Democracy on Trial: Convention vs Control in Zambia’s Political Landscape
By Michael Zephaniah Phiri Political Activist
The recent political developments in Zambia have exposed a growing contradiction in the country’s democratic space. While one party managed to hold a convention under extremely difficult and restrictive conditions, questions are now being raised by the United Party for National Development (UPND) about its legitimacy, despite their own failure to convene.
At the very least, a convention was held. That alone demonstrates commitment to internal democracy. It is far more commendable than remaining passive while office bearers’ mandates lapse, such as the looming expiry around 13th February 2026. If indeed the ruling party believes in democratic principles, then the expectation is simple: prove it by example.
What is emerging instead is a troubling narrative,one that seeks to paint opposition political parties as disorganized and incapable. Yet this narrative is being constructed in an environment where the opposition is systematically denied space to operate. Since Hakainde Hichilema assumed office, opposition parties have struggled to hold rallies and effectively communicate their manifestos to the Zambian people.
This raises a critical question: is the playing field truly fair?
There is a growing perception among citizens that the current administration’s performance has fallen short of expectations. Public frustration is mounting, and many believe that this dissatisfaction has made it increasingly difficult for the ruling party to secure victory through popular support alone. Consequently, there are fears that suppressing opposition activities and shaping negative perceptions about their organization is becoming a political strategy.
Such tendencies mirror patterns observed elsewhere on the continent. In Uganda under Yoweri Museveni and Benin under Patrice Talon, opposition voices have faced increasing constraints, raising concerns about the erosion of democratic norms.
Further concerns have been raised regarding governance practices, including allegations of nepotism and the perceived lack of neutrality from institutions such as the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ). Incidents that suggest bias only deepen public mistrust and undermine confidence in the electoral process.
However, the opposition must also take responsibility. Internal divisions and prolonged infighting only serve to strengthen the ruling party’s position. The time has come for opposition leaders to rise above personal ambitions and unite behind a single candidate. A fragmented opposition risks not only electoral defeat but also political irrelevance.
The message from the people is becoming clearer: leadership must be earned through performance, transparency, and respect for democratic principles, not through control, suppression, or narrative manipulation.
Zambia stands at a crossroads. The choice is between deepening democracy or drifting toward a system where power is maintained through restriction rather than representation. The responsibility lies with all political actors,but especially with those in power, to ensure that democracy is not only preached, but practiced.