Today’s ruling regarding former President Edgar Lungu’s eligibility for the 2026 Zambian presidential elections has sparked significant controversy across the nation. The Constitutional Court (ConCourt) upheld Lungu’s eligibility for the 2021 elections but has now barred him from running in 2026, leading to accusations of inconsistency and disillusionment among many Zambians. This decision has ignited a heated debate about judicial independence, the clarity of the Constitution, and the concerning precedent it sets for the country.
While the court aimed to tackle a crucial constitutional issue, its ruling has generated more questions than answers. If Lungu was deemed eligible to run in 2021 after serving two terms, how can the same Constitution now deem him ineligible for 2026? Even a child would struggle to understand the reasoning. Critics contend that this ruling was strategically designed to prevent the invalidation of the 2021 general elections. Declaring him ineligible for 2021 could have led to a constitutional crisis, potentially nullifying the election results and throwing the country into turmoil with demands for a new election.
This case has also revealed significant flaws within Zambia’s judiciary. The frequent reshuffling of judges, including the alleged dismissal of three Constitutional Court justices by President Hakainde Hichilema, has raised concerns about the judiciary’s independence. The current bench, which has been restructured with judges reportedly appointed or promoted by the current administration, faces accusations of being used as a political instrument.
This isn’t the first time Lungu’s eligibility has come under scrutiny. The issue has been examined and resolved multiple times, including in the notable Danny Pule & Others, Aubrey Bampi Kapalasa, and Sishuwa Sishuwa cases. Each time, the conclusion was the same: Lungu’s partial term following Michael Sata’s death did not count as a full term. Yet, despite these rulings, the question of eligibility has been reopened again and again, with critics accusing the judiciary of playing to the whims of the Executive.
The UPND’s handling of this case may have been a strategic misstep. By barring Lungu in 2026, the ruling has reignited political tensions and potentially bolstered opposition unity. Some political analysts argue that today’s decision was designed to limit Lungu’s political influence while avoiding the fallout of overturning the 2021 elections. However, this maneuver may have backfired, as it has opened the UPND to accusations of judicial manipulation and undermining democratic institutions.
President Hichilema’s perceived willingness to sacrifice the independence of institutions like the judiciary, Parliament, and the Electoral Commission to achieve political goals has not gone unnoticed. Such actions risk eroding public confidence in Zambia’s democracy, leaving citizens to wonder: if even the highest court in the land cannot be trusted, where does one turn for justice?
The ConCourt’s decision, rather than settling the matter, seems to have marked the beginning of an endless cycle of petitions and counter-petitions. The judiciary’s inability to deliver a clear, definitive resolution has turned it into a circus, running like a headless chicken and drawing widespread criticism. Respect for judicial authority is eroding, as many believe the institution has failed to respect itself.
“Respect the judiciary,” people say. But how can citizens respect an entity that appears to contradict its own decisions and allow itself to be used as a political pawn?
Today’s choreographed ruling has not only complicated Zambia’s political landscape but also reshuffled opportunities in the opposition camp. With Lungu out of the picture for 2026, the race for leadership within the Patriotic Front (PF) has intensified, creating an unpredictable and volatile political environment.
The broader implications for Zambia’s democracy are concerning. The ConCourt’s ruling sets a precedent for revisiting final judgments, which could lead to an endless cycle of litigation over constitutional matters. This erodes judicial authority and creates uncertainty in the political arena, undermining the stability needed for national development.
Zambia finds itself at a critical juncture. The judiciary, once the cornerstone of justice, is now viewed with suspicion. Political leaders must recognize the damage caused by undermining democratic institutions and work toward restoring public trust. For the judiciary, the task is to reclaim its credibility by upholding its independence and delivering judgments free from political interference.
For now, however, the question of Edgar Lungu’s eligibility and the broader issues of judicial integrity and democratic governance remains a cloud hanging over Zambia’s future. The dust has not settled; if anything, it has been stirred up, leaving Zambians to grapple with the consequences of today’s decision.
Moses Haansimuna
Legal Analyst, Political Commentator, Investigative Journalist, Public Affairs Specialist
Austria
The Judgement of the court is clear to all. The nation was at crossroads before this constitutionally based judgement. What is not clear about the court judgement to you Moses Haansimuna??
When one is in power, judgement is in his favour. He loses power judgement is against him. So what if he won the 2021 elections?
Let Lungu and his cadres stay in Chawama. I do not think that they have anything good for the people of Zambia. I am of the view that that those that wish ECL to bounce back are just unhappy that someone who hails from from former North Eastern Rhodesia is no longer in plot one. What is at stake here is the false unit of the Zambian Nation.
Lungu is from Chimwemwe in Kitwe. He was just an MP in Lusaka so his cadres are everywhere
The Constitutional Court was ECL’s creation to achieve enforce his political ambitions and that of the PF. That the monster that they created has swallowed them is beyond their understanding. They have reaped what they sowed!
Shouldnt the ballot decide where he should be whether in Chawama or not? Nifunsako chabe
Where is the hoo-la-baloo, judgement has been delivered and there is no chaos and doomsayers made us believe. ECL is gone and gone for ever. Peace continues in Zambia , praise be to the Almight God.
Done and dusted.
Done not dusted
Done and dusted in your mind only
Thisis African politics at its best
However, this maneuver may have backfired, as it has opened the UPND to accusations of judicial manipulation and undermining democratic institutions.
The ConCourt read the ruling based on what is in the constitution. What has UPND got to do with judicial manipulations? That constitution was signed by ECL and not HH and so where is this bitterness coming from?
Does it really matter who signed the constitution? You always want to choose what to believe in and what to throw away in the Constitution. Congratulations for winning the fight on the opposition.
This government’s legacy will certainly be that of Judicial manipulation. That Chief Justice is a plant. Now he will discreetly sneak in homosexual rights because HH owes him one after this.
“With Lungu out of the picture for 2026, the race for leadership within the Patriotic Front (PF) has intensified,”
Yayi baba dont be in a hurry. This is not football but politricks. Just wait
This judgement is the clearest there has been on this matter: Lungu was eligible in 2021 because the Court at the time said so, even if it was wrong in law. The 2021 elections cannot be affected because they were held under a valid, though not correct, court order. Court rulings have to be respected even if they wrong until they are vacated. Courts of final jurisdiction have power to change their rulings, and they have done so in Zambia. The Court demonstrated that this is the case in other countries across Africa and in major democracies around the world. Mr Lungu has accepted the verdict.
Unbelievable! Ever since the racists hounded Guy Scott to start their looting-express, this judgement was waiting on the horizon. VP Scott would have ended MCS(the genesis of ECL’s nemesis) term with no lacunae, no one ECL started dribbling upon MCS demise with panga-ballots and overrating himself as top-notch legal-mind “he signed the revised constitution blind-folded”, what folly, deadly arrogance…!! The Concourt clearly and CORRECTLY in this particular case, saw “elected and sworn-in twice” as superior to ” two full-terms” – no sangwatutionics!! Lets move on and address the REAL ISSUES – food, energy, health, tribal-politics: REMOVE “TRIBE” FROM NRC!!!
The courts will get rid of Lungu but the people will remove 2H. These people forget very easily that real power is vested in the people not institutions.
DO NOT FORGET THAT LUNGU WAS WORKING UNDUR JUDICIARY AND NOW AS A PRESIDENT, HE WAS ITIMIDATING THEM.