Aug 30, 10:01 AM
Treason by Design: How Zambia Settled Its Presidential Election
Hakainde Hichilema secures a second term while his main rival faces capital charges and closed courthouse doors.
African elections occasionally yield moments of dark irony, and Zambia’s latest contest is no exception. Incumbent President Hakainde Hichilema secured his second term with 60 percent of the vote against opposition candidate Brian Mundubile’s 38 percent on 13 August. Yet, winning convincingly at the ballot box was apparently not quite enough to settle the matter.
When the opposition sought to contest the results, they ran into a rather pragmatic barrier: on the final day permitted for filing legal challenges, state authorities simply sealed off the courts. Deprived of a judicial audience, Mundubile and his party found themselves targeted by a lethal security raid, accompanied by official accusations that his group was concocting an armed insurgency.
Mundubile and his running mate, Makebi Zulu, sought refuge inside a United Nations facility. That sanctuary proved temporary. Following sustained pressure from the executive branch on international officials, the political refugees were handed over to state security forces. By Saturday night, attorney Milner Katolo confirmed that Mundubile, Zulu, and 16 other associates were facing formal charges of treason.
Katolo indicated that his client intends to contest the allegations in court—assuming, of course, that the judicial doors are unlocked for the defense. Meanwhile, the legal burden of treason provides an effective mechanism to neutralize political friction just as Hichilema prepares for his official swearing-in ceremony on 1 September.
Foreign observers had dutifully noted that election day itself passed off in a largely peaceful atmosphere, as international monitors so often prefer to report. Local human rights bodies offer a less serene narrative. Zambia’s Human Rights Commission has demanded answers regarding citizens whose whereabouts remain entirely unaccounted for following post-election detentions and security operations.
The sequence of events illustrates how state apparatuses can manage political competition with surgical precision. By branding the runner-up an enemy of the state while physically denying him access to election tribunals, the regime ensures a quiet inauguration. Power in Lusaka is preserved, the judicial docket is cleared, and the primary rival faces the gravest charge in the criminal code.
Written by Freya Stensrud freya.stensrud@alpineweekly.com
