ECL’s Name, No Rules: Inside Tonse Alliance’s Growing Crisis

🇿🇲 VIEWPOINT | ECL’s Name, No Rules: Inside Tonse Alliance’s Growing Crisis

The opposition space is fragmenting in real time, and the cracks are no longer subtle. What was once marketed as a united front under the Tonse Alliance banner is now a contested arena of ego, procedure, memory, and raw political survival. At the center of the latest rupture is a basic question the alliance has failed to answer clearly. Who exactly owns the Edgar Lungu legacy, and by what rules is that ownership exercised.

Zambia Must Prosper leader Kelvin Fube Bwalya, speaking on the Emmanuel Nkhoma Podcast, did not soften his words. He described developments in Tonse Alliance as “fraud,” “imingalato,” and “ubufufuntungu,” arguing that the alliance has abandoned its own rules in the rush to coronate a successor to former president Edgar Lungu.

KBF says his party has formally written to the Tonse Alliance faction led by Dan Pule, demanding that the process of selecting a flag bearer be anchored in clear procedures rather than improvisation

At the core of KBF’s complaint is the undefined nature of the so called ECL Movement. He argues that registered political parties within Tonse have held conferences, adopted constitutions, and elected leadership, while the ECL Movement has done none of this yet enjoys disproportionate influence.

“How can a movement that is not registered have more delegates than registered parties,” he asked, warning that the alliance risks practicing the same illegality it accuses President Hakainde Hichilema of committing.

KBF also directly questioned the authority of Zumani Zimba, accusing him of arbitrarily selecting who represents the ECL Movement. He noted the inconsistency of elevating figures such as Brian Mundubile and Mutotwe Kafwaya, while excluding others widely known to have been close to Lungu, including Makebi Zulu, Mumbi Phiri, Godfridah Sumaili, and Raphael Nakacinda. In KBF’s framing, this is not organization.

It is gatekeeping disguised as consensus.

The historical irony is difficult to miss. The Patriotic Front itself fractured after Michael Sata’s death because succession rules were unclear and power was settled through muscle rather than process. That disorder eventually produced Edgar Lungu, who went on to lose power in 2021 by more than one million votes. Today, the same PF lineage is being repackaged inside Tonse, again without a clear constitutional anchor.

The difference is that now multiple presidential hopefuls are competing to wear Lungu’s memory like a campaign talisman.

Even Mundubile’s own position exposes the contradiction. He has filed nomination papers under Tonse Alliance while insisting publicly that he remains PF. That dual posture reflects a broader opposition dilemma. Everyone wants the moral authority of the PF base and the emotional weight of Lungu’s name, but no one wants to submit fully to a disciplined structure that might limit ambition.

This is not about ideology. It is about control. The Tonse Alliance is becoming a marketplace where legitimacy is negotiated informally, delegates are allocated politically, and rules are invoked selectively. KBF’s warning cuts deeper than personal grievance. Without agreed criteria, transparent representation, and enforceable procedure, the alliance risks collapsing under the very weight of the legacy it is trying to exploit.

The opposition often argues that the ruling party thrives because state institutions are bent to serve power. What KBF is now saying is that Tonse is bending its own rules to serve ambition. This contradiction is not theoretical. It is visible. And unless resolved, it will continue to shrink trust inside the alliance long before voters are asked to trust it with the country.

© The People’s Brief | Editors