Africa-Press – Lesotho. “The Spirit you received does not
make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.
Romans 8:15 (NIV)
But you belong to God, my dear
children. You have already won a victory over those people because the Spirit who lives in you is greater than the spirit who lives in the world.
1 John 4:4 (NLT)
So, let us start by getting the definitions out of the way. A chattel is defined by any number of dictionaries as, “a personal possession. ” Chattelism, according to the Merriam-Webster
dictionary, is a noun which means two things, (1) either the state or quality of being a chattel or, (2) the treatment of things, or especially persons, as
chattels. One of the major reasons why I resisted taking up the membership of any political party in my adult years is because of the prevailing sentiment of chattelism which has always been apparent
in our partisan politics. I cannot, as a right-thinking, independent-minded, adult human being be dictated to as if I am an inanimate object with no thoughts and feelings about any particular issue.
The chattelism groupthink in our partisan politics is apparent for all to see. It is such a disturbing phenomenon when adults start to accept the infantilization that comes with
being a political chattel. Internal dissenters who refuse to kowtow to chattelism have always been given unflattering pejorative labels like, “lejelathoko”
or “lehanapuso” and they have been historically marginalized and banished to the fringes of their parties where they usually shrivel up and die. We have owners of parties and owners
of constituencies in Lesotho it seems; indeed we have owners of people in our beloved country and it is time we made ourselves clear on the issue lest there
are unnecessary misunderstandings later on. During the COVID-19 lockdown, at a time when Basotho were dying of hunger and civic-minded Basotho and private
companies were handing out food parcels, an MP in one of the urban constituencies caused a commotion by gatecrashing with, “ke eng e ntseng e etsahala lebatooeng lena la ka ke sa tsebe?” Those who already had
their food parcels reportedly took flight. It is dangerous for an MP not to appreciate the parameters of the powers of their office when it comes to public
institutions and the rights of the public within the constituency they serve. My immediate response would be, dear MP if there is any law that we are flouting by handing out food parcels in this constituency without your
knowledge or permission, please sue us, only a court order will stop us. I doubt such a law exists. It would be absurd in the extreme. What interior deficits fuel this need
to own people, political parties and constituencies? Does the MP appreciate that we are equal before God and the law and that all that the MP has been entrusted
with is a specific set of constitutionally defined responsibilities? MPs do not have carte blanche but act within the parameters set by the Constitution
and all relevant subsidiary pieces of legislation. In this context, the MP owns nothing. MPs must not feel entitled to go on ego trips and intimidate the very
people who mandated them in specific ways. What gets my goat is that this happens during an unprecedented public health crisis where tangible delivery is
proving elusive. A pitiable scenario indeed. The notion of the ownership of a political party, a constituency or other humans violates several spiritual,
constitutional, and juristic personality principles. Political parties are body corporates which have a juristic personality quite apart from their members
including the party leaders. Nobody should aim to own these organisations. They are body corporates that are membership based, from the leader to the member at
the grassroots. Every single person, the leader included, subscribes with M1. Every single person has one vote that carries equal weight. Let us, of course, accord the
leaderships of these organisations the respect they deserve, not because they are deities, but because, by virtue of those offices, they are entitled to a
modicum of respect. Similarly, the leaderships of our various parties should not aspire to own us, the members, as respect is a two-way street. The moment
you aspire to own another human being, you have lost respect for them and are in fact dehumanizing them. Only an inanimate object, a thing without, inter
alia, personality, opinions, and self-determination, can be owned. That is why slavery stunk and still stinks. The premise that one can buy and own another human being to do one’s bidding without question is purely
psychopathic. So, I ask again, what is the basis for these statements that some politicians and their minions utter with regularity at rallies, on radio, in conversations, at meetings, about owning parties because they started them? Here is the short answer: there is no legal, moral, or ethical basis for such unconscious statements.
Mothepa Ndumo is a Legal Academic at
the National University of Lesotho, Industrial Sociologist and Certified Executive Coach. www. higherselfcoaching. org
For More News And Analysis About Lesotho Follow Africa-Press
