best and who thinks being an independent legislator has uniquely qualified him to speak on behalf of the nation.

He, therefore, believes that he alone should have the last say on any issue that comes to his inflated mind.

When history is written on our generation, people like him will always shine tall on the squandered words yet in terms of duscharding duties they were elected to promote and defend, there would be nothing to show for it.

It is astonishing that Mliswa knew and knows that the government of Zimbabwe has actors who are allergic to any accountability yet he would want to subject Makandiwa to tests that he is not willing to use in relation to the President.

Civics illiteracy is pervasive yet Mliswa believes that parliament is an address for eloquence and not a bridge to an open and accountable Zimbabwe.

It is chilling that Mliswa who genius, if any, should be manifested in his works would want to suggest that Makandiwa is not DMART.

Anything not thought and executed by Mliswa is condemned as silly and not smart.

Holding people in public positions and not Makandiwa should be Mliswa’s business.

He should be asking whether the message that a public property like a state President should openly associate with Pastors who seemingly support his incumbency is a breach of his oath.

The constitution is clear and specific that s167 of it gives any person the right to challenge the President on his conduct to establish whether it is consistent or not with his oath.

Mliswa would know if he has been following the FOSMM debates that no one should be above the law hence my application to challenging the conduct of the President.

Like Biti, Mliswa never ceases to amaze me when he pretends that his lonely rants can alter the trajectory of what is yet to happen in Zimbabwe using parliament as a weapon.

The government is manned by persons who need guidance on how best to serve including MPs who believe that it is an address to debate and not to hold the executive for using public power to undermining the rule of law.

Before making any utterances, it behooves on any MP to be alive to test any utterances against their oath of office.

The public is left guessing when no standard is developed and used to test in an independent and impartial manner whether the conduct of a sitting President in openly and transparently associating with Pastors that he can bank on when his competitors are busy borrowing from the bible to increase their political voltage.

The church is apparently open for use by actors who cherish political power alleging that God has ordained the process and outcome.”