— Writes Kelvin Kamayoyo, Zambian Economist and Scholar—
Hostility and unconscionable conduct will just make the Economics Association of Zambia (EAZ) loose the real foundation of its establishment and encounter difficulties in recruiting members to the Association. The recent developments which included change of logo and introduction of very prohibitive membership fees lack the desired membership involvement and inclusive participation of members as required of by an institution created in the manner of EAZ.
The change of the Asociation logo and introduction of new membership fees should have been subjected before the general membership’s deliberation and subsequent approval, if need be. However, as humanbeings we often take advantage of the strength of the will of the people and erroneously think we can decide their destiny unilaterally but more often than not such enjoyment is involuntarily short lived.
Henceforth, it is more compelling now that the interim Executive Committee undertake to face the general membership as the Guarantors had done when they needed the strength of the general membership to foster legitimacy of removing the previous Executive Committee that had outlived its prescribed tenure of office through either consideration of “force majeure or otherwise”. Now with the active involvement of the general membership vis-a-vis to demonstrate adherence to acceptable corporate governance the Guarantors possesed a good locus standi that induced an easy exit of the previous Executive Committee. The decision they took be it individually or severally is commendable and demonstrated their respect for rule of law despite their tenure vividly marred with a double-edged sword.
Notwithstanding the aforesaid, does those charged with holding the institution while in transition for whatever circumstances got the mandate to disregard the fundamental principles of good corporate governance and need to actively engage the general membership on such matters that require general membership approval? It is a question whose rationality is uncontested and such individuals just ought to do the right thing which is respecting the inherent fundamental rights of membership driven organisations or democratic bodies and need for inclusive participation as opposed to unilateral conduct and unconscionable approaches.
Specifically, unilateral conduct and unconscionable approaches have no genuine justification and often times the proceeds of such only accrue to a select few but erodes the institution’s brand loyalty. Therefore a timely and conscious advise is that no matter how much the individual sacrifice or innovations that those in the lnterim Executive Committee make they won’t inspire EAZ members because their efforts lack membership ownership and ultimately makes society to think we don’t know what is expected of us and yet not.
Always endeavour to go back to the general membership and consult them on issues that require general membership’s consideration and approval unlike pursuing unilateral approaches. EAZ is still a viable brand and let us preserve it. Indisputably, increasing the unit price or general membership fees has no positive casual-link to raising the profile of EAZ in society but instead drives existing and or potential members away.
