The Editor Zambia
The latest defence of Archbishop Alick Banda by former diplomat to Germany, Kellys Kaunda, illustrates a worrying tendency in Zambia’s political discourse: the refusal to distinguish between a person’s right to pray and the responsibility of public figures to answer legitimate questions about their political associations and activities.
Here, we are talking of Archbishop Alick Banda with close links to the Patriotic Front (PF), and now Tonse-Pamodzi Alliance, which he has been defending relentlessly as a beneficiary. 
Nobody should be condemned for praying. Equally, nobody, including a senior cleric like Archbishop Alick Banda, should be placed beyond scrutiny simply because criticism of them can be portrayed as an attack on religion.
The central issue is, therefore, not whether Archbishop Banda prayed for Zambia. Of course, he has every right to do so. The issue is whether a religious gathering involving prominent political actors, some like Archbishop Banda at a time when the country was dealing with serious allegations concerning attempts to destabilise the State, can reasonably be discussed without partisan defensiveness.
What Kellys Kaunda should know is that prayer is not a substitute for accountability, and invoking God does not automatically settle factual questions that properly belong to law enforcement and the courts.
Kellys Kaunda shamelessly goes further to dismiss information of military destabilisation as propaganda and challenges the existence of military equipment recovered from individuals connected to the opposition.
There is also an unfortunate attempt to turn criticism of Archbishop Banda into persecution of the Catholic Church.
What Kellys Kaunda should know is that criticising an individual cleric like serial critic of President Hakainde Hichilema and the UPND is not the same as attacking Catholicism.
Archbishop Banda is a public figure (though known for wrong reasons) whose provocative interventions have repeatedly entered the political arena.
That naturally makes his conduct and statements legitimate subjects of public discussion because religious leaders enjoy freedom of expression, but that freedom does not create an exemption from public accountability.
The claim that the Archbishop’s prayers are responsible for Zambia’s peace is laughable and silly because believers are entitled to hold that conviction.
Kellys Kaunda must know that that assertion cannot be converted into a political argument that those who question the cantankerous Archbishops like Banda are somehow spiritually blind or enemies of God.
Zambia’s peace is the product of many factors, including responsible citizens, institutions, security services, political leaders, and communities that have repeatedly chosen restraint over violence.
Most importantly, nobody, including Archbishop Alick Banda or any other bishop, should weaponise religion in defence of political positions, especially personal views.
In conclusion, Kellys Kaunda should know that faith deserves respect, but faith must never become a shield against accountability.
