By Given Mutinta
MAKEBI OUTSHINES MUNDIBILE
Brian Mundubile, one of the Patriotic Front’s (PF) presidential candidates, filed his nomination under a Tonse breakaway external alliance structure before the internal party selection process is done, raising serious questions about his commitment to PF internal democracy and organisational discipline.
Mundibile’s action suggests a willingness to circumvent established PF internal protocol for personal gain or political expediency
In PF democratic politics, the party constitution and regulations serve as the social contract among its members.
When a person such as Mundibile bypasses these foundational rules, it signals his potential predisposition towards treacherous or convenience-driven decision-making, traits antithetical to sound PF governance, and can get Mundibile expelled.
This is a clear indication that Mundibile does not respect the PF processes designed to build consensus within their own organisation because he has no respect for his party’s constitutional processes in spite of being a lawyer.
Makebi Zulu, another PF presidential candidate, exemplifies a principled approach to leadership by deciding to wait for the formal PF conference to elect its standard-bearer.
By prioritising the established PF internal mechanisms, Zulu demonstrates an understanding that legitimacy flows from proper procedure.
This patience and deference to organisational structure are hallmarks of a mature politician who values long-term party stability over short-term opportunism.
In Zambian politics, where building coalitions and having democracy within parties can be unstable, Zulu’s promise to wait for the due process to happen shows that he understands the need for unity that comes from legitimate means.
This adherence to established law within the party context serves as a strong indicator that Zulu would similarly respect national statutes and constitutional mandates if elected president.
A leader who respects the rules when they are inconvenient is a leader worthy of trust.
The distinction between Mundibile and Zulu’s actions has direct implications for their potential performance as president.
A leader who shortcuts internal party rules, as suggested by Mundubile’s reported filing, may be inclined to disregard checks and balances at the national level.
This tendency can lead to executive overreach and the erosion of democratic institutions.
Political science consistently shows that leaders who operate outside established norms, even for ostensibly positive outcomes, often create precedents for instability.
Makebi Zulu’s conduct, however, suggests a commitment to the rule of law.
A president who knows how important it is to follow the established path to power is more likely to govern through established institutions, respecting the independence of the courts, the oversight of Parliament, and the rule of law.
This procedural consistency is vital for national predictability and economic confidence.
Therefore, the manner in which political aspirants navigatez the internal selection process provides crucial data points regarding their character and governing philosophy.
Brian Mundubile’s alleged bypass of PF internal rules contrasts sharply with Makebi Zulu’s commitment to awaiting the formal party conference.
Zulu’s action of adhering strictly to the PF procedural framework positions him as a candidate who values order, internal democracy, and the rule of law.
Such demonstrated principles are not mere political posturing; they are essential precursors to effective, stable, and legitimate national leadership.
Therefore, the procedural rectitude displayed by Makebi Zulu strongly suggests he possesses the necessary temperament and commitment to institutional respect required to serve as a good and reliable president.