The Smiling Strategist or Dividing General?

What Does Emmanuel Mwamba Really Stand For?

By Dr. Mwelwa

Every political moment produces its own narrators. Some narrate to illuminate. Others narrate to dominate the conversation. And a few narrate to test the waters—careful not to commit, eager to influence outcomes without bearing responsibility for them.

Ambassador Emmanuel Mwamba’s EMV platform began as a welcome intervention in Zambia’s shrinking democratic space. At its birth, it was hailed as a channel of courage—a voice for those silenced, a refuge for dissent, a megaphone for opposition unity. Many saw it as a necessary counterweight to state power, a platform that would interrogate authority and amplify the people.

But platforms, like swords, reveal their true nature not by how sharply they are forged, but by where they are pointed.

Today, EMV raises uncomfortable questions—not about government alone, but about the opposition itself. And that is where the dilemma begins.

Sun Tzu warned: “If you use spies, do not let them become generals.” In politics, this translates to a simple truth: influence without accountability is dangerous. When a platform becomes powerful enough to shape alliances, destroy trust, and redefine leadership legitimacy, the question is no longer about free speech—it is about responsibility.

So what, exactly, does Emmanuel Mwamba stand for?

He smiles with colleagues on camera, praises them as brothers in struggle, and then—sometimes in the same breath—subjects them to withering critique that weakens their public standing. Is this strategic honesty? Or is it friendly fire disguised as analysis?

The Bible cautions us: “Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but deceitful are the kisses of an enemy” (Proverbs 27:6). The problem with EMV is not criticism—criticism is essential in democracy. The problem is direction. To what end is the criticism deployed? Toward reform and unity, or toward fragmentation and personal positioning?

One cannot escape the central contradiction: EMV claims to build the opposition, yet repeatedly places its sharpest spotlight not on state power, but on opposition leaders—especially those with presidential ambitions. Is this coincidence, or calculation?

Mwamba himself is a declared presidential contender, albeit in ex!le. He cannot campaign on the ground. He cannot test his appeal in Kang’ili, Nshinso, Nkulumashiba, or Matuku. He does not board minibuses in Lusaka, queue at City Market, or feel the daily pulse of survival politics. And yet, from afar, he speaks with certainty about who is relevant, who is misguided, who is strategic, and who must be resisted.

Sun Tzu again reminds us: “A general who commands from the rear without seeing the terrain will misjudge the battle.” Can one accurately arbitrate opposition legitimacy without sharing the risks, constraints, and ground realities of those inside the arena?

Another troubling question emerges: Is EMV a platform, or a political instrument? Platforms ask questions and let the audience decide. Instruments push outcomes. Increasingly, EMV feels less like a mirror and more like a lever—applied selectively.

Why do some opposition figures receive sustained scrutiny while others are treated with restraint? What criteria governs who is interrogated and who is affirmed? Is there an underlying strategy, or are we witnessing ideological improvisation?

Mwamba often speaks the language of principle, yet principles demand consistency. You cannot condemn factionalism while amplifying factional narratives. You cannot decry division while hosting conversations that deepen suspicion and rivalry. Christ himself warned: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation” (Matthew 12:25).

The opposition does not need a firing squad disguised as a think tank. It needs a compass.

There is also the unresolved question of alignment. EMV often sounds like a man tasting the political waters—testing multiple futures without committing to any. Is this prudence, or paralysis? Is it wisdom, or fear of backing the wrong horse?

In war, indecision at the top is fatal. In politics, it is corrosive. Followers do not demand perfection; they demand clarity.

So we must ask plainly:
Is EMV building a shared opposition vision—or auditioning for relevance in every possible outcome?
Is it correcting errors—or weakening contenders?
Is it guided by conviction—or by calculation?

None of these questions deny Emmanuel Mwamba’s intellect, experience, or past service. But leadership is not measured by brilliance alone. It is measured by what you strengthen and what you leave broken behind you.

The opposition’s greatest enemy is not disagreement—it is distrust. And any platform that multiplies distrust must reflect deeply on its mission.

In the end, history will not ask how sharp the questions were. It will ask whether the questions helped a people move forward—or merely entertained them while unity slipped away.

As Scripture reminds us: “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:16).

The time has come for Emmanuel Mwamba—and EMV—to answer the hardest question of all:

Are you here to build the house, or to test which walls will fall first?

As Long as you are in America Shut up ! Will you

Lily Mutamz Tv

🇿🇲 ANALYSIS | Miles Sampa, the Law, and the Performance of Victimhood

Miles Sampa’s last night appearance on Diamond TV was a good performance. It was shaped for an election season where emotion often outruns evidence. Every line of his claims was calibrated to recast a legal problem into a political grievance, and to turn personal discomfort into national outrage.

At the centre of Sampa’s account is a familiar claim. He insists his arrest followed direct political instruction from President Hakainde Hichilema, arguing that the Inspector General of Police ultimately answers to the Head of State. In his framing, the law did not act on its own. Power did.

He opened by dwelling on detention conditions. Overcrowded cells. Mosquitoes. Cockroaches. Open toilets. He said he refused to eat for two days to avoid using them. The description was vivid and intentional.

“Allow me to thank President HH for sending me to jail… everybody used to tell me your political CV is useless, you don’t have jail. Here I am, the President has gifted me.”

The line drew laughter and sympathy, but it also revealed the strategy. Custody was not presented as an injustice to be corrected. It was presented as political currency. Jail became a credential, not a consequence.

From there, Sampa moved to the Cyber Crimes Act, calling it “draconian” and promising its repeal if he ever leads the country. His position was absolute.

“Let the people talk. Let them say what they want… you cannot gag people.”

He went further.

“Even lies, let the public judge.”

This is where the argument breaks down. Freedom of expression does not exist without responsibility, especially during elections. Every democratic system places limits where speech threatens public order or electoral integrity. By-elections are regulated processes, not open mic sessions.

Sampa was not detained for expressing an opinion. He was detained after announcing the existence of a fake polling station during the Chawama by-election, a claim later rejected by the Electoral Commission. He apologised publicly for that statement. The apology matters. It acknowledges the information was false.

One cannot apologise for spreading false election information and later claim persecution for speaking truth.
two positions cannot coexist.

His criticism of cyber laws also carries selective memory. Restrictive legal frameworks around security and communication did not emerge in a vacuum. Many were enacted or reinforced during periods when opposition figures now crying foul exercised state power themselves. The discomfort today is less about principle and more about position.

Sampa also described Chawama as violent territory. He claimed he was almost killed by “UPND thugs” armed with pangas and said police saved his life.

“Chawama was a difficult campaign… I was almost killed there.”

The allegation is serious, yet no corroborating police statement or case reference was presented during the interview. What remains is narrative escalation, where a by-election becomes proof of systematic repression.

On accusations of betraying Edgar Chagwa Lungu, Sampa leaned on reconciliation. He said the two resolved their differences and that Lungu encouraged opposition unity. This has become a recurring theme across PF-aligned politics. Lungu’s name is invoked as moral authority long after voters rejected his leadership.

Reconciliation, however, does not rewrite history. Electoral defeat does not transform into moral victory simply because time has passed or death has intervened.

What unfolded on Diamond TV was not a legal argument. It was a repositioning exercise. A man facing accountability chose to shift the arena from the courtroom to public emotion. The state became the villain. The law became oppression. Personal discomfort became national crisis.

He apologised for spreading false election information. The law was triggered. The courts will decide.

As campaigns start, this distinction matters. The real question is not whether politicians should speak freely. It is whether falsehoods during elections should carry no consequence at all.

Victimhood can mobilise. Accountability still governs.

© The People’s Brief | Editors

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.

🇿🇲 EDITORIAL | John Sangwa and the Line He Must Never Cross

John Sangwa’s recent decision to step into ordinary spaces and engage people directly is not a stunt. It is a late but necessary correction. Politics does not begin in court filings, legal seminars, or elite conversations. It begins where people live. That reality has now caught up with him, and to his credit, he appears to be listening.

When Sangwa burst onto the political scene last year, he arrived with confidence and intellectual force. For a brief moment, parts of the opposition were excited. Then the distance set in. Not because Sangwa lacked value, but because he did not fit neatly into their narrow political project. That project is not reform. It is not policy. It is not vision. It is survival.

Most of the opposition figures dominating today’s airwaves are politically descended from the Patriotic Front. They carry PF instincts even when they wear different logos. Their politics is built around grievance, anger, and one overriding fixation: removing the current president. Not replacing ideas. Not competing on solutions. Just removing a man.

Listen to them carefully on radio and television. The anger is loud, but the substance is missing. There is no coherent plan for jobs. No serious alternative on education. No credible anti-corruption framework. No economic vision that survives scrutiny. The entire message collapses into one tired slogan: change government.

Zambians rejected that emptiness in 2021. Decisively. That rejection did not happen by accident. It happened because people were exhausted by politics driven by fear, intimidation, and personal survival. The former president, Edgar Chagwa Lungu, was not voted out because of bad luck. He was rejected because of how power was used, how institutions were treated, and how the country was governed.

Today, when PF-linked figures speak about Lungu, they speak as if Zambia did not live under that reign. As if arrests, intimidation, selective justice, and economic drift never happened. As if memory must be suspended. Death does not rewrite history. It does not turn failed leadership into sainthood. It does not absolve brutality. Lungu is now invoked almost as a political deity, a spirit to be summoned for mobilisation. That is dishonest politics, and it insults the intelligence of the electorate.

John Sangwa must never reduce himself to that.

He is not PF. He has no obligation to inherit their baggage, their grief politics, or their obsession with resurrection narratives. PF politics today is built around mourning, not meaning. Around grievance, not governance. Around identity, not ideas. It is backward-looking and emotionally manipulative, and it has no future.

The context has also changed. Tribal mobilisation, once a reliable campaign tool, is now a criminal offence. And suddenly, those who thrived on it are crying about freedom of speech. What they are really mourning is the loss of a weapon. Division is no longer protected politics. That is not repression. That is accountability.

This is why Sangwa’s path matters. He has real assets. He understands institutions. He has professional credibility. He has networks that extend beyond party nostalgia. But none of that will matter if he chooses to orbit a political culture that has already been rejected by the people.

If he aligns himself with PF-style opposition figures, he will be swallowed by their failure. They will not build him. They will drain him. Their politics is not about Zambia’s future. It is about personal relevance in a country that has moved on.

Zambia does not lack opposition noise. It lacks an alternative government. Free education is policy. Debt restructuring is policy. Social protection is policy. Anyone who opposes these must answer a simple question: what replaces them. Silence is not a plan.

The uncomfortable truth is that, right now, Zambia has no credible alternative government-in-waiting. That vacuum is real. It will not be filled by shouting, nostalgia, or myth-making.

John Sangwa still has a choice. He can build a new political language, grounded in listening, humility, and policy clarity. Or he can become another angry voice shouting from the ruins of a rejected past.

Yesterday’s engagement with ordinary people was not a photo opportunity. It was a warning. It was also an invitation.

If Sangwa listens, this path can grow. If he imitates PF politics, it will end him before it begins.

Zambia has moved on. Those who refuse to move with it will be left talking to themselves.

© The People’s Brief | Editor-in-Chief

EAT THEIR FOOD, MONEY BUT VOTE WISELY

… Kalaba tells the people of Kasama ahead of thursday’s Mayoral by – election.

KASAMA, TUESDAY, JANUARY 27,2026 [ SMART EAGLES]

CITIZENS First party President Harry Kalaba has implored the people of Kasama to accept all the goodies being offered to them by the UPND Government ahead of thursday’s mayoral by – election and teach them a lesson by voting for the CF candidate Aaron Zimba.

Speaking on Radio Mano last night, Mr. Kalaba said the people of Kasama should ask themselves where the UPND have been for them to resurface during the by – election and start dishing out money and mealie meal in order to buy their vote.

He said the people of Kasama should vote wisely and avoid making a mistake of voting for the UPND, a party he said has failed to deliver meaningful development in the country.

“The Kasama mayoral by – election is litmus test for the 2026 General elections, I am saying to the people of Kasama that eat the food the UPND is offering to you and vote wisely on thursday. Ask the UPND where they have been all this while for them to resurface now and start dishing out money and mealie mealie in order to buy votes. The only person who will bring meaningful development in Kasama is Aaron Zimba because he has experience being the former councillor for Mulilansolo ward and he knows how the people live here,” Mr. Kalaba said.

“UPND has destroyed alot of things in the country and only Citizens First party is coming to control and make meaningful changes. CF is the only party that has life and puts Zambians first and we are coming to liberate the citizens, ” the CF leader said.

And Mr. Kalaba said the money the UPND is busy dishing out in Kasama could have been used to pay farmers who supplied maize to the Food Reserve Agency and provide medicines in hospitals.

“If the UPND was serious, this money they wasting on dishing out and cooking nshima for electorates in Kasama during campaigns could have been used to pay farmers. This money they wasting on nshima could also have been used to buy medicines for the people of Kasama including upgrading roads, and my wish is for the UPND to lose this by election, the person who must win is Aaron Zimba,” Mr. Mr. Kalaba said.

MWILA URGES ELECTORATE TO VOTE OUT MPs WHO VOTED FOR BILL 7

Former PF Secretary General Davies Mwila has challenged MPs who voted for Bill 7 to openly justify their actions to the voters in their constituencies instead of denying that they did not vote for Bill 7 that was widely rejected by the church and other stakeholders before its enactment into law.

“This is not a time for MPs to deny that they did not vote for Bill 7 for fear of losing elections. They should be truthful during the ongoing campaigns in their constituencies by admitting that they voted for Bill 7,” Mr Mwila says.

He named Kalulushi MP Kampamba Mulenga as one of the opposition MPs denying to the people of Kalulushi that she did not vote for Bill 7 contrary to the well-documented truth at Parliament and on the ground.

GOVT PROBES MISSING NTUMPA UNIVERSITY FUNDS

THE Government has launched investigations into the disappearance of funds allocated for the construction of Ntumpa University in Northern Province.

Finance and National Planning Minister Situmbeko Musokotwane disclosed this in Kasama after touring the proposed university site in Lukashya Constituency.

Dr. Musokotwane expressed dismay at the absence of meaningful development nearly a decade after the project was launched.

The Minister said he was shocked to find that only a small wall had been erected on the vast land designated for the institution, despite the strategic importance of the university to the region’s socio-economic development.

Dr. Musokotwane noted that Ntumpa University, planned as a major public higher learning institution, was initiated by the previous government in 2017 on approximately 400 hectares of land.

He said construction stalled the following year, with no clear explanation provided to date.

The Finance Minister stated that government will engage investigative agencies to establish how much funding had been released for the project and to identify the contractors involved.

He criticised the alleged mismanagement of public resources, stating that it was unacceptable for leaders entrusted with developing rural communities to divert funds meant for national development.

Dr. Musokotwane further stressed the need for collective responsibility in safeguarding public finances, warning that the country’s progress would remain elusive without integrity and accountability.

Meanwhile, a local resident Joseph Mumbi called for full transparency, urging the previous administration to account for the missing funds and explain why the project was abandoned.

This is according to a statement issued to ZNBC news by Northern Province Principal Public Relations Officer Sandra Mulenga.

ZNBC

LUBINDA’S TONSE ALLIANCE RE-ADMITS NCP

The Given Lubinda led Tonse Alliance has re-admitted the New Congress Party which had left the opposition grouping.

The late former President Edgar Lungu had picked NCP to be the Purpose Vehicle Party but he ditched the grouping.

Sources within the Patriotic Front (PF) have told Zambian Eye that the Lubinda led Tonse Alliance intends to use NCP as Purpose Vehicle Party.

TONSE ALLIANCE COMMUNIQUÉ

..Tonse re-admits NCP…

26.01.2026

RE: Outcomes of the Tonse Alliance Council of Leaders (CoL) Meeting Held on Monday, 26th January 2026 at Eagle’s View Event Centre – Lusaka

The Tonse Alliance Council of Leaders convened on Monday, 26th January 2026 at Eagle’s View Event Centre. The meeting was chaired by Hon. Given Lubinda, Chairperson of the Tonse Alliance and President of the Patriotic Front.

The Council met to deliberate on the following agenda items:

1. Consideration and admission of new political parties and Civil Society Organisations into the Tonse Alliance.

2. Consideration of applications for re-admission by former members of the Alliance.

– ADMISSION TO TONSE ALLIANCE

Following deliberations, the Council resolved as follows:

A. NEW ADMISSION

The following political parties and Civil Society Organisations were admitted into the Tonse Alliance:

1. Resolute Party

2. Democratic Union

3. Citizens Democratic Party

4. Exodus Party for Peace and Prosperity

5. Revolutionary Communist Party

6. Leadership Development Party

7. Youth Advocates for Development in Africa (YADA)

8. Borderless Africa University Club

9. Youth With Initiative

10. Hope of Refuge

11. Youth Leadership and Dialogue Programme

B. RE-ADMISSIONS

The Council further approved the re-admission of members who had earlier resigned :

1. New Congress Party (NCP)

2. United for Better Zambia (UBZ)

The Council of Leaders reaffirmed its commitment to strengthening the Alliance through inclusive, disciplined, and purpose-driven participation, anchored on the shared objective of delivering a credible alternative government for the Republic of Zambia in response to the people’s expectations.

Issued by:
Ephraim Shakafuswa
Spokesperson
Tonse Alliance

Amb. Emmanuel Mwamba Wrote;

Why Nixon Chilangwa and Chitotela and Others are not supposed to be in Prison

…It would seem that the accused were attacked by the villagers in retaliation of their alleged attack on two of their own and the reported harassment….

I came across this Judgment that convicted UPND cadres that hacked two Kawambwa residents and were driving the Mahindra which was burnt by the angry villagers.

The UPND cadres were convicted and jailed but were released on bail-pending appeal.

That matter has never come up for trial in the High Court.

Meanwhile the same facts were presented differently in a matter before Magistrate Martin Namushi.

Kawambwa Magistrate Martin Namushi convicted Nickson Chilangwa and Ronald Chitotela, but only sentenced Chilangwa. He committed Chitotela to the High Court for sentencing because the offense of arson carries a minimum sentence of 10 years, which is outside a magistrate’s jurisdiction.

What happened that day?

The UPND cadres were prosecuted and convicted in 2022,August for the assault.

Luapula Province youth chairperson Nelson Kalembwe and four others were jailed for 2 years for an incident that happened on election day.

Particulars of the offence was that Nelson Kalembwe, John Lukwesa, Sunday
Chola, Ivyn Mutono and Thomas Chafye on the 12th day of August, 2021 at
Kawambwa in the Kawambwa District of the Luapula Province of the Republic of
Zambia jointly and whilst acting together did assault Evans Mulenga thereby
occasioning actual bodily harm

In the second count particulars allege that Nelson Kalembwe, John Lukwesa,
Sunday Chola, Ivyn Mutono and Thomas Chafye, on the 12th August, 2021 at
Kawambwa in the Kawambwa District of the Luapula Province of the Republic of
Zambia jointly and whilst acting together did assault Francis Mwenya thereby
occasioning him actual bodily harm.

The truth is,those criminals almost killed 2 villagers on Poll Day..
On their way back,they found that the villagers had set the Mahindra on fire as a reaction to the hacking of their kinsmen by these UPND cardres…

On the elections Day 12th August,2021, 5 UPND cardres beat up two local people in Kawambwa….over 30 km from the Boma….The idea was to instill fear in the voters  identified as PF. The UPND thugs were using the Mahindra in their mischief for transport. In the process,they harassed other motorists who then reported to the police that there were cadres  misbehaving…Police made a follow up and intercepted the Mahindra.

At that point,2 people had been hacked …The PF leaders Kalumba and Chilangwa received the report too and followed up with the police…At the point of interception,the UPND cardres were rounded up those that wanted to run away met villages who had by now organized themselves…The 5 cadres were put in a police cruiser …police then proceeded to pick the victims of the assault under  the hands of the cadres  beyond the point of interception…At that point ,Kalumba and Chilangwa headed back to the Boma… On the way back from picking the assault victims…

The system quickly pushed for their bail pending appeal…That appeal has never been heard to date…

Hon. Ronald Chitotela was never at the scene with his brothers…

Davy Kaniki was the one driving Chilangwa and Kalumba.. They both left the scene before the Mahindra was set ablaze by the irate villagers.

Below were the findings of the Court in the Assault Case:

“It is therefore not possible that PW1 was at the scene were the Mahindra was set on fire as the same was found burning on the way back from picking the assault
victims.”

“The third accused seemed to suggest in cross examination that PW1 pulled him
on the beards at the time of meeting the Police. However, there is evidence that is not challenged that PW1 was picked from Kabanda by Police after the accused had already been apprehended and at that time PW1 had already been beaten.”

“The assertion by A3 is an obvious impossibility and if indeed someone pulled him on the beards then this is a serious case of mistaken identity or simply an attemptnto confuse or mislead the Court.”

“A5, in cross examination, seemed to suggest that PW1 hit him with the Pajero (Chitotela’s vehicle).”

However, the evidence on record shows that the Pajero left in the Kawambwa
direction and the driver actually met Police and told them about the dreaded Mahindra whose occupants were harassing other motorists.”

“There is no report of the Pajero getting back to Kabanda polling station from where Police actually picked the injured PW1. This is again a case of mistaken identity or willful misleading of the Court by the accused that PW1 was at the scene where the Police met the accused person in the Mahindra and in fact he was already beaten
by them” J25-

The accused persons said they were given Medical Report Forms because they had also been beaten but no arrest had been made.

“This is probably because the accused persons do not really know which people beat them up from the mob that attacked them after word went round that they were harassing members of the public and had actually assaulted two of the villagers into unconsciousness.”

“It would seem that the accused were attacked by the villagers in retaliation of
their alleged attack on two of their own and the reported harassment.”

“From the tempo of the defence, the accused wanted to drag this Court into the issue of the Mahindra by linking the complainants to the case that is before another Court.”

“The accused were harassing members of the public and had actually assaulted two of the
villagers into unconsciousness.”

“It would seem that the accused were attacked by the villagers in retaliation of their alleged attack on two of their own and the reported harassment.”

“From the tempo of the defence, the accused wanted to drag this Court into the issue of the Mahindra by linking the complainants to the case that is before a
deferent Court. I refuse to be drawn into another case before another Court.”

“PW4, the officer in charge, told the Court that on the way from picking the victims of the assault, they found the fire and the Mahindra was burning. This evidence
was not challenged inbcross examination.”

However, A1 in defence said that Mr. Chilangwa started the fire before the Police Land cruiser had left. This is an
obvious afterthought and A1 was not being truthful in the quest to run away from the liability.”

“A1 kept mentioning that he did not know the complainants while insinuating that the complainants were part of the many Cadres that attacked them at the vehicle.” J26-

“The complainants told the Court they were attacked at home by the accused and
the Police met the accused coming from the direction of the assault.”

“There was only one UPND vehicle in the area whose occupants were reported to have been harassing people and beat up the two complainants.”

“The question of
mistaken identity does not arise under the circumstances.”

“From the evidence on record 2 accused persons camped in Pambashe and were joined by 3 others on the morning of the Polls.”

“The assertion that they delivered
the vehicle to the UPND Candidate has been disproved.”

“It seems that the intention to harass people was hatched well in advance to cause intimidation.”

“Therefore, the accused executed their common intention through harassing motorists and beating the complainants. In this regard, it is immaterial which specific role the accused played.”

A Ticket of Brian Mundubile and Chifumu Banda Is Non-Controversial — It Can Give the Tonse Alliance a Better Chance and a Proper SPV

By Dr. Kingsley B. Chinyama
Brussles | 25.01.2026

As Zambia edges toward another decisive political moment, the central question before the opposition is no longer whether change is necessary, but how that change can be made credible, inclusive, and electorally viable. For the Tonse Alliance, success will depend on presenting a ticket that reassures the undecided voter, consolidates the base, and avoids reopening wounds that fragment the opposition vote. In this context, a Brian Mundubile–Chifumu Banda ticket stands out as a non-controversial, strategic choice, one that offers the alliance a proper vehicle to compete and win.

First, politics is about arithmetic before it becomes poetry. Elections are won by coalitions broad enough to cut across regions, generations, and political histories. A Mundubile–Banda ticket speaks directly to this logic. It is not built on provocation or personality cults, but on political balance. It avoids extremes and instead offers a calm, steady alternative that can attract traditional party loyalists while remaining acceptable to floating voters who are fatigued by constant political drama.

Second, credibility matters. Voters are increasingly skeptical of experimental politics and last-minute political marriages that feel opportunistic. What gives this ticket strength is its predictability and seriousness. It does not frighten the business community, civil servants, churches, or cooperating partners. At the same time, it does not alienate grassroots supporters who want leadership that understands both governance and opposition struggle. In short, it is a ticket that looks like government-in-waiting, not a protest slate.

Third, the non-controversial nature of this ticket is precisely its advantage. In a polarized environment, controversy mobilizes opponents faster than it mobilizes supporters. The Tonse Alliance does not need a ticket that excites Twitter for a week but bleeds votes on election day. It needs a ticket that lowers political temperatures, keeps the alliance intact, and forces the ruling side to campaign on record rather than fear-mongering. Mundubile and Banda do exactly that: they deny opponents an easy attack line.

Fourth, unity within the alliance is non-negotiable. The Tonse Alliance is strongest when it acts as a coalition of shared purpose rather than competing egos. A Mundubile–Banda ticket minimizes internal resistance because it does not appear to privilege one faction at the expense of others. It creates space for all alliance partners to see themselves in the project. That internal peace is not cosmetic; it translates into coordinated campaigns, disciplined messaging, and higher voter turnout.

Finally, Zambia’s current mood favors stability with reform, not chaos with slogans. Citizens want leadership that can fix the economy, restore confidence, and govern competently from day one. A non-controversial ticket reassures voters that the transition will be orderly and focused on delivery, not revenge or experimentation. That reassurance is what converts dissatisfaction with the status quo into actual votes.

In conclusion, the Tonse Alliance does not need the loudest ticket, it needs the right one. A Brian Mundubile and Chifumu Banda ticket offers balance, credibility, unity, and electability. It is a proper vehicle for a serious political project and a realistic path to victory. In a contest where margins will matter, being non-controversial is not a weakness; it is the strategy.

Kingsley Chinyama