but the same court which is now weaponised by HH ruled that ECL was eligible in 2021. and in 2026 and future he is not eligible. can't you use common sense for once?
@@YeboLubutoChulu no, I do not agree with you and it's not complex. Lubinda abused justice system when he was justice minister under PF. He is the one who influenced 3 concourt ruling in favour of ECL, and also wanted to amend some laws in our constitution to suit his political ambitions. Please do not believe what he says, he is the cause of all this debate on ECL eligibility
Why can't PF just organize themselves in unity and put a leader through party elections and get rid of individual based politics, encourage the former president to support the new candidate As a democratic country we need the country to put government to checks and balances other than concentrating on an individual
Given Lubenda is always misleading in terms of the way he comes out remember the issues of Bill 10,the issue of Mps who over stayed in office,even pro 2021 elections he was saying that after the elections he'll be saying banyala now supporting what he himself knows very well that the constitution which ashard ECL into office was the 1991 constitution which states that twice elected and twice sworn in that's all now why does he want the court to decide that ECL is eligible based on the constitution which he signed after becoming president ?
This man Lubinda has never in his life defended the Zambian constitution, was he not one of the minister who deliberately chose to break the law by staying in office when cabinet was dissolved? He should be the last one to complain.
For me, It's just how that you "the opposition" are free to walk in any media house and debate without fear... If you ask me, after upnd are no longer in power, I would surely say they brought freedom of speech...❤
The problem with politicians, especially in Africa, is that they lack honesty, decency, and consistency, PF brought about this vicious cycle of interference in the judiciary. Now, they want to cry the loudest against the same weapon they created.
Answer voted twice and sworn in twice.that is the issue here.were tterms not completed.John sangwa said it that ecl was not eligiible.he is vindicated.
He is not wise he's just arrogant pf is devided into three fuctions and your wise vice president is saying there are no fuctions meanwhile one of the groups is holding a certificate of registration if someone is holding a certificate gotten from a legal issuing body
The difference is that in 2021 the court omitted the provision of amendment act 1 of 2016 which states that the constitution for all purposes of the amendment act 1 of 2016 refers to the constitution of Zambia 1991 and that constitution states that a term is any period served by a president until the next election. The 2015_16 term was served under the 1991 constitution and so that term counts as one term. The constitution was amended in 2016 but the law does not apply retrospectively.
I think the judiciary in Zambia should be made free and independent , this will make judges to choose among themselves to bring in speaker of Parliament...
A person shall hold office twice, two terms, 10 years and not more. If Edgar Lungu is allowed to stand again and wins, it will mean that he will be in office for more than 10 years. The fact that the court reviewed this matter 3 times, it means they knew his was not eligible. They only allowed him to stand because he was president. Let PF choose another person to stand and let lungu rest.
That's why to be fair, technically ECL is eligible but only for 3 years! Not more. Then he will have ruled for 10 years. UPND are happy forgetting that the same can happen to them. If the president dies 3 months to finishing his term, (God forbid)will Veep accept that she has ruled the country for a full term after just 3 months? These politicians are always shooting themselves in the foot.
It seems that most people debating this case are not talking about the legal principle of retrospective effect. The 2016 constitutional amendment cannot be applied backwards, that's were the error was made.
From Mr Lubinda's statements,the difference is the new faces meaning it's possible ECL was favored then right bcz they were ok with the then judgement. I wish he debated stating the article from the constitution that say elected twice, sworn in twice and held office twice and not the rulings that were made🙏
The Seven Judges clearly stated that ECL was only eligible in 2021 because the Court said he was in error. If the Court said he was eligible in 2021 whether in error or not he was eligible. Once the same court comes back and says they made an error, and they even explained the error that was made in interpreting the classification of his first term, then correct their error and say he is not eligible, he becomes not eligible no matter what you say. This was John Sangwa's position too, he maintained that ECL was not eligible but once the court said, he clearly stated that ECL was eligible because the court said so. The error that was in 2021 was to declare his first term as not being a term, but this time around they explained which law should be used to classify the first term.
When he said our Constitution document has Laguna we all raised in anger and said the document is absolute. But now we are seeing plainly how the absolute document is making these leaders argue absurdly. The document needs amendments! Sworn in twice or elected twice... had he been elected would he have just saved the remainder of the disputed term? PF did deliberately a lot of things hoping that Zambians will continue being gullible and then the tides change. They are being dealt with there own bitter medicine.
I strongly believe that the whole purpose of this interview was designed to push Hon. Lubinda to reveal Plan B. But Lubinda is more intelligent than Costa X10
Political and Public discourse about the 2016 constitutional amendments. Critics argue that Edgar Lungu's approach to the 2016 constitutional amendments may have been influenced by a desire to extend his tenure as president. Here are some key points that support this view, particularly regarding the definition of the term of office: 1. The "Third Term" Controversy Lungu argued that his first term (2015-2016) did not count as a full term because he assumed office following the death of President Michael Sata and only served the remainder of Sata's term. The 2016 amendments introduced a clause that defined a term as serving at least three years of a five-year presidential term. This legal interpretation allowed Lungu to stand for re-election in 2021, despite opposition claims that this constituted a third term. 2. Strategic Constitutional Changes Some analysts argue that the amendments were designed to create ambiguities that could be exploited. For instance, the timing of the amendment and Lungu's subsequent legal battles to run in 2021 suggest a deliberate effort to maximize his time in office. 3. Lungu’s Public Statements Lungu was vocal in defending his eligibility, often stating that he would respect the Constitution but also challenging those who opposed his re-election bid. This dual stance fueled speculation about his long-term intentions. 4. Weakening Democratic Norms Critics argue that while the amendments included progressive elements, such as the 50%+1 rule and the Constitutional Court, Lungu’s administration may have used these reforms to solidify power rather than strengthen democracy. For example, his critics pointed to alleged political interference in the judiciary, particularly the Constitutional Court, which ruled in his favor regarding the term limit issue. 5. Historical Parallels Zambia’s history includes leaders attempting to extend their rule (e.g., Frederick Chiluba’s failed third-term bid). Some viewed Lungu's actions as part of this pattern, raising fears of democratic backsliding. While Lungu ultimately lost the 2021 election to Hakainde Hichilema, this debate remains a significant chapter in Zambia’s political history, reflecting concerns about the balance between constitutional reform and political ambition.
He was eligible in 2021 but not in 2026 , reason court said, because of the courts mistake they had to made that is why he was eligible now the judgement it has changed. uwawa tabula kabepesho, there is no plan B but threatening the nation nama propaganda fipobosa fyekafyeka fi pf
Given Lubinda is trying too hard to spin. The judgement is clear and straightforward. All the questions Given is raising were answered in that judgement. He is obviously pandering here.
Wanyala and his bitter team should or must have discussed this matter in court and not outside the judicial system. Zayelo should have gone to court. Judges are not politicians and can't be expected to appear on this forum.
I think these are the people who are making the life of former president,Edgar lungu to be tough and in chaos.Edgar lungu might be a good leader but the people surrounding him i think they are after there interest.Given Lubinda you should stand if you want PF to rule,kaili the party has got the same goals and manifestos regardless of who stands.Stop misusing Mr lungu for your own interests,if you want power just stand!
Can Lubinda answer the question, "did Mr. Lungu's period in office from 2015 to 2016 constitute a term of office? The answer to this question is the crux of the matter.
@misumbidickson266 which part of the constitution (before 2016) defined a term as 5 years? In my understanding, a term was not defined but it was strict that as long as you've been sworn in, then that counts as 1
I have no doubt Given lubinda is a big problem in our Zambian politics and being justice minister during PF, he had his dirty hands in manipulating our justice system and that is why we are here still discussing the constitution which directly and self interpretaly on presidential limit. This guy abuse the justice and he need to be investigated and tried for the abuse of law for his political interests.
ECL before the 2021 elections threatened the judges not to judge to the contrary in line with the Kenyan courts that ruled against the then incumbent Uhuru Kenyatta.
The mistake that was made in the previous judgment was that article 106/3 of 2016 constitution was applied retrospectively. The constitution that was in effect when Ecl was voted into office in 2015 was the 1996 one in which through article 35 qualifies the period between 2015 and 2016 that Ecl held office as a full term.
Parliament must amend the constitution that allows president to appoint judges and let the citizen to vote for them so that they are answerable to the people who voted for them
The problem with this suggestion is that, we only know politicians because they campaign but judges are not politicians they ain't built to campaign, how are we going to know the judges to vote for?
we wasting our time, we all know what happened here, its happened before, Pf just had a taste of their own medicine! the fact is whichever govt is in power runs the judiciary, PF should not complain about this, it is the result of their own past actions
In Zambia constitution court in Zambia is the highest on constitution matters my question to Given lubinda where he said they will go back to the same court what will happen should constitutional court throws out their appeal because this is the most likely. I think Lubinda is wasting time on a none starter matter instead of re organizing themselves for 2026 election which is just around the corner.
Let the media stop talking about the issue which is already dealt with by the competent courts of law. Lubinda has nothing to offer. Which Pandora box is he talking about and how is it going to be opened and by who. PF under ecl is dead which is unfortunate
Lubinda should discuss the substance of the case as opposed to discussing the power of the court to revisit the case. If the court's earlier judgement was faulty or erroneous, that cannot be sustained forever in a well-functioning judicial system. "'The proof of the pudding is in the eating"
It was wrong Judgements in the past because Judges were threatened not to judge properly. It's correct now because the judgement is not interfered with
Its GOOD we have knowledgeable and informed people like Given Lubinda.. Sense
20:30 in the 3 previous cases ECL was president and weaponised the same court
that means that court has no spine, it is influenced by politicians
but the same court which is now weaponised by HH ruled that ECL was eligible in 2021. and in 2026 and future he is not eligible.
can't you use common sense for once?
Loop holes in the same law
Lubinda is agreat man of great vision
The problem here is the Judiciary.We the people are slowly losing trust in them.
Their interpretation of the law depends on who appointed them. Zero professionalism.
Lubinda's argument is making a lot of sense
What is that argument 😂😂😂 didn't ECL held or sworn in twice?
So then how was he ELIGIBLE in 2021 and what would have happened IF he had won 2921 elections
@@phillipmwamba741 you and I agree, sir, that it's far more complex than that.
@@YeboLubutoChulu no, I do not agree with you and it's not complex. Lubinda abused justice system when he was justice minister under PF. He is the one who influenced 3 concourt ruling in favour of ECL, and also wanted to amend some laws in our constitution to suit his political ambitions. Please do not believe what he says, he is the cause of all this debate on ECL eligibility
Lubinda trying by all means impress his boss the case is closed bwana let lungu rest@@phillipmwamba741
Why can't PF just organize themselves in unity and put a leader through party elections and get rid of individual based politics, encourage the former president to support the new candidate
As a democratic country we need the country to put government to checks and balances other than concentrating on an individual
kaya , but that can make sense
PF was Sata and Sata was PF.This is my view,pf have no stable and no future leadership in it due to blinded mindset with corrupted thinking
Given Lubenda is always misleading in terms of the way he comes out remember the issues of Bill 10,the issue of Mps who over stayed in office,even pro 2021 elections he was saying that after the elections he'll be saying banyala now supporting what he himself knows very well that the constitution which ashard ECL into office was the 1991 constitution which states that twice elected and twice sworn in that's all now why does he want the court to decide that ECL is eligible based on the constitution which he signed after becoming president ?
This man Lubinda has never in his life defended the Zambian constitution, was he not one of the minister who deliberately chose to break the law by staying in office when cabinet was dissolved? He should be the last one to complain.
For me, It's just how that you "the opposition" are free to walk in any media house and debate without fear... If you ask me, after upnd are no longer in power, I would surely say they brought freedom of speech...❤
Honorable Lubinda you are great
Honorable you know how to elaborate the law well sir. We will wait and see patiently ...
I wonder one thing,why was it ok for the court to review its decision 3 times before and it is not ok for this one now?
Mr Linda kindly stand on PF
😂😂😂 yama, read the constitution on the qualifications for presidency?
Lubinda does not qualify to be Zambian president according to the constitution
He could but as usual looking hypocritically at one man
He didn't even qualify to stand in 2021
He's a junkie
Indeed you are, Hon. Former minister of Justice, sir.
They indicated the reasons for the change in judgement.
The problem with politicians, especially in Africa, is that they lack honesty, decency, and consistency, PF brought about this vicious cycle of interference in the judiciary. Now, they want to cry the loudest against the same weapon they created.
And soon UPND shall cry about the same if one will have to finish someone's term, ruling just for a few hours.😂
Mr lubinda you are speaking sense sir
Answer voted twice and sworn in twice.that is the issue here.were tterms not completed.John sangwa said it that ecl was not eligiible.he is vindicated.
Given Lubinda is a very intelligent man and would probably make a better president than HH. Costa has a preconceived position defending the concourt
I wish Given Lubinda was a lawyer not a junk that he is! He has proved to be headless and dull to say the least!
Given lubinda understands the law very well....these are people we need sir continue doing the good work✅
Mr lubinda you are brilliant
Very wise vice president
He is not wise he's just arrogant pf is devided into three fuctions and your wise vice president is saying there are no fuctions meanwhile one of the groups is holding a certificate of registration if someone is holding a certificate gotten from a legal issuing body
Great man wise
The difference is that in 2021 the court omitted the provision of amendment act 1 of 2016 which states that the constitution for all purposes of the amendment act 1 of 2016 refers to the constitution of Zambia 1991 and that constitution states that a term is any period served by a president until the next election. The 2015_16 term was served under the 1991 constitution and so that term counts as one term. The constitution was amended in 2016 but the law does not apply retrospectively.
Mr. lubinda is asking Valid question
Costa you have found the person that knows the law and know what he's arguing about..I love the knowledge of given has 🎉🎉
Lungu was never disqualified but just reminded that he served 2 terms and he is not eligible for 3rd term..
CORRECT!!! Nothing less, nothing more.
The man we're telling all these is dull he can't even stand up for him self as the candidate
Lol couldnt have said it better
Spot on!
I think the judiciary in Zambia should be made free and independent , this will make judges to choose among themselves to bring in speaker of Parliament...
A person shall hold office twice, two terms, 10 years and not more. If Edgar Lungu is allowed to stand again and wins, it will mean that he will be in office for more than 10 years. The fact that the court reviewed this matter 3 times, it means they knew his was not eligible. They only allowed him to stand because he was president. Let PF choose another person to stand and let lungu rest.
They did things and made decisions thinking Zambians will always be gullible... Otherwise, they're running out of time to pick a new leader.
That's why to be fair, technically ECL is eligible but only for 3 years! Not more. Then he will have ruled for 10 years. UPND are happy forgetting that the same can happen to them. If the president dies 3 months to finishing his term, (God forbid)will Veep accept that she has ruled the country for a full term after just 3 months? These politicians are always shooting themselves in the foot.
It seems that most people debating this case are not talking about the legal principle of retrospective effect. The 2016 constitutional amendment cannot be applied backwards, that's were the error was made.
Lubinda is so intelligent
Lubinda is not so intelligent
In a world of idiots
From Mr Lubinda's statements,the difference is the new faces meaning it's possible ECL was favored then right bcz they were ok with the then judgement. I wish he debated stating the article from the constitution that say elected twice, sworn in twice and held office twice and not the rulings that were made🙏
Mr Lubinda forget ECL , just stand yourself.
If PF was a Democratic Party it would have held the party convention the moment aspiring candidates paid K200,000 nomination fees.
Very much sense from your speaking atleast someone gets to understand whatever is going through in this our country
Please let us know the details of which lead the petitioner to appeal
Lubinda you are feeling it now
The Seven Judges clearly stated that ECL was only eligible in 2021 because the Court said he was in error. If the Court said he was eligible in 2021 whether in error or not he was eligible. Once the same court comes back and says they made an error, and they even explained the error that was made in interpreting the classification of his first term, then correct their error and say he is not eligible, he becomes not eligible no matter what you say. This was John Sangwa's position too, he maintained that ECL was not eligible but once the court said, he clearly stated that ECL was eligible because the court said so. The error that was in 2021 was to declare his first term as not being a term, but this time around they explained which law should be used to classify the first term.
And I think Costa was not prepared enough to handle this interview.
@@TheWizardQyou are right
This is incredible explanation Sir Mr Given you are actually ploughwing deep sir extremely exerllent
The level of bitterness against HH is worrying. Every presidency has tenure. Accept it and move on. I feel sad for Bo Lubinda
When he said our Constitution document has Laguna we all raised in anger and said the document is absolute. But now we are seeing plainly how the absolute document is making these leaders argue absurdly. The document needs amendments!
Sworn in twice or elected twice... had he been elected would he have just saved the remainder of the disputed term? PF did deliberately a lot of things hoping that Zambians will continue being gullible and then the tides change. They are being dealt with there own bitter medicine.
This man is vested with wisdom I mean these are big machines ❤
Oh my God!
😂 Mr.Lubinda the game is over.
Arrogant even in opposition, I can't imagine that.
Imagine,a seemingly brilliant fellow deciding to be misleading,lawless and criminal
Imagine the things they use to do when they were in power??
So arrogant this lubinda guy
Lubinda Why do he stand himself
If really want to save PF as a party
He's a Chola boy 😂
He's a Chola boy 😂
What do you expect from PF? They're crying babies now
Mmmmmmm we are in safe hands mr lubinda has knowledge
Mr lubinda are sure during the previous govt there were no one abusing to their powers thats a big lie honorable
Lubinda you are right
I strongly believe that the whole purpose of this interview was designed to push Hon. Lubinda to reveal Plan B. But Lubinda is more intelligent than Costa X10
Political and Public discourse about the 2016 constitutional amendments.
Critics argue that Edgar Lungu's approach to the 2016 constitutional amendments may have been influenced by a desire to extend his tenure as president. Here are some key points that support this view, particularly regarding the definition of the term of office:
1. The "Third Term" Controversy
Lungu argued that his first term (2015-2016) did not count as a full term because he assumed office following the death of President Michael Sata and only served the remainder of Sata's term. The 2016 amendments introduced a clause that defined a term as serving at least three years of a five-year presidential term. This legal interpretation allowed Lungu to stand for re-election in 2021, despite opposition claims that this constituted a third term.
2. Strategic Constitutional Changes
Some analysts argue that the amendments were designed to create ambiguities that could be exploited. For instance, the timing of the amendment and Lungu's subsequent legal battles to run in 2021 suggest a deliberate effort to maximize his time in office.
3. Lungu’s Public Statements
Lungu was vocal in defending his eligibility, often stating that he would respect the Constitution but also challenging those who opposed his re-election bid. This dual stance fueled speculation about his long-term intentions.
4. Weakening Democratic Norms
Critics argue that while the amendments included progressive elements, such as the 50%+1 rule and the Constitutional Court, Lungu’s administration may have used these reforms to solidify power rather than strengthen democracy. For example, his critics pointed to alleged political interference in the judiciary, particularly the Constitutional Court, which ruled in his favor regarding the term limit issue.
5. Historical Parallels
Zambia’s history includes leaders attempting to extend their rule (e.g., Frederick Chiluba’s failed third-term bid). Some viewed Lungu's actions as part of this pattern, raising fears of democratic backsliding.
While Lungu ultimately lost the 2021 election to Hakainde Hichilema, this debate remains a significant chapter in Zambia’s political history, reflecting concerns about the balance between constitutional reform and political ambition.
He was eligible in 2021 but not in 2026 , reason court said, because of the courts mistake they had to made that is why he was eligible now the judgement it has changed. uwawa tabula kabepesho, there is no plan B but threatening the nation nama propaganda fipobosa fyekafyeka fi pf
Given Lubinda is trying too hard to spin. The judgement is clear and straightforward. All the questions Given is raising were answered in that judgement. He is obviously pandering here.
Wanyala and his bitter team should or must have discussed this matter in court and not outside the judicial system. Zayelo should have gone to court. Judges are not politicians and can't be expected to appear on this forum.
Lungu's resistance to stepping down is so worrisome
I think these are the people who are making the life of former president,Edgar lungu to be tough and in chaos.Edgar lungu might be a good leader but the people surrounding him i think they are after there interest.Given Lubinda you should stand if you want PF to rule,kaili the party has got the same goals and manifestos regardless of who stands.Stop misusing Mr lungu for your own interests,if you want power just stand!
Encourage the old man to retire. He did his fair share of destruction to the country. We can't go backwards.
Can Lubinda answer the question, "did Mr. Lungu's period in office from 2015 to 2016 constitute a term of office? The answer to this question is the crux of the matter.
Isn't a term supposed to be 5 years?
@misumbidickson266 which part of the constitution (before 2016) defined a term as 5 years? In my understanding, a term was not defined but it was strict that as long as you've been sworn in, then that counts as 1
he answered and you know what the constituition says
That was wrong jmnt
Didn't the ConCourt say that they didn't take the repealed Article 35 into consideration when delivering the previous 3 judgements?
Even Costa didn't first study the judgement before engaging in this conversation, reasons were given but he is smiling incompetently 😊
Costa if he says the judgment was influenced then what are they saying about the judgment given in thier favor during their time in office!
Good point, the same court broke the law during the petition but they were happy bcuz it benefited them.
Weldone lubinda very wise man keep it up, fight for pf we are with you our votes are yearning for for 2026 to remove HH
HH is winning 2026 election again
Amen
Keep yearning till 2031
I have no doubt Given lubinda is a big problem in our Zambian politics and being justice minister during PF, he had his dirty hands in manipulating our justice system and that is why we are here still discussing the constitution which directly and self interpretaly on presidential limit. This guy abuse the justice and he need to be investigated and tried for the abuse of law for his political interests.
Given Lubinda and Nakachimba are the two playboys who misled sleeping ECL.
Powerful
And for your own information, not even the real top pf officials want Lungu
Absolutely
Are you mad chikala????? What do you know about pf???
Costa u are a good interviewer but the only challenge is that u don't give time to the people u are interviewing to express themselves.
Judges Charles Zulu and Jushua Banda were dismissed by ECL in 2018, a lot of Zambia Police personnel were dismissed etc, Mr Lubinda is not sincere.
Costa good question because the president is the commander in chief and has special powers to appoint and fire officials appointed by him
This is just drama and not a rulling
ECL before the 2021 elections threatened the judges not to judge to the contrary in line with the Kenyan courts that ruled against the then incumbent Uhuru Kenyatta.
The mistake that was made in the previous judgment was that article 106/3 of 2016 constitution was applied retrospectively. The constitution that was in effect when Ecl was voted into office in 2015 was the 1996 one in which through article 35 qualifies the period between 2015 and 2016 that Ecl held office as a full term.
Parliament must amend the constitution that allows president to appoint judges and let the citizen to vote for them so that they are answerable to the people who voted for them
The problem with this suggestion is that, we only know politicians because they campaign but judges are not politicians they ain't built to campaign, how are we going to know the judges to vote for?
Woow lubinda we love you am with you
Surprised to learn the former minister of Justice doesn't understand what is known as "persuasive authority" and "Binding Authority".
we wasting our time, we all know what happened here, its happened before, Pf just had a taste of their own medicine! the fact is whichever govt is in power runs the judiciary, PF should not complain about this, it is the result of their own past actions
Super leader
In Zambia constitution court in Zambia is the highest on constitution matters my question to Given lubinda where he said they will go back to the same court what will happen should constitutional court throws out their appeal because this is the most likely. I think Lubinda is wasting time on a none starter matter instead of re organizing themselves for 2026 election which is just around the corner.
IS COSTA'S INTERVIEW AN INTERVIEW OR A DEBATE?
Let the media stop talking about the issue which is already dealt with by the competent courts of law. Lubinda has nothing to offer. Which Pandora box is he talking about and how is it going to be opened and by who. PF under ecl is dead which is unfortunate
Hon lubinda 👏👊💪 salute you
Please I need a power bank
Lubinda should discuss the substance of the case as opposed to discussing the power of the court to revisit the case. If the court's earlier judgement was faulty or erroneous, that cannot be sustained forever in a well-functioning judicial system.
"'The proof of the pudding is in the eating"
We didn't have anyone abuse power??? when PF was in power
It was wrong Judgements in the past because Judges were threatened not to judge properly. It's correct now because the judgement is not interfered with
When you are lying to yourself and believe your own lies.
ba lubinda you are butter remember how you where treating opposition
Case law does not override the law🧐But play reference
All these people what ever ECL gave them but sirely they were benefiting just how to insist on one man like this ba given one would be dispointed.
In Zambia we still have wise politicians, hon Given lubinda very wise submissions
So you want it to go to the Supreme court?
Hard Rock😂😂😂 sir
Someone want to answer the question and busy asking another question 🤔
Exceptional sucumstances what guys
Selfishness & bitterness in one person a cadre for ECL Given Lubinda😂😂😂😂
He didn't dismiss any because they adjudicated in his favor.
Great man
Plan B will be told when the right time comes
It's cold outside government.. PF members are bitter
It’s funny how we understand different.
Ba PF the best for you is to go for a convention. Not just appointing members unilaterally. You have created confusions coz of your shortcuts.
Lubinda you are a break away from pf with your friends.You have no party to stand on