Honourable Tasila’s predicament is something a child should not go through young or old.
Honourable Tasila is enduring what no child should never have to go through in a lifetime. I choose to try to understand her.
How do you continue working as MP when your father who walked you down the aisle is unburied? How do you debate in Parliament when your father who paved the way for you to become one is unburied?
How do you continue working as MP when the man who gave you your name is unburied?
Tasila, on the day you had your first born, I happened to be with ECL in a meeting.
I remember how his face lit up when we congratulated him on his latest grandchild and inquired about your welfare.
In that moment I saw a father not the former President, just a father. You are your father’s child.
I wish you take your father ‘home’ just as you did at heroes stadium when he handed over the instruments of power after being booed. I was there.
This is a damn situation.
Honourable Tasila, I offer you and your family my fullest sympathies, compassion and kindness at this time.
…….TASILA LUNGU’S PARLIAMENTARY REMOVAL IS A CRUEL BLOW TO A FAMILY STILL FIGHTING TO BURY THEIR FATHER…..
Late President Edgar Chagwa Lungu’s daughter Hon. Tasila Lungu Mwansa has lost her Chawama parliamentary seat.
But the full weight of this decision becomes even more heartbreaking when one remembers a fact that cannot be ignored.
Her father, the late President Edgar Chagwa Lungu, is STILL not buried because the government sued her, her mother, her siblings, and the family spokesperson.
This lawsuit, initiated by the State, has kept the Lungu family in endless court hearings, delaying the burial of a man who once led this nation. It is a situation that no family regardless of politics should ever endure.
And it is this cruel and prolonged legal battle, forced upon them, that has kept Hon. Tasila Lungu out of Parliament.
Hon. Tasila has not been absent out of negligence.
She has been absent because she has been forced into courtroom after courtroom, fighting for the right to lay her father to rest.
Every hearing pulls her back into trauma.
Every adjournment reminds her that closure remains out of reach.
Every delay deepens the wound.
What kind of nation forces a daughter to choose between her parliamentary duties and the burial of her own father a burial delayed by the very government now punishing her for missing sittings?
While Hon. Tasila Lungu was grieving and battling in court a court case initiated by the State itself Parliament has chosen to take away her seat. At a time when support, empathy, and understanding should prevail, we are witnessing the opposite: the weaponisation of procedure against a bereaved family.
Other MPs with far less compelling reasons for absence have never been subjected to such drastic action. The inconsistency is glaring. The insensitivity is painful. And the message it sends is chilling:
You may lose your parent, We may drag you to court, We may delay the burial, And when you miss Parliament because of it we will punish you.
This is not justice. This is not leadership. This is cruelty.
It is impossible to overstate the emotional torment the Lungu family has endured. Months after his passing, Zambia’s Sixth President remains unburied not because of family conflict, not because of indecision but because of a legal case brought against them by the very government now declaring Tasila’s seat vacant.
The people of Chawama voted for Tasila because they saw her dedication and her heart. She worked quietly, effectively, and without theatrics. Even in her grief, she remained committed to her community.
To strip her of her seat during the most painful chapter of her life is not just unfair it is unkind.
Our country is built on values of respect, empathy, and ubuntu. We do not laugh at mourning families. We do not punish daughters whose only crime is loving their father enough to fight for his dignified burial.
Hon. Tasila Lungu deserved support, not a political blow.
She deserved time to mourn, not institutional punishment.
She deserved understanding, not exclusion.
And above all, her father deserved to be laid to rest with dignity and honour.
Now the country already struggling will spend millions for a by election when we have elections in the next few months.
GUEST ARTICLE: “HH FACES HIS BIGGEST TEST: HAS THE PRESIDENT BECOME WHAT HE FOUGHT AGAINST?”
By Michael Zephaniah Phiri Political Activist
A political storm is sweeping across Zambia and its centre is none other than President Hakainde Hichilema. The nation that once rallied behind him is now asking a blunt, uncomfortable question:
Has President Hichilema turned into the very leader he spent years fighting?
The outrage is loud and widespread. Citizens remember a man who marched boldly against Bill 10, who defended protesters, who demanded transparency, and who vowed never to manipulate the Constitution for political convenience.
Today, those same citizens watch with disbelief as Bill 7 is pushed forward under a cloud of secrecy, confusion, and resistance from the very people who trusted him with power.
Worse, the President’s message to the public has shifted from “ *the people must decide” to “go to court or wait for Parliament.”*
This is not the language of a reformer.
This is not the language of a democrat.
This is the language of a leader losing touch with the very citizens who lifted him into State House.
And the unresolved, lingering issue involving former President Edgar Lungu continues to hang over the nation like a dark cloud. A government calling for dialogue cannot afford to be seen as avoiding dialogue. It cannot lecture the country about unity while failing to resolve one of the most sensitive national matters within its own reach.
The public sees the contradiction.
The public feels the double standards.
And they are speaking up.
When the Women’s Forum confronted the President, they did not whisper. They did not tiptoe. They stood firm and delivered a message the entire country has been waiting for:
“ *Withdraw Bill 7. Take it back to the people. Follow the proper process.”*
This was not defiance.
This was accountability.
Because if constitutional amendments were wrong under Bill 10, then they are wrong under Bill 7 — unless the rules only matter when someone else is in power.
Zambia’s constitutional history — from 1964 to 2016 — has been shaped by negotiation, consensus, and genuine national dialogue.
Never by force.
Never by one-sided declarations from the top.
Mr. President, consistency is not a luxury it is the foundation of leadership. And Zambia has reached a moment where the truth can no longer be dressed up:
*You promised better.*
Zambians expect better. And they will not apologise for demanding better.**
Bill 7 has become a symbol not of progress, but of political drift. A symbol of a government forgetting its own words. A symbol of a leadership losing the trust it once commanded effortlessly.
If President Hichilema wants to prove he is different from those who came before him, then the path is clear:
*Withdraw Bill 7.*
*Restart the process.*
*Respect the people.*
Because if the President ignores this moment, history may record it as the turning point when the New Dawn dimmed and Zambia realised that promises, no matter how bright, mean nothing without the courage to keep them.
IN the late afternoons, after a long hectic day, I was cruising on Esther lungu road, heading home for a nap, when BAM! I heard the crunch. I looked up, and my front bumper was kissing the back of a sleek Range Rover, my heart skipped! Just the thought of how I was gonna pay for the Range Rover repairs nearly gave me an instant heart attack!
I stepped out of my car and the Range Rover owner stepped out too, I’m thinking, “Oh no, this is gonna be bad.” I started apologising before I could even take a clear look at him! But then he looks at me,
Guess what, it’s my bro, YO MAPS, calm and swagged. Before, he could say any word, I admitted my guilty and already indicated how I am not in a good place to fix his Range today, but maybe let insurance kick in. He takes one look at my ride, all dented with a leaking radiator and says, “Don’t worry muntu wandi, filachitika (it happens)!”
He invites me to his car, reaches out to his wallet, and hands me a bunch of K200 notes amounting to K7,000 saying “This should help with towing your car, and meet part of the costs for fixing it” I am like, “What? Ninebo neulufyenye boi (I am the one in the wrong) and you are kind enough to even help?” He smiled and said, “it’s nothing boi, you need it more than I do at the moment. Plus my car only has a minor dent!, and the rest is history!
Truly Angels do exist! I am grateful to Yo Maps for showing me true kindness and generosity in my state of panic and confusion, which is a rare quality especially for people in our industry! Wechipondo may you be blessed even more and long life!
Mthuli Ncube Gets Tough On Rental Income Tax, Requires Property Owners To Submit Tenant Registers Every 3 Months Finance Minister Mthuli Ncube is getting tough on rental income tax, unveiling a powerful new plan that will force landlords with tenants running businesses to hand over their tenant details to the taxman every three months. The move, announced in his 2026 National Budget Statement presented on 27 November 2025, builds on a tax he introduced just a year prior. The new regime takes effect from 1 January 2026, giving property owners little time to prepare for the sweeping changes.
The minister declared that a significant amount of business activity happening in rented buildings has been flying under the radar of the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA).
He stated that existing laws have not been strong enough to catch property owners who collect rental income but fail to pay their fair share of tax.
From Initial Tax To A Full-Blown Crackdown This is not the first time Minister Ncube has targeted the rental sector. During his 2025 National Budget Statement proposal last year, he introduced the Rental Income Tax. That initial measure specifically targeted “properties converted from residential to commercial use,” slapping them with a tax rate of 25%. It also required companies to disclose their landlords to the tax authority or lose the ability to claim rental expenses.
However, the minister now believes those initial measures were not enough. The new 2025 budget statement reveals the government’s view that “significant business activities… continue to escape the tax net.” This has prompted a much stricter, more invasive approach focused on constant reporting and severe penalties to force compliance.
A New Era Of Quarterly Submissions The core of the new strategy involves a mandatory and continuous reporting requirement for any landlord collecting rental income from someone operating a business from their property.
Professor Ncube has proposed a major legislative shift that will require property owners and managers to act as active agents for the tax authority.
He outlined the new requirements in his address to Parliament, stating:
“I, therefore, propose that legislation be amended to require mandatory registration with ZIMRA, of all commercial and non-commercial properties where business activities are conducted and compel property owners or managers to submit quarterly tenant registers, occupancy lists and rental schedules to ZIMRA to facilitate audit and enforcement.”
This means that every three months, landlords must provide ZIMRA with a comprehensive list of who is renting their properties to run any kind of business and how much they are paying.
Hefty Penalties And Business Closures For Non-Compliance The latest budget statement lays out severe consequences for landlords who fail to comply with the new regulations, going far beyond the initial rules. The measures are designed to leave no room for avoidance, with financial penalties that match the alleged tax evasion.
The Minister was unequivocal about the punishment for non-compliance, proposing:
“A property owner or manager who fails to register and account for Rental Income Tax, as well as withholding 10% of rental income payable by informal sector operators, be subject to a penalty equivalent to the Rental Income Tax and the Presumptive Tax payable thereof, including interest.”
In an even more drastic step, the minister has proposed that ZIMRA be granted the power to temporarily shut down businesses operating from non-compliant properties. He stated:
“Furthermore, I propose that ZIMRA be empowered to temporarily close the premises used for such businesses until completion of compliance processes.”
This could see tenants locked out of their shops or offices if their landlord has failed to meet the new tax obligations, a risk that was not part of the previous year’s tax introduction.
What This Means For Landlords And Tenants This new framework imposes a significant administrative burden on landlords with tenants operating businesses from their properties. Property owners must now meticulously track these tenants and report their income to ZIMRA every quarter.
For people running businesses from rented premises, particularly those in the informal sector like market stall holders, there is a new layer of financial scrutiny. Landlords are now required to withhold 10% of the rental income from these informal traders as a presumptive tax, a cost that may potentially be passed down.
The success of this initiative hinges on ZIMRA’s ability to enforce these new rules, which will affect countless property owners across the country.
Chivayo Pays US$600,000 Fortune For President’s Scarf At Charity Auction
Flamboyant businessman Wicknell Chivayo emerged victorious from a dramatic high-stakes bidding war, securing President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s signature scarf for a colossal US$600,000 (approximately R11.1 million). The electrifying auction was the centrepiece of the Angel of Hope Foundation’s annual Christmas Fundraising Dinner. The event took place at the State House on the evening of Friday, November 28, 2025. The entire winning bid was donated to the foundation, which First Lady Auxillia Mnangagwa chairs.
The atmosphere in the room became charged as President Mnangagwa personally removed his scarf and offered it for auction. A source present at the dinner reported that the President made a light-hearted remark about a “peaceful transfer of power,” which was met with cheers from the assembled dignitaries and business leaders. An aide promptly gave the President a replacement scarf.
A Dramatic Auction Showdown The bidding for the presidential accessory began competitively, with offers quickly rising from initial bids in the low thousands. The contest soon narrowed, with gold mining firm, FS Mining, making a formidable offer of US$250,000 (approximately R4.6 million). Just as it seemed they had won, Wicknell Chivayo entered the fray. He immediately countered with a commanding bid of US$450,000 (approximately R8.3 million). In a surprising twist,
Collins Mnangagwa, the President’s twin son, then intervened, playfully raising the bid to US$500,000 (approximately R9.3 million). Chivayo responded without hesitation, clinching the victory with a final, unbeatable offer of US$600,000 (approximately R11.1 million).
After his win, Chivayo expressed his thoughts on the acquisition.
He stated, “It was an honour to acquire such a significant item for such a worthy cause. The work that the Angel of Hope Foundation does is incredible, and I was happy to contribute.”
A Week Of Multi-Million Rand Donations This record-breaking charitable payment came just 48 hours after another major announcement from the businessman. On Wednesday, November 26, 2025, Chivayo publicly pledged a donation of US$1 million (approximately R18.5 million) to his former primary school, Dudley Hall in Norton. Official communications from the school confirmed that the funds are designated for the construction of two new dormitories. These buildings are to be named ‘Emmerson Dambudzo House’ and ‘Auxillia House’ in honour of the First Couple.
A spokesperson for the Angel of Hope Foundation acknowledged the immense impact of Chivayo’s successful bid.
The foundation spokesperson said, “We are overwhelmed by Mr Chivayo’s generosity. This single act of kindness will directly support the vulnerable women and children across the nation that our foundation strives to help every day. It was a truly historic night for charity in Zimbabwe.”
The event has cemented Chivayo’s reputation for making grand philanthropic gestures that capture national attention.
The United States will host the presidents of the Congo and Rwanda as they sign a crucial peace agreement. The Congolese government announced on Friday that President Felix Tshisekedi is preparing for the trip. They described it as the culmination of months of diplomacy driven by U.S. President Donald Trump.
Officials in Congo have repeatedly stated that their commitment to the deal depends on Rwanda halting all support for the M23 rebel movement, which has entrenched itself across parts of eastern Congo.
Confirmation of the December 4 signing followed comments from Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame, who voiced hope that the agreement could hold, while warning that meaningful progress would require that “people directly concerned are committed to achieve results.”
The conflict in eastern Congo has intensified throughout the year. More than one hundred armed groups operate in the region, but the M23 has posed the greatest challenge, capturing the major cities of Goma and Bukavu and deepening an already severe humanitarian emergency.
U.N. experts have alleged that between 3,000 and 4,000 Rwandan soldiers are present in eastern Congo working with the rebels, a claim Rwanda denies while insisting that any military action is meant to safeguard its own borders.
Tina Salama, spokesperson for President Tshisekedi, told The Associated Press that the government insists the agreement exclude any “mixing or integration of M23 fighters.”
She emphasized that both countries committed in June to the withdrawal of Rwandan troops, a step she said remains central to the peace framework. “We are seeking peace within the framework of regional integration,” Salama said. “What is non-negotiable for us is the territorial integrity of the DRC.”
Kagame, speaking one day earlier, accused Congolese authorities of shifting their positions and revisiting previous commitments. He stressed that the viability of the upcoming deal will depend on the resolve of the parties at the heart of the conflict.
“Some of these processes will not work not just because we are meeting in Washington or powerful United States is involved, but until those people concerned directly are committed to achieve end results,” Kagame stated.
Late today I received home some PF officials from Chawama constituency, Lusaka District & Lusaka Provice after the news of vacancy declaration of the Chawama seat.
Chawama seat has been held by the bonafide overwhelmingly elected MP Hon Tasila Lungu Mwansa but who now remains in mourning as long as her Father ECL is not burried. The UPND government stopped his burial via Court Injunctions. It’s been about 6 months now since.
The Speaker found it fit however to declare Hon Tasila seat vacant regardless apparently because she has not physically showed up into parliaments since her father died.
Meantime Zambia and Africa tradition forbids children and relatives of deceased from engaging into official activities until their beloved one is layed to rest. .
The mercenary aim is to have the by election take place before before December 12, 2025 beyond which the Constitution bars any by-election because its 6 months before the Parliament dissolves. They need numbers for the evil Bill 7.
Today I assured the Chawama and Lusaka officials that Chawama is our Seat and no matter what they do, it will never be held by UPND before Parliament dissolves in May 2026.
In 2001, Chawama signaled the end of the MMD then in power when they tried to grab it via a politically induced by-election. They then engagnged into massive violence to win it. Residents rejected them and oppostion candidate Geofrey Samukonga won. MMD never recovered thereon.
Hang in there Hon Tasila Mwansa Lungu. They wont grab your seat.
TRICKY DIALOGUES – ECL REMAINS UNBURIED IN A FAILED DIALOGUE
A KBN TV EDITORIAL COMMENT
We watched an update from State House in which both the Oasis Forum Chairperson, Ms.Beauty Katebe and President Hakainde Hichilema informed the nation about the progress made to an inconclusive dialogue process regarding the future of the proposed constitutional amendments.
In a brief update, both delegation leaders tried to steady their composure from what we understand to have been a very candid but tense meeting flaring with emotions.
Without disclosing much, the meeting announced that some progress had been made in which the two sides have agreed to scale down on the number of talking heads to a small group that is likely to convene as early as tomorrow.
Insiders say while the Oasis Forum wants Bill 7 withdrawn completely and a new holistic approach started which includes the Bill of Rights, the State is on the other hand proposing to negotiate the content and process.
While heeding widespread outcry to shelve Bill 7 would be the most desirable outcome of this dialogue, the State is hoping to come out with a negotiated end game that allows the ill-fated process to continue.
Constrained with time, the meeting agreed to adjourn the dialogue and task a smaller adhoc committee to focus on agreeing a new process and what sort of content if any, to be absorbed in the Constitutional amendment process.
Concerns are rife that even though the State is calling for dialogue, they seem fixated on wanting to push through with the widely condemned, denounced and rejected Bill 7, which seems to be suggesting a complete overhaul to the governance system.
Stakeholders have expressed concern that even though the State toutes dialogue as the most civilised way to resolve differences, former Republican President Edgar Chagwa Lungu remains unburied over fives months since he passed on in South Africa over a failed dialogue process.
With a sour taste in the mouth over the ECL failed dialogue process, the Oasis Forum must avoid being trapped into another tricky dialogue process where the State might want to dictate its way against the wishes of the citizens.
The most probable compromise and outcome of this dialogue should be to deffer the Constitutional amendment process until after the 2026 elections to give sufficient time to both the content, process and Bill of Rights.
Anything short of that, is laundering ill intentions and masking them in a dialogue camouflage.
BRIEFING | PF Questions Logic and Cost of Tasila Lungu Ousting
The Speaker of the National Assembly, Nelly Mutti, declared the Chawama parliamentary seat vacant following the prolonged absence of MP Tasila Lungu. The decision, announced on Friday, invokes Article 72 of the Constitution after Ms Lungu failed to attend parliamentary business for nearly five months and did not respond to formal directives requiring her return.
Speaker Mutti noted that Tasila was instructed to resume duties within fourteen days after her father’s burial, or within fourteen days of the opening of the Fifth Session.
She did not appear before the Committee on Privileges and Absences and did not seek written permission for her continued absence, prompting the vacancy declaration.
PF party presidential candidate Brian Mundubile has questioned both the timing and financial implications of the decision.
Speaking at the Oasis Forum prayer gathering, Mundubile argued that calling a by-election six months before Parliament dissolves would impose an unnecessary burden on the Treasury.
“It costs poor taxpayers about K30 million to conduct a parliamentary election,” he said. “Where will the money come from when government cannot buy drugs in hospitals, pay farmers for the maize they sold to FRA, or import electricity?”
Under electoral law, a by-election must be held within ninety days of a vacancy. A new MP for Chawama would likely sit for a very short period before the House dissolves ahead of the 13 August 2026 elections.
PF officials have signalled that they will challenge the decision.
Tasila Lungu, who has remained in South Africa since the death of her father, former President Edgar Lungu, issued a statement to constituents acknowledging the development.
She said she continued to participate virtually in Parliament and highlighted ongoing community work led by councillors and constituency staff.
“We have made every effort to represent you, including virtually, during this deeply painful mourning period as we have not yet laid Dad to rest,” she wrote.
Ms Lungu thanked residents for their support and said the team would “fight to keep our Chawama family strong and united.”
The vacancy comes as tensions remain relatively active over the unresolved burial dispute of the former head of state, now before the South African courts.
It also places Chawama, a historically competitive constituency, back into the national spotlight ahead of the 2026 campaign cycle.
ANALYSIS | State House Dialogue & Politics of Representation
The constitutional debate around Bill 7 reached a new stage on Friday as the Oasis Forum delegation met President Hakainde Hichilema at State House for a seven hour dialogue session. The meeting followed a morning prayer rally at the Pope Square where political actors, former ministers and church leaders appeared in coordinated black attire. The attendance raised questions about whether the event was a civic platform or a gathering of elite figures who once occupied the centre of power.
Oasis Forum Chairperson Beauty Katebe opened the dialogue with a demand for the full withdrawal of Bill 7. She argued that “Bill 7 must be completely withdrawn from the floor of Parliament” and urged government to “prioritise the Bill of Rights.” Her framing presented Oasis Forum as the custodian of public sentiment. But the rally earlier in the day drew mostly political veterans, former cabinet ministers, and opposition presidential hopefuls.
This raises a central question. Which majority does Oasis Forum claim to represent when its physical gatherings are dominated by elite actors rather than broad national participation?
The meeting was shaped by contrasting tones. Katebe adopted a confrontational posture, stating that citizens expected “celebration, not alarms.” The President responded with measured sarcasm, greeting the delegation by saying, “I hope your prayers went well.”
Hichilema warned against street mobilisation, noting that “street protests can easily lead to violence.” His remarks reflected a government stance that views dialogue as the first option and public demonstrations as a last resort.
The exchange revealed different understandings of negotiation. One side presented withdrawal as a starting point. The other framed negotiation as a process of compromise.
https://youtu.be/QKCdCY810n4?si=xLacJ2rUasShAKEd
The debate over representation sits at the centre of the current tension. Zambia’s constitutional system recognises Parliament as the formal channel of national consensus. Every region and demographic group is represented there. The Constitution was amended in 2016 through this mechanism when President Edgar Lungu and the PF government pushed through major constitutional changes despite UPND objection. The PF secured the votes with MMD support.
Records show the process was legal and binding. History shows that constitutional change in Zambia is decided by parliamentary arithmetic, not by civic coalitions alone.
Katebe’s remarks also raise structural questions. If Oasis Forum is the benchmark of consensus, what happens to the views submitted through the Technical Committee and parliamentary consultations? Do those citizens not think properly? The framing risks creating a hierarchy of civic legitimacy where elite platforms overshadow ordinary contributions.
The constitutional review process has always accommodated divergent views. The challenge is to balance civic input with institutional authority without privileging one civic faction over another.
President Hichilema’s statement after the meeting reinforced this principle. He emphasised that “the constitutional review process should not become a source of division” and reminded the nation that “divergent opinions are normal in a democracy.” He committed to “fair and equitable distribution of resources” and thanked the Oasis Forum leadership for entering dialogue.
The formal tone contrasted sharply with the confrontational rhetoric outside State House, highlighting the gap between public mobilisation and institutional decision making.
The emerging dynamic suggests an ongoing negotiation rather than a settled confrontation. Sources indicate that the dialogue will resume with a smaller delegation to improve clarity. This reflects a recognition by both sides that constitutional reform cannot be resolved through public messaging alone. It requires technical precision, political realism and procedural discipline.
Withdrawal, amendment or retention will ultimately be decided on the floor of Parliament where the Constitution places that responsibility.
The wider question remains unresolved. Who carries the voice of “the people” in this debate? Civic groups, clerics and opposition leaders all claim that mantle. Yet Zambia’s constitutional order places that authority in elected representatives.
Any outcome outside Parliament risks creating parallel centres of legitimacy. The present dialogue is therefore not only about Bill 7. It is a test of Zambia’s institutional discipline, civic restraint and constitutional maturity..
MUTTI ORDERS MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ON DENIAL OF VISAS TO MPs DESPITE DIPLOMATIC PASSPORTS
SPEAKER of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti has directed Jack Mwiimbu to deliver a ministerial statement on Wednesday next week regarding MPs being denied visas despite them holding diplomatic passports.
This was after Bwana Mukubwa MP Warren Mwambazi, during Urgent Matters Without Notice, narrated how he and 17 other MPs were denied visas to travel to Berlin and Turkey at the German Embassy.
He wondered why government does not reciprocate the treatment, as demanded by diplomacy.
“Madam Speaker, this year in June, I was tasked to travel with your team to Berlin and Turkey, as it were, and, Madam Speaker, we did apply for Visas at the German Embassy, the Schengen Visa. Madam Speaker, your members were denied visas even with their diplomatic passports.
And in turn, we were even asked a very, very, I can call it foolish question by the people there to say, ‘why are you travelling, 18 of you? Do you have money?’ And we said, ‘you have no jurisdiction to ask us such a question.’ Madam Speaker, why I rise on this matter is that diplomacy is about reciprocity, how you are treated is also how you need to treat others,” narrated Mwambazi.
“Madam Speaker, the diplomatic passport is soon becoming worthless, because even as I speak, Madam Speaker, I did try again to apply for a visa for a WHO meeting in Geneva. Even through fast-track, your members again are denied visas. So, Madam Speaker, even the bonding with the US, it’s the same thing.
Why doesn’t the government reciprocate the way we are treated? Because these people arrive in this country and we give them Visas from the airport upon arrival. Can you reciprocate this issue to ensure that we are all treated fairly, as it were? Because the diplomatic passport ensures that a person is a high-level person, even the behaviour is honourable, even the conduct is honourable”.
Speaker Mutti admitted the urgent matter without notice, adding that it needed to be addressed by Mwiimbu in place of the Foreign Affairs Minister as he was acting.
“I know that the Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security is also Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, to my knowledge. Since the Honourable Minister of Foreign Affairs is not here, we don’t know when the Honourable Minister of Foreign Affairs will come in, but I think that is a matter that needs to be addressed. It needs to be addressed because if they can deny members of parliament visas, holding diplomatic passports, then where are we going? And we are going to undertake our oversight responsibility checking on the embassies how they are performing, and then a Visa is denied. I think it’s a matter that we need to address, Honourable Minister,” Speaker Mutti guided.
In response, Mwiimbu said the issue of visas fell under his jurisdiction and he would address it.
“The issues of visas fall under my jurisdiction. I have heard what the Honourable member of parliament has indicated, we will address it, Madam Speaker,” responded Mwiimbu.
The Speaker then guided that a ministerial statement be issued on the matter next week Wednesday.
THE TRUTH AND MAIN REASON SOME PF CADERS DON’T WANT Bill 7 IS HERE- PLEASE READ TILL THE END
BY DR LARRY MWEETWA
It is both curious and instructive that certain political stakeholders, particularly some Patriotic Front (PF) cadres, appear averse to substantive engagement on Bill 7. Each time they are invited quite reasonably to identify the precise clauses to which they object and to propose alternative wording, a conspicuous silence follows. Instead, the default response is a procedural cliché: “We do not like the process because not all stakeholders were consulted.”
Yet the record speaks for itself. Traditional leaders were consulted. Public notices were disseminated through television and other media platforms. An online portal was established to facilitate nationwide submissions. When pressed to specify which stakeholders were allegedly excluded, the response invariably narrows to two civil society organisations: the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) and the Non-Governmental Organisations’ Coordinating Council (NGOCC).
With respect, these two bodies, while important, do not constitute the entirety of civil society, nor do they monopolise the civic space. LAZ represents a segment of the legal profession; NGOCC advocates largely for women’s interests. Both were aware of the process and had every opportunity to make submissions. Their choice not to participate cannot, in law or logic, invalidate a national consultative process. As the law would put it: volenti non fit injuria one who chooses not to act cannot later claim to have been wronged.
The argument is then swiftly shifted: “The process has been rushed.” Rushed when compared to what benchmark? Zambia’s constitutional history offers useful context. President Kenneth Kaunda amended the Constitution in 1991 an election year. President Frederick Chiluba did the same in 1996 also an election year. President Edgar Chagwa Lungu amended the Constitution in January 2016, barely seven months before general elections. None of these processes were invalidated on the mere ground of timing. One is therefore entitled to ask, with some measured irony: since when did the calendar become a constitutional gatekeeper?
Strikingly, the same voices now opposing Bill 7 were silent when previous amendments were effected under arguably similar or even tighter timelines. The principle of equality before the law demands consistency. Selective outrage is not a constitutional doctrine.
Equally perplexing was a recent statement attributed to the Chairperson of the Oasis Forum, suggesting that a referendum be held to amend even the Bill of Rights. This demand is legally misplaced in the present context. The Bill of Rights is not under amendment in Bill 7. Even former President Lungu, during the 2016 process, did not reopen the Bill of Rights nor did he establish a fresh Law Reform Commission; he relied on existing commission reports. The sudden insistence on a referendum now, where none is constitutionally required, raises legitimate questions of motive rather than method.
The central legal question therefore remains unanswered: Why do some PF cadres and allied voices refuse to make formal submissions specifying which provisions of Bill 7 they oppose? In constitutional practice, objections must be clause-specific, evidence-based, and remedial in nature. Political slogans are no substitute for constitutional drafting.
It bears recalling that Bill 10 was allowed to proceed to Parliament, where it ultimately collapsed on procedural and numerical grounds. Democratic consistency demands that Bill 7 be accorded the same opportunity to rise or fall on the floor of Parliament, not in press conferences, clerical corridors, or NGO boardrooms. As one might quip in civic satire: “A constitution is not amended on Facebook; it is amended in Parliament.”
It is therefore unten_toggle_able that a nation of over 20 million citizens should be held hostage by the positions of two civil society organisations, two clerics, or a handful of political commentators. The constitutional architecture of Zambia vests the final amending authority in Parliament, subject to prescribed procedures not in veto by protest.
For the avoidance of doubt, many citizens have made their submissions in good faith and in accordance with the law. Those submissions are lawful, valid, and must be respected. No individual or group holds a monopoly over constitutional patriotism. As the old legal adage reminds us: “Equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent.”
In sum, if objections to Bill 7 exist, let them be articulated with legal precision, not political anxiety. Let the contest be one of ideas, not of obstruction. And above all, let Parliament do what the Constitution empowers it to do to deliberate, to amend, or to reject in open session, on behalf of the people of Zambia.
Government is formed by the party that has won elections.
Government consists of the President and the cabinet that he puts together.
In Zambia, cabinet members are appointed from among Members of Parliament.
The President and his cabinet formulate policy and initiate legislation.
They derive the authority to do this from the fact that they were elected.
They received the mandate to do so from the voters. How they go about executing this mandate is spelt out, first, in the constitution, second, in public policy, and third, in the laws they pass.
On the other hand, Civil Society Organizations, CSOs, are formations by members of the public around a stated matter of public interest.
These may be public safety, nuclear energy, food security, constitutional matters, women’s health, etc, etc.
They seek to influence public policy or legislation by lobbying government to adopt their viewpoint.
In Washington, DC, for instance, they have lobbyists with permanent offices always engaging cabinet members, senators and members of congress.
In Brussels, there are similar lobby groups seeking to influence EU policy and legislation favorable to their clients.
What this means is that those that are elected carry the ultimate authority to pass public policy and legislation.
They could choose to accommodate or not the views of the CSOs that lobby them.
And the CSOs must understand these power dynamics.
Specific to the case that has prompted me to write this article, what happened at State House yesterday is exactly what I am saying.
CSOs went to lobby government for the latter to not only see but hopefully adopt their viewpoint.
It means government has decided to listen. However, when all is said and done, the ultimate authority to pass public policy and legislation lies in the hands of the voter expressed through the body called government that holds his or her mandate.
In other words, legally and politically, government is the expression of the will of the people.
No matter how objectionable this sounds, the position Hichilema and his cabinet will take to parliament is the expression of the will of the Zambian people.
Opposition parties know this too well hence their continued engagement with the voter.
To be voted into political office, not to form an NGO, is how you get the real authority to pass laws and formulate public policy.
So, to CSOs, humbly accept the outcome of your engagement with government.
Don’t antagonise them. These politicians guard their mandate jealously and will defend it with every ounce of their being.
Remember, they went into the “trenches” to dig for votes, not an easy undertaking.
They are not about to share their position with someone without a similar background.
Bill 7 ADVANCES RIVALRY BETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE SDA
The events surrounding the proposed Constitution Amendment Bill 7 under President Hakainde Hichilema has revealed a troubling evolution in this dynamic, especially when contrasted with the reception of the controversial Constitution Amendment Bill 10 under the Patriotic Front (PF) of President Edgar Lungu.
The stark divergence in presidential posture, coupled with the aggressive rhetoric from some of the United Party for National Development (UPND)’s supporters, have shown that political expediency is now overriding established norms of interfaith respect, potentially fracturing the nation along religious or denominational lines.
The handling of constitutional amendment bills by successive administrations provides a clear illustration of political opportunism concerning religious advice. During the tenure of President Lungu, the Catholic Church publicly denounced Bill 10, citing concerns over its potential to undermine democratic principles. At that time, the current President Hichilema, then in opposition, lauded the Catholic Bishops for their principled guidance, which many credit with contributing to the Bill’s eventual collapse in Parliament. This endorsement positioned the Catholic Church as a vital moral compass in national discourse.
However, the script dramatically reversed with the introduction of Bill 7 under President Hichilema.
When the Catholic Bishops offered similar cautionary advice regarding Bill 7, the response from the Presidency was markedly different. Instead of valuing the guidance, reports indicate intimidation, with the Head of State threatening those who opposed the Bill.
This abrupt change from praising religious counsel to penalizing it exposes a selective appreciation for institutional advice, contingent entirely upon whether that advice aligns with the ruling party’s immediate political agenda.
Perhaps the most alarming development is the subsequent behaviour of some of President Hichilema’s vocal supporters who sometimes come out as radicals.
While supporters of Lungu’s regime generally respected the Catholic Church’s authority even in disagreement on Bill 10, certain factions supporting President Hichilema have engaged in direct, aggressive insults against the Catholic Church following their critique of Bill 7.
A quick systematic review of the top ten news Facebook pages in Zambia and top ten socialite Facebook pages reveals that when the Catholic Church (Priests and Bishops) says something about Bill 7, the reaction of some readers frequently manifests specific, biblically derived, and often derogatory labels such as The Beast, The Church of Sin, The Antichrist, The Child Molesters, The Apostate Church, The Jesuits, and Babylon.
This realisation raised serious questions about the motivations behind these attacks.
A significant observation is that President Hichilema belongs to the Seventh day Adventist (SDA) faith, and many of his vehement online defenders used these biblically derived random insults which are integral components of Seventh-day Adventist covenant theology and prophetic understanding. These terms they are using function to demarcate clear theological boundaries, reinforcing the Adventist self-identity as the remnant church upholding biblical truth against a powerful, historically dominant, and theologically compromised institution.
This correlation suggests that the opportunity presented by political disagreement has been seized by some to advance long-standing, though usually dormant, denominational rivalry between the Catholic Church and the SDA community.
This shift indicates that political allegiance under the current administration is unintentionally, or perhaps intentionally, manifesting as religious or denominational factionalism. Where political opposition previously operated within a framework that generally respected religious unity, the current climate appears to be permitting, or even encouraging, the weaponization of religious identity against critics.
Such an environment validates the argument that the divisiveness currently felt at political and tribal levels is now permeating the religious sphere.
The use of religious identity as a tool for political mobilization or silencing dissent is profoundly dangerous for a nation striving for unity.
The Catholic Church, with its broad national footprint, acts as a crucial mediator in Zambian society. When its guidance is publicly scorned and its members attacked by partisan groups affiliated with the ruling party, the social fabric is strained.
The critique that Bill 7 is divisive is no longer confined to constitutional interpretation; it extends to the realm of social cohesion. If citizens perceive that their loyalty to a political leader is conditional on their religious affiliation, or that religious advice will be met with partisan aggression from co-religionists of the President, the potential for sustained denominational conflict becomes a tangible threat to national stability.
This phenomenon demonstrates that President Hichilema’s leadership, despite promising unity, is inadvertently fostering deeper cleavages.
The consistency of the Catholic Church’s stance across two administrations highlights their commitment to principle, while the inconsistency of the Presidential response highlights the fragility of political ethics when facing institutional scrutiny.
Thus, transition from respecting Catholic guidance on Bill 10 to intimidating them over Bill 7, accompanied by the rise of religiously charged insults from certain segments of the ruling party’s base, signals a dangerous descent into governance driven by factional interests.
The observation that this animosity seems linked to the President’s own religious background underscores the troubling fusion of personal identity and national policy. For Zambia to avoid deepening societal fractures, the leadership must immediately curb the religious intolerance displayed by its supporters and reaffirm a commitment to valuing counsel from all faith traditions, irrespective of political convenience or underlying denominational tensions.
Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has criticized the rapid growth of churches in the country, warning that some exploit vulnerable citizens instead of promoting genuine faith and development.
Speaking to the press on Thursday, Kagame said he saw little role for churches in addressing global problems such as war and unemployment.
In August this year, more than 4,000 churches were closed down for failing to comply with health and safety regulations.
The Rwanda Governance Board stated that the rapid growth of some churches is driven by founders pursuing personal gain, including financial profit and property from members, while spreading misleading teachings.
Kagame urged religious institutions to focus on education, health, and social progress rather than profit-making, saying the faith “should uplift people, not impoverish them.”
-DW Africa-
ON NOVEMBER 27, 2025 KAGAME SAID:”If it were upto me, I would not allow any church to re-open…The church plays no role in development, in the survival of the country nor in resolving war issues . Does the church give jobs? Running a church is scamming and cheating from people! The church is a place full of bandits I have no mercy for any church You have been deceived by the colonizers and you let yourself be deceived!Why are we even talking about churches? Go cultivate your lands, go raise your animals As for prayer, if you need to, pray over the phone! Don’t you know the origin of churches? We had mercy, if we did not, we could have closed more churches. When asked about the few remaining churches overcrowding because now there are only a handful open, Mr Kagame said, To solve the issue of overcrowding, let’s close them all! We will close the ones that we allowed to remain open and as for the people, let them pray from their homes. These praying stuff… who has (bewitched you) Africans?
We shall meet pro-amendment group on Monday, HH announced at close of meeting with OASIS Forum
President Hakainde Hichilema says the dialogue with the OASIS Forum over the constitutional amendment process will continue tomorrow, with another scheduled meeting with those who are pro-constitutional amendments set for next Monday.
The President announced the Monday meeting when he was giving his closing remarks following a meeting he described as having been held in the spirit of positivity with OASIS Forum.
“The spirit within which we had the meeting is positive, it’s respectful, fair to each other, heard each other, the chair said, and at the end of the meeting we felt that we must have a catch-up again tomorrow or
Constitutional Court orders Attorney General to take over as government representative in LAZ case against Speaker Mutti
The Constitutional Court has ruled that the Attorney General should be joined to replace Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti as the government’s legal representative in a case where she has been sued by the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) over her ruling on the deferred Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 7 of 2025.
Lusaka, 29 November- LAZ took the Speaker to court, arguing that her decision to defer the Bill and her interpretation of parliamentary procedure were unconstitutional. In her earlier ruling, Ms. Mutti maintained that the Bill was properly before Parliament and that the deferment aligned with the Standing Orders. She further stated that if the Bill’s sponsor, Minister of Justice Princess Kasune, chose to proceed with the next stages, Parliament would continue its consideration regardless of the Constitutional Court’s judgment in a related case involving Munir Zulu and others.
Delivering the decision, a full bench comprising Judges Martin Musaluke, Mathew Chisunka, Judy Mulongoti, Mudford Mwandenga, and Kenneth Mulife held that the Speaker acted in her official capacity, bringing the matter under the constitutional framework established by Article 177, which mandates the Attorney General as the government’s principal legal advisor and representative.
The judges emphasised that while government comprises several organs and institutions that operate independently by constitutional design, legal proceedings involving any of these entities cannot be handled in isolation. They noted that the Attorney General has a constitutional duty to represent the executive, even in matters that may appear adverse to other branches or institutions of government.
The court relied on Order V Rule 4 of the Court Rules, which empowers it to add a party to the proceedings at any stage without a formal application if doing so is necessary to ensure a fair and just determination of the matter.
The ruling effectively positions the Attorney General as the official respondent on behalf of the State in the ongoing case between LAZ and the Speaker.
STATEMENT ON THE ALLEGED ILLEGAL SHARING OF FISP FARMING INPUTS.
The Government has noted with serious concern a video circulating on social media from Katete District in Eastern Province, depicting farmers illegally sharing Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) seed and issuing misleading statements against the Republican President, Mr. Hakainde Hichilema, and His Government.
Investigations have revealed that the women featured in the video were mobilized by a named Chairperson of Mpilila Cooperative, who is also linked to a named opposition political party. This individual recorded and circulated the video in an attempt to politicize a well-intended Government Programme. Such actions undermine the tremendous progress made by Government in curbing these unacceptable practices.
It has further been established that seven (7) of the individuals appearing in the video are bona fide FISP beneficiaries who were persuaded to share farming inputs in direct violation of Programme Guidelines. Both the implicated farmers and the cooperative will face disciplinary action in accordance with FISP Regulations. Government reiterates that the sharing or redistribution of farming inputs is ILLEGAL and will result in removal of non-compliant farmers and cooperatives from the Programme.
The nation is reminded that the FISP has fully transitioned to a 100 % e-voucher system. Under this system, farmers in their individual capacities receive their unique redemption codes on their registered mobile phone numbers for accessing inputs from accredited agro-dealers.
Farmers are bonded individually, and therefore any sharing of inputs constitutes a breach of the bonding requirements. Consequently, farmers are strictly prohibited from sharing their redemption codes or distributing inputs to any other person under any circumstance.
Farmers who are not beneficiaries under FISP are encouraged to access other Government support initiatives, including the Sustainable Agriculture Financing Facility (SAFF), the Citizens Economic Empowerment Commission (CEEC), Food Security Pack (FSP) Programme and the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), among others.
The Ministry assures the nation that it remains committed to supporting all farmers, enhancing agricultural productivity, and safeguarding national food security.
Grade Four Pupil Reported Missing Found at Boyfriend’s House in Chipata District
By White Luhanga
A Grade Four Pupil at a named school who was reported missing after failing to return home from school was later found to have spent her time at the house of her alleged boyfriend, an 18-year-old boy, in Chipata District of Eastern Province, leading to the arrest of the boy and his father.
Eastern Province Police Commissioner Robertson Mweemba confirmed the incident, stating that it occurred between 21st November 2025 at 10:10 hours and 28th November 2025 at 09:30 hours in Nabvutika Compound.
The victim’s mother reported to the police that her 15-year-old daughter had left home for school on 21st November at about 10:00 hours but did not return.
Brief facts of the matter are that on 21st November 2025, the victim left for school and never came back home.
On the same night, the suspect’s father, identified as Banda Senior, went to inform the victim’s parents that their daughter was at his house and that they had come to formalize a marriage arrangement.
Shocked and alarmed, the parents immediately reported the matter to the police.
Police launched an investigation that resulted in the arrest of the 18-year-old suspect for abduction and defilement, while his father was charged with permitting child marriage.
A medical report form has been issued to the girl, and police say investigations are ongoing.
REMINDER TO PRESIDENT HAKAINDE HICHILEMA: LEADERSHIP REQUIRES CONSISTENCY, NOT DOUBLE STANDARDS
By Michael Zephaniah Phiri Political Activist_
A reminder must be placed before President Hakainde Hichilema: when in opposition, he fought the Patriotic Front and President Edgar Lungu with relentless energy. He mobilised citizens, challenged constitutional amendments, defended public protest, and promised that once in office, reforms would be “far better and cleaner” than those proposed under Bill 10.
Today, however, the same citizens who stood with him feel betrayed. The very people who believed in his promise of inclusive, people-driven constitutional change are now being told to “go to court” or “wait for Parliament.” This abrupt shift in tone has left many shocked—because it contradicts everything he once stood for.
The unresolved issue surrounding the late President Edgar Lungu has only added fuel to the national frustration. For months, dialogue has stalled, tension has grown, and yet on camera the President speaks strongly about “dialogue” and “national healing.” Many Zambians now ask: How do we amend a Constitution when we cannot even resolve a simple family-nation dispute with compassion and urgency?
If President Hichilema argues that he “cannot bury Bill 7 without process,” then citizens equally ask: How did the nation fail to settle the matter of ECL with the same seriousness? This inconsistency fuels accusations of double standards.
It must be remembered that President Hichilema himself once declared that if it were him in charge, he would “withdraw such a bill immediately and take it back to the public.” But today, he stands on the opposite side of his own words. Youths once protested Bill 10 openly including under leaders like Ackson Banda. Those protests were defended by the then-opposition. Today, young people fear the same civic space is shrinking.
Under the current leadership, many burdens lie on the President’s shoulders. Citizens expect engagement, not avoidance. Consensus building, not confrontation. Dialogue, not dismissal.
The Women’s Forum, civil society, and community leaders who met with the President expressed a simple expectation: *withdraw Bill 7, take it back to the people, and restart the process correctly through broad consultation, genuine consensus, and national participation.* That is how constitutional amendments should be handled. That is how trust is built. That is how leadership proves it is for the people, not for political survival.
The President himself reminded the room of Zambia’s history: 1964, 1973, 1991, 1996, 2016—each constitutional moment involved negotiation, listening, and compromise. Never force. Never arrogance. Never instruction without conversation.
If those lessons were true then, they remain true now.
This is not a moment for media fights or finger-pointing. It is a moment for honesty. The country does not want a return to street confrontations, political tension, or governance by fear. Zambia is trying to heal from the bitterness of the past. This healing requires fairness, humility, and sincerity from all leaders including the President.
FINAL REMINDER*
Mr. President, the people who stood with you in opposition are watching.
They remember your words. They remember your promises.
And they expect you to uphold the same democratic principles you once demanded from others.
Leadership is not proven by power.
Leadership is proven by consistency, dialogue, and the courage to correct one’s own path.
Former President, Goodluck Jonathan has clarified the circumstances that led to his return to Nigeria aboard an aircraft sent by Côte d’Ivoire, following the political unrest that erupted in Guinea-Bissau earlier in the week.
Jonathan offered the explanation in a recent interview, which serves as his first public reaction since the incident triggered widespread concern at home.
Jonathan, who was in Guinea-Bissau as the head of the West African Elders Forum Election Observation Mission, said the turbulence in Bissau sparked anxiety across Nigeria, prompting him to publicly acknowledge the outpouring of support and worry from citizens.
He revealed that both President Bola Tinubu and Ivorian President Alassane Ouattara immediately mobilized an aircraft to evacuate him and members of his delegation once reports of gunfire and possible instability began circulating.
He explained that Côte d’Ivoire’s proximity to Guinea-Bissau and the strong ties between Francophone and Lusophone countries helped accelerate the approval needed for the aircraft to enter Bissau’s airspace. As a result, the Ivorian jet was already en route before Nigeria obtained similar clearance.
Jonathan noted that as soon as he was informed that the Nigerian aircraft had finally received the green light to depart, he and his delegation decided not to halt the Ivorian evacuation effort already in motion.
“That is why, if you look at the images from our return, you will see that we came in on an Ivorian aircraft,” he said.
The former president used the opportunity to publicly appreciate both President Tinubu and President Ouattara for their swift interventions, emphasizing that their combined efforts demonstrated commitment to his safety and to regional cooperation.
“I sincerely appreciate Nigerians, and I want them to hear directly from my mouth to appreciate their concern. And secondly, to thank my president, President Tinubu, and the Ivorian president, President Ouattara,” he said. He also expressed gratitude to Nigerians across all political, ethnic, and religious lines, acknowledging the nationwide concern that followed early reports of the unrest.
GUINEA-BISSAU PRESIDENT FLEES TO SENEGAL AFTER COUP
GUINEA-BISSAU’S deposed President Umaro Sissoco Embaló has arrived in neighbouring Senegal following his release by the military forces who toppled his government this week, Senegal’s authorities have announced.
It follows negotiations by the regional West African bloc Ecowas to secure his transfer amid rising tensions in Guinea-Bissau.
Senegal’s foreign ministry said in a statement that Embaló had landed in the country “safe and sound” on a chartered military flight late on Thursday.
The military in Guinea-Bissau has already sworn in a new transitional leader, Gen Horta N’Tam, who will rule the coup-prone country for a year.
Wednesday’s coup came a day before authorities were due to announce the provisional results of a presidential and parliamentary election.
The military has suspended the electoral process and blocked the release of the results.
It said it was acting to thwart a plot by unnamed politicians who had “the support of a well-known drug baron” to destabilise the country, and imposed a night-time curfew.
Sandwiched between Senegal and Guinea, the coup-prone country is known as a drug-trafficking hub where the military has been influential since it gained independence from Portugal in 1974.
A mother of three told the BBC it was not the first military takeover she had lived through, nonetheless it had came as a surprise as people were expecting to hear about the outcome of the election, which had an estimated voter turnout of more than 65%.
“We heard gunfire. We ran away. We tried to pack our bags to go home,” she said.
Another resident of the capital, Bissau, said he was unhappy about the situation.
“This doesn’t help anyone. Because it puts the country into chaos,” Mohamed Sylla told the BBC.
But reactions have been mixed, with some residents praising the army and hoping for an orderly transition.
“I am not against the military regime as long as they improve the living conditions in the country,” Suncar Gassama told the BBC.
“Guinea-Bissau is a very rich country where all the conditions exist for a good life. I cannot understand why Guineans always have violence in their minds and are shooting everywhere. People must fight for the establishment of democracy.”
Both Embaló and his closest rival Fernando Dias had claimed victory in Sunday’s presidential poll.
Government sources earlier told the BBC that Dias, Pereira and Interior Minister Botché Candé had also been detained.
The military junta has banned public protests and “all disturbing actions of peace and stability in the country”.
Tension remained high in Bissau on Thursday, with most shops and markets closed as soldiers patrolled the streets, news agency AFP reported.
Earlier that day, Gen N’Tam, Guinea-Bissau army’s Chief of Staff, was named the country’s new leader for a period of one year.
He said in a speech that the military had acted “to block operations that aimed to threaten our democracy”.
Shortly after the swearing-in, the military reopened land, air and sea borders that were shut when it announced the coup.
Some local civil society groups have accused Embaló of masterminding a “simulated coup” against himself with the help of the military, saying it was a ruse to block election results from coming out in case he lost.
Dias made similar claims, saying it was an “organised coup”. He told AFP that he considered himself the president-elect of Guinea-Bissau and believed he won roughly 52% of the vote.
Embaló has not responded to the allegations.
The 53-year-old leader has said he has survived multiple coup attempts during his time in office. However, his critics have previously accused him of fabricating crises in order to crack down on dissent.
He dissolved parliament after one such coup attempt in December 2023 and the country has not had a sitting legislature since then.
Persistent political infighting had left Embaló’s administration increasingly exposed, explains Beverly Ochieng, West Africa analyst at the intelligence firm Control Risks.
“Over the course of Embaló’s presidency, the legislature, judiciary and several state institutions have either been rendered non-operational or are functioning well below capacity,” she told the BBC.
Political analyst Ryan Cummings said the president’s previous actions had fuelled suspicions that the coup attempt was orchestrated to pave the way for his return to power under military oversight.
However, he told the BBC it was also “highly plausible” that the armed forces had acted independently to prevent a deeper political stalemate.
It was Sierra Leonean President Julius Maada Bio, the current Ecowas chair, who had contacted the Guinea-Bissau military on Wednesday to secure assurance for Embaló’s protection, according to Sierra Leone’s Foreign Minister Timothy Musa Kabba.
When asked about Embaló physical health on the BBC’s Newsday programme on Friday, the minister declined to comment but said the priority was ensuring his safe evacuation from Guinea-Bissau.
Ecowas leaders have suspended Guinea-Bissau from all decision-making bodies until constitutional order is restored. In a statement, the bloc ordered the military to return to the barracks, calling its actions a “grave violation of Guinea-Bissau’s constitutional order”.
The African Union has also condemned the coup.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a statement that he was “deeply concerned” about the situation in Guinea-Bissau, calling for an “immediate and unconditional restoration of constitutional order”.
Guinea-Bissau has witnessed at least nine coups or attempted coups over the last five decades.
USA MOVES TO BLOCK AFRICANS FROM ENTERING ITS COUNTRY, WHAT IS THE AFRICAN UNION POSITION ON THIS DECISION?
AFRICAN UNION must immediately act on the Trump decision to block Africans from entering the USA.
American Companies trade in Africa,they are more than 40 Embassies in African soil and several business interests of Americans including long term investments in Oil,Gas,Agriculture,Mining,Energy etc. Africa should Unite behind one common mind and whip to order the USA hostile Foreign Policies.
Three Effective Major Actions Africa should Implement:
1)Expel all American Diplomats,Shutdown of all American Embassies 2)Freeze all ongoing,pending and future deals with every USA Companies. 3)Place a Travel Embargo on all USA Citizens
Senegal’s Prime Minister has dismissed reports of a coup attempt in Guinea-Bissau, describing it as a “fabrication.” He accused President Umaro Général Umaro El Mokhtar Sissoco Embalo of using the military to hold onto power after losing the first round of elections.
On Thursday, Guinea-Bissau’s military installed Major-General Horta Inta-a as transitional president, removing civilian authorities before official results from the weekend’s presidential and legislative elections could be announced.
“What happened in Guinea-Bissau was a sham. We want the electoral process to continue,” said Senegal’s Prime Minister Ousmane SONKO during a parliamentary session.
“The [electoral] commission must be allowed to declare the winner.” Embalo has since arrived in Senegal after being released by military forces.
Reports allege he ordered security forces to detain opposition leaders and create chaos to justify a state of emergency. The situation has raised concerns about regional instability, with ECOWAS closely monitoring developments.
Rwanda’s Churches Under Pressure After Kagame’s 27 November 2025 Remarks
Rwanda’s regulation of churches has been a live political issue for years, framed by the government as a matter of public safety, accountability, and protection of citizens from fraud, and by critics as a potential constraint on religious freedom. The debate sharpened again on 27 November 2025, when Paul Kagame used a press conference in Kigali to deliver unusually blunt remarks about the role and conduct of many churches in Rwanda.
Paul Kagame argued that the rapid proliferation of churches has created space for exploitation, with some leaders presenting themselves as doing spiritual work while primarily seeking financial gain from followers. He questioned what tangible contribution churches make to core national and global challenges, such as jobs, wellbeing, and even war, and urged citizens to prioritise productive activity and economic self-reliance over what he portrayed as excessive time spent in places of worship. He also defended the continued closure of many churches, suggesting that reopening should not be automatic simply because a building meets minimum requirements.
Rwanda’s ruthless ruler further instructed that the remaining churches be closed and advised oppressed and enslaved Rwandans to pray in their homes or over the phone.
A church leader in Rwanda recently told me, “For many Rwandans, churches are not just places of worship. They are social safety nets, providers of community support, counselling, and informal welfare, especially where poverty and stress make people seek hope and solidarity.”
On the ground, reactions among church leaders and congregants have been mixed. Some Christian leaders have supported tighter enforcement as a way to deter abuse and protect vulnerable worshippers, while others argue implementation can be uneven and practically difficult, especially for smaller Pentecostal congregations, pushing worship into private homes or online and creating fear of penalties.
In mid-2024, Rwanda’s regulator, the Rwanda Governance Board (RGB), inspected large numbers of worship sites and closed over 7000 churches for non-compliance with regulations, including building standards, sanitation requirements, and concerns about exploitation. International Christian outlets reported that the crackdown resulted in closures ranging from about 7700 to nearly 10000 churches.
By: RPF Gakwerere, a military corporal for more than three decades
President Emmerson Mnangagwa claims to be a constitutionalist. He repeats, with the confidence of a man reading from a laminated script, that he abides by the law, respects the law, and, as his oath requires, defends the constitution. Yet around him — sometimes in broad daylight, sometimes in whispers — his lieutenants are openly plotting to vandalise that very constitution in his name.
Zimbabweans are being told, with straight faces and tortured logic, that while the constitution limits presidents to two terms, it does not specify how long each term must be.
If this sounds absurd, that’s because it is. It is the political equivalent of arguing that a loaf of bread is fixed at “two loaves,” but the size of each loaf is… negotiable.
This faction-manufactured loophole is not only legally groundless — it is politically combustible.
A Manufactured Crisis Wearing Constitutional Clothing
Mnangagwa took an oath to uphold the constitution. Yet he now allows ZANU PF officials, hired legal enablers, and political consultants to publicly debate how to defy it, dilute it, or circumvent its spirit.
He watches silently as this creates deep factional divisions within his own party.
He pretends to be weak and overwhelmed — an innocent bystander to “popular demand,” a reluctant hero begged to stay.
Except his reluctance is theatre, and the begging is orchestrated.
He cannot credibly claim devotion to constitutionalism while simultaneously sponsoring an “intellectual cartel” to massage the public into believing that “2030 is a done deal.”
Zimbabweans have heard this script before. In 2017, Jonathan Moyo loudly declared that Mugabe’s succession was “a done deal.” Within weeks, Mugabe was gone — removed by the very men who had once carried his briefcase.
In politics, nothing is a done deal until it is done.
The Constitution Is Clear — Painfully Clear
Sections 91 and 95 of the constitution limit the presidency to two five-year terms.
Not two terms of flexible length. Not two terms “adjustable by convenience.” Not two terms for ordinary mortals and custom-made terms for emperors.
To change that, you need:
>A constitutional amendment
>A referendum
And even then, the change cannot benefit the sitting President
This was a deliberate safeguard — one learned from the Mugabe era and insisted upon by the people in both the 2000 and 2013 processes.
Zimbabweans didn’t design a constitution so that its most important clause could be undone by wordplay.
Playing With Fire in a Region That Has Seen This Movie Before
Across Africa, presidents who tried to engineer term extensions have triggered explosions they never intended.
Frederick Chiluba – Zambia (1996–2001)
Chiluba tested the waters for a third term. Zambia pushed back. His own party rebelled. Result? His bid collapsed and his political career ended in humiliation.
Olusegun Obasanjo – Nigeria (2006)
Despite overwhelming power, Obasanjo’s third-term attempt was decisively rejected by parliament — backed by his own party heavyweights.
Abdoulaye Wade – Senegal (2012)
Wade attempted constitutional acrobatics to stay longer.
Senegal rose in mass protests. He lost the election spectacularly to his former protégé.
Blaise Compaoré – Burkina Faso (2014)
Tried to amend term limits. Citizens burned parliament, the military intervened, and he fled the country overnight.
Joseph Kabila – DR Congo (2016–2018)
Delayed elections to extend power.
The resulting instability forced a negotiated exit.
History is consistent: term-extension schemes either explode or implode — but they do not glide smoothly.
If Mnangagwa thinks Zimbabwe will be the exception, he is underestimating the very forces that delivered him to power in 2017.
A Coup Invitation Delivered With Both Hands:
Every soldier, not only the Head of State, swears an oath to defend the constitution.
No military in the world — not even one accustomed to political involvement — sits idle while a constitutional order is openly vandalised.
The 2030 campaign is not only unconstitutional; it is provocative.
It is walking, whistling, and dancing toward the same power vacuum that triggered the November 2017 intervention.
It is inviting instability by attempting to hijack the constitutional order for the benefit of a small cartel masquerading as revolutionaries.
Zimbabwe’s constitutional framework cannot be bent by the whims of criminal networks operating parallel to the state.
>A cartel is not a legislature. >A political consultant is not the constitution. >A factional slogan is not a referendum.
Mnangagwa’s Calculated Ambiguity Is Dangerous:
Mnangagwa pretends to be powerless to stop the chaos created in his own name.
He acts confused by the noise yet privately encourages it.
He plays the role of a democrat trapped by “popular demand” — yet refuses to put that demand to the only test that matters: a national referendum.
He wants the political benefits of the push while avoiding the political responsibility for it.
It is a dangerous game.
Zimbabwe has walked this path before. Africa has seen where it leads.
And history has never been kind to those who flirt with constitutional arson.
Conclusion: The Fire Is Real
Mnangagwa is playing with fire.
He is allowing factions to shred the constitution, divide the party, provoke the army, and drag the nation into avoidable instability — all for a term extension he cannot legally benefit from.
Zimbabwe’s constitution was written in blood, memory, and hard lessons.
It will not fall simply because a few individuals pretend not to understand plain English.
If the President truly wants to be remembered as a constitutionalist, there is only one path: End the 2030 circus, stop the enablers, and protect the constitution he swore to defend.
Otherwise, he risks becoming the latest African leader to discover — too late — that constitutions may bend, but nations do not.
ANGOLA announces construction of fertilizer factory in Soyo
With the opening of the gas treatment plant in Soyo, Angola plans to build a fertilizer production unit that will use the gas from the new plant.
The announcement was made by the President of the Republic, João Lourenço, in statements to the press after the inauguration of the gas factory, which has two platforms: Quiluma and Maboqueiro.
João Lourenço affirmed that there will be “a lot more jobs”, counting on the future fertilizer factory, to be built equally in the municipality of Soyo.
In this municipality, João Lourenço recalled, there is already facilities from Angola LNG, which produces gas associated with petroleum, but it was necessary to advance for the exploration of unassociated gas, whose reserves along the coast were already known, but lacked investment.
In addition, he explained, it was necessary to create legislation in 2018, that would protect investors interested in the gas manufacturing and transformation industry, and a new gas consortium in 2019.
“Gas is in high demand on the international market. It’s less polluting than diesel, for example. It has a good market price. Therefore, the benefits of this investment – which is a pioneer in this domain of unassociated gas, we believe others will come along the coast – are very promising for the Angolan people, for the national economy,” João Lourenço said.
Zimbabwe is in the throes of a constitutional crisis — not a theoretical one, not one debated by academics, but a real, immediate, and dangerous assault on the very idea of a republic.
Mnangagwa stands ready with a bludgeon, Mudenda with an axe, and Ziyambi Ziyambi with a legislative hammer — all set to vandalise the Constitution, bulldoze the people’s mandate, and carve out a Mnangagwa dynasty by suspending two election cycles.
While this unfolding coup-by-amendment threatens the nation’s future, one would expect the loudest alarm bells to come from the man who proclaims himself the face of the opposition.
But Nelson Chamisa — the self-styled vessel of hope — has chosen silence.
Worse still, he declared, with his signature ambiguity, that “there is no constitutional crisis” and “there is no constitution to defend.” No elaboration. No explanation. No strategy. Just another cloud of mystique released into the political atmosphere while the nation suffocates in reality.
Meanwhile, people resisting this term-extension madness are being bombed at night.
Arrests have begun.
Activists and critics — including myself — are now flagged for immediate arrest at every Zimbabwean border post.
And the main opposition leader is busy posting emojis.
The Show Must Not Go On
Chamisa re-emerged this week with yet another dramatic but empty proclamation — “I’M FIRED UP” — as if emojis can substitute for leadership at a moment of national peril.
Zimbabweans now know this routine well: the disappearance, the mysterious return, the spiritual slogan, the promise of an imminent “moment,” and the expectation that citizens will align their emotions to whatever riddle he has issued.
This is not leadership.
This is theatre.
And the script is getting stale.
While he offers suspense trailers, the government offers constitutional carnage. While he posts inspirational graphics, others are facing abductions, night explosions, and politically motivated prosecutions.
Zimbabweans do not need a motivational speaker. They need a leader — urgently.
The Myth Has Outlived Its Magic
Chamisa’s political brand has always relied on mystique: a destined leader whose ideas are permanently “coming soon,” whose strategy is hidden in spiritual language, whose movement hovers in the clouds waiting for revelation.
But myths collapse when confronted by hard reality.
And reality has arrived — armed, unapologetic, and determined to disfigure the constitution beyond recognition.
Behind the charisma stands a leader who avoids structure, sidesteps accountability, and treats organisation like an inconvenience. He is a man who longs for the presidency yet refuses to build anything that resembles a functioning political party.
For all the roaring he expects from citizens, Chamisa leads with the organisational seriousness of a youth-group coordinator who can’t find the attendance register.
The Human Cost of Ambiguity
While Chamisa protects his mystique, others pay the price.
Professionals who left careers to join CCC at his invitation are now jobless and owed months of salaries. Promises were made, sacrifice was accepted, and then — without explanation — they were abandoned.
Leadership is not measured by how one excites a crowd, but how one treats those who sacrifice quietly.
On that measure, Chamisa has failed dramatically.
The Tshabangu Debacle Was Not a Mugging — It Was Negligence
Let us be honest: Chamisa did not lose CCC to Tshabangu. He misplaced it.
He built a party with no constitution, no structures, no legal protections, and no institutional staying power. Mnangagwa’s lawfare did not defeat Chamisa — it merely exposed the vacuum he insisted on calling a political movement.
If one cannot protect one’s own political vehicle from an opportunist armed with stationery, how then does one propose to safeguard a nation?
Silence Is No Longer a Strategy
Zimbabwe faces a coordinated authoritarian project: • a constitution under attack • a parliament captured • a judiciary compromised • a security apparatus deployed against civilians • and now a plan to suspend elections and install a dynasty.
At such a moment, silence is not strategy — it is complicity.
Ambiguity is not wisdom — it is abandonment.
A leader cannot claim to fight for the people while refusing to speak when the people are under siege.
If Chamisa is building a new movement, he must say so plainly. If he has stepped back, he must say so plainly. If he is studying, regrouping, or undecided, he must say so plainly.
A nation on the brink does not need a political messiah emerging from cloud storage. It needs a leader anchored in clarity, courage, and responsibility.
A Final Word: Enough of the Illusions
Zimbabweans are tired. Tired of repression. Tired of corruption. Tired of uncertainty. Tired of waiting for miracles while facing batons, bombs, and bogus amendments.
The opposition cannot afford mystics when it needs mechanics. It cannot afford prophets when it needs planners. And it cannot afford a leader who speaks in riddles while the constitution burns.
Chamisa must end the theatrics, stop the strategic ambiguity, and address the nation like a man who understands the weight of the hope he has long taken for granted.
Zimbabweans deserve leadership that is clear, grounded, accountable — and real.
Trump Sends Real Estate Delegation to Moscow to Offer Putin a “Peace Deal” That Looks Suspiciously Like Surrender
In a bold new chapter of The Art of the Deal, Donald Trump is reportedly prepared to recognize Russia’s ownership of Crimea and whatever other territories Putin has wandered into lately, all in the sacred pursuit of “ending the war” by giving the aggressor exactly what he wants.
According to The Telegraph, Trump’s very own Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and his permanently astonished son-in-law Jared Kushner have boarded a jet straight to Moscow to deliver the offer personally, since nothing says “diplomacy” like sending a real estate developer and a man whose most notable political achievement is marrying Ivanka.
Observers in Brussels remain unimpressed, probably because not a single EU diplomat remembers electing either of these two gentlemen to represent the free world.
Meanwhile, Trump assures his supporters that he alone can solve the conflict before he becomes a political ghost in six months, a timeline that seems to intensify his enthusiasm for handing out geopolitical freebies.
Critics note that Trump has no authority to “recognize Russian ownership” of anything, including his own social media companies, but that hasn’t slowed the momentum.
Kushner, for his part, appears delighted to play Secretary of State for a day, blissfully ignoring the minor detail that American voters have never chosen him for anything except maybe “most likely to misplace his security clearance.”
Russia Declares Human Rights Watch an “Undesirable Organization”
The Russian Ministry of Justice has officially added Human Rights Watch (HRW) to its register of “undesirable organizations.” Under Russian law, any activity in cooperation with such organizations is prohibited.
The move follows Russia’s 2015 legislation designed to restrict foreign and international NGOs considered a potential threat to national security, defense, or constitutional order. Russian authorities have not issued a detailed public explanation for this designation.
Individuals or groups continuing to cooperate with HRW in Russia could face legal consequences under the law.
Yermak Is Out — and Kiev’s Power System Is Splintering
Zelensky confirmed that Andrey Yermak has submitted his resignation and announced a full “reset” of the President’s Office. He thanked Yermak in public, but Ukrainian media are blunt: this wasn’t Zelensky’s decision. NABU’s pressure, public backlash, and political attacks forced him to sacrifice the man who actually ran the Bankova.
Ukrainian outlets now say openly that Zelensky is losing control. Yermak wasn’t just an aide — he was the fixer who held together the entire system. His removal shows Zelensky can no longer shield even his closest circle. And in Kiev, everyone understands that Yermak, Mindich, and the other corruption-linked figures never acted without Zelensky’s approval. A blow to Yermak is a blow to Zelensky himself.
The Ukrainian press describes two pathways for the crisis:
1️⃣ Soft scenario: Power shifts from the Bankova to parliament and the cabinet, with “Servant of the People” trying to hold the center. Figures hostile to Yermak, including Arakhamia and Fedorov, push this line to prevent fractures in the Rada.
2️⃣ Hard scenario: A split inside “Servant of the People” creates an anti-Zelensky coalition — Poroshenko’s bloc plus grant-funded MPs aligned with NABU. This could trigger a no-confidence vote, demands for a “unity government,” and even Zelensky’s removal.
Control over the Prosecutor General’s Office, SBU, and State Bureau of Investigation is also slipping, because Yermak coordinated their political operations — especially the battles with NABU. Without him, the machinery is breaking down.
Ukrainian analysts warn the fallout will hit everything: the budget, energy, defense procurement, and morale. Zelensky’s political future is collapsing — corruption scandals, the fall of his strongest ally, and open rebellion inside the elite. His re-election chances evaporate as U.S. leverage grows, making him more vulnerable to pressure on peace terms he previously rejected.
Some Ukrainian commentators say Zelensky may even be pushed to resign, leaving negotiations to an acting president acceptable to Washington. Others warn of a deeper collapse in which Kiev becomes ungovernable — a scenario the West fears because of its military consequences.
Meanwhile, David Arakhamia — Yermak’s longtime rival — has already backed Zelensky publicly, positioning himself to expand influence as the power balance shifts.
Suzanne Hinn’s marriage to the popular faith-healer Benny Hinn is officially over for a second time in 46 years.
Records from the Hillsborough County Court in Florida, first cited by the Trinity Foundation, show the Hinns’ marriage ended in an uncontested divorce on Nov. 19.
When Suzanne Hinn filed for divorce in the summer of 2024, the former couple had been living in separate homes more than 60 miles apart.
When asked for a statement, Benny Hinn’s attorney, Damon Chase, said his client was not the one who requested the divorce, but the case was settled amicably, claiming they are still very much in love with each other.
“Benny Hinn and Suzanne Hinn still love each other with a deep, profound soulmate type of love, and they always have for years and years and years. They just got divorced. It was personal feelings. It was something personal to them, but they did what they felt was right,” Chase said. “They’re still very much in each other’s lives. And will always be in each other’s lives.”
Chase insisted the divorce was for undisclosed personal reasons, saying the couple still prays together and remains committed to Christian ministry.
“There is no end of the relationship. They both love each other very much,” Chase told CP.
“As you can see from reviewing the file, it was extremely amicable. They both will always be in each other’s lives, and like, always, they’re very, very close. They love each other a lot, both of them. And that was clear all through [the process]. This was not like some contentious divorce or anything like that.”
Back in February 2010, Suzanne Hinn served her husband with divorce papers in California’s Orange County Superior Court, citing “irreconcilable differences” after 30 years of marriage. They were first married on Aug. 4, 1979, and have four children together.
In the summer of 2010, the National Enquirer photographed Hinn leaving a hotel room with fellow televangelist Paula White, reports Charisma. The Enquirer report claimed that Hinn and White had spent three nights in a five-star hotel that the televangelist booked under an alias. Hinn later said that he and White had a “friendship” that he ended after the National Enquirer report was published and denied allegations of an “affair.”
“No immorality whatsoever. These people out there are making it sound like we had an affair. That’s a lie,” Hinn told followers at a crusade in California.
Hinn claimed the Vatican had made him a Patron of the Arts, and he took White to Rome because he wanted her to become a donor to help maintain the Vatican’s art collections.
“I let her come with me to Rome so she can donate money,” Hinn said. “That was stupid on my part. And for that, I do ask forgiveness.”
In 2012, the Hinns announced their reconciliation. Benny Hinn also claimed that their divorce was triggered by Suzanne Hinn’s addiction to prescription drugs.
“Suzanne started taking certain prescription medications to help her cope with some of her personal struggles. She became dependent on those for nearly 15 years, and those medications made her behave erratically at times,” Hinn wrote in a message on his ministry’s website at the time.
“As her husband, I did not know the extent of her reliance on these medications, nor did I fully understand just how much harm they were causing to her, physically and emotionally.”
The couple remarried in 2013 at the Holyland Experience in Orlando, Florida, before an audience of 1,000.
Sean Combs’ fellow inmates at FCI Fort Dix were expecting a bleak Thanksgiving, but the holiday took a different turn after Combs organised and funded an inmate-led effort to provide meals across the facility. According to Combs’ representative, the music mogul worked with an internal group known as Bankroll Bosses, purchasing food from the commissary, preparing it over two days, and distributing it to every housing unit in the New Jersey prison.
Combs told TMZ, “Thanksgiving, to me, is about making sure other people eat. Everybody misses their family. People get depressed during the holidays. We just wanted to come together as a family and do our own thing.” Prisons typically offer only a basic, minimal “in-and-out” Thanksgiving meal, but Combs and the group sought to create something more meaningful for the inmates.
B.I., a former gang leader who helped coordinate the effort, said, “We cooked the food and sent it to all the buildings. Enough for about 200 people each building. It took two days to prep everything.” Despite limited tools, no stoves or microwaves, the inmates managed by using their ID cards for cutting and other improvisations. The prison’s official Thanksgiving menu consisted of turkey roast with trimmings, mashed potatoes, corn and dessert.
Combs, who arrived at Fort Dix on October 30 to begin serving a 50-month sentence for violating the Mann Act, appeared to be adjusting to prison life. “There’s a lot of misinterpretations about prison. There is a strong brotherhood. We all look out for each other. It’s nothing but a positive thing,” he said. “It’s like a little bit of home in a dark place.”
U.S. Petition Targets Elon Musk — Americans Call for His Citizenship to Be Revoked and Demand Deportation to South Africa
A political storm is brewing in the United States — and this time, Elon Musk is right at the centre of it.
A group of concerned American citizens has launched a public petition demanding that the U.S. government revoke Musk’s naturalized citizenship and send him back to South Africa. The petitioners claim that Musk has grown “too influential, too political, and too deeply involved in shaping national decisions for a private billionaire.”
They argue that Musk, who originally came from Pretoria, has accumulated outsized political power, especially through platforms like X and his close alignment with certain U.S. political figures. They accuse him of “distorting the political climate” and using his companies to push policies that benefit him.
THE TIMING IS NO COINCIDENCE This petition comes at a moment of extreme tension between President Donald Trump and President Cyril Ramaphosa over South Africa’s exclusion from the 2026 G20 Summit. Trump’s accusations, South Africa’s pushback, and the growing diplomatic war have put SA–US relations under the spotlight.
Now Musk — one of the most famous South Africans in the world — is being pulled into the drama.
HOW MUSK IS LINKED TO THE TENSION • Musk has publicly weighed in on U.S. foreign policy, including Africa-related issues. • His platform, X, is being used heavily in the heated debate about South Africa’s G20 snub, sanctions, and Trump’s statements. • Some petitioners claim that Musk’s global influence “could interfere with U.S. diplomatic decisions,” especially during a sensitive period involving South Africa.
Whether those claims are exaggerated or politically motivated, the petition shows that Musk is no longer just a tech billionaire — he’s becoming a political lightning rod.
THE BIGGER PICTURE This isn’t just about Elon Musk. It’s about: • Rising suspicion of billionaires in U.S. politics • The fight between Trump’s America and Ramaphosa’s South Africa • How powerful private individuals are now shaping international narratives
With SA–US relations already on a knife’s edge, this new petition could add yet another chapter to a growing geopolitical showdown.
“GENOCIDE IS FOR COURTS TO DECIDE, NOT GOVERNMENTS” — UK Pushes Back Amid Global Outcry Over South Africa Allegations
The United Kingdom has sent a message that is shaking up the global debate: genocide is a legal determination, not a political slogan. In a time where loud voices, foreign politicians, and lobby groups are throwing accusations at South Africa, the UK is reminding the world that such claims can only be confirmed by independent courts, not governments driven by agendas.
And this statement could not have come at a more important moment.
—
The world is not buying the narrative pushed by AfriForum, Trump, and certain US groups
For years, AfriForum, parts of the American right wing, and lately Donald Trump himself have been promoting the narrative of “white genocide” in South Africa.
They’ve travelled to Washington, spoken to US politicians, and flooded international media with one-sided claims — hoping foreign governments would endorse their version of events.
But here’s the reality: Most of the world is not agreeing with them.
The UK’s latest position echoes what many countries quietly believe: These are political claims, not legal facts. They must be tested in court, not decided on Twitter or YouTube. You cannot weaponise the word “genocide” for political pressure.
This puts AfriForum and Trump in an uncomfortable position: Their campaign relies on political sympathy — but the UK is saying sympathy is not evidence.
—
UK and South Africa still maintain a strong, respectful relationship
What makes the UK’s statement even more significant is this: It comes from a country with one of the strongest diplomatic, economic, and historical ties to South Africa.
The UK is still one of South Africa’s largest: Trade partners Tourism contributors Investors Development and education collaborators
The two countries continue working together on:
Economic development
Trade expansion
Green energy
Technology partnerships
Security cooperation
This is NOT the posture of a nation that believes South Africa is committing genocide or collapsing into chaos. In fact, it shows that London sees Pretoria as a long-term partner, not a crisis zone.
Compare that to the hostile tone from Trump-era US voices — and the contrast is clear.
—
The deeper message behind the UK’s words
When the UK says “genocide is for courts to decide,” they are also saying:
Stop using South Africa for political point-scoring.
Stop exaggerating South Africa’s issues for international leverage.
Stop bypassing legal processes by running to foreign governments.
If you have evidence, bring it to court — not to Washington lobbyists.
This is a direct challenge to AfriForum’s long-running strategy of appealing to foreign governments instead of international courts.
—
South Africans should understand what this means
The world sees South Africa’s problems — yes. But the world also sees the propaganda, exaggerations, and political agendas creeping into the narrative.
The UK’s position proves: South Africa is NOT isolated. South Africa is NOT being seen as a genocidal state. International partners still value diplomatic truth, not political theatre.
The Mediation and Security Council (MSC) of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has suspended Guinea-Bissau from all “decision-making bodies” and warned that coup leaders would face strong regional consequences unless they restore constitutional order following Wednesday’s military takeover.
The MSC made the announcement after a virtual meeting of ECOWAS leaders chaired by Sierra Leonean President Julius Maada Bio on Thursday, following the coup in Guinea-Bissau.
Bio cautioned that the region “cannot allow the illegal abortion of a democratic process,” insisting that ECOWAS must act decisively to defend stability. “We must stand firmly with the people of Guinea-Bissau, who only days ago demonstrated their commitment to democracy,” he said.
ECOWAS expressed “deep concern with the unfolding political crisis”, noting that citizens had shown “resilience and commitment to democracy” by voting massively in the November 23 elections.
The MSC said it “condemns in the strongest terms the coup d’état perpetrated on 26 November 2025”, rejecting any arrangement that legitimises “the subversion of the will of the people.” It demanded that coup leaders allow the National Electoral Commission to declare the election results immediately.
The Council also called for the “immediate and unconditional release of all detained officials, in particular President Umaro Sissoco Embaló, electoral officials and all other political figures.” It placed full responsibility on the coup leaders for the protection of life and property during the crisis.
Concern about the safety of international personnel was strongly highlighted, with ECOWAS urging the coup leaders to “guarantee the safety and facilitate the evacuation and safe passage of ECOWAS and all other international election observers.”
In a major step, the Council suspended Guinea-Bissau from all ECOWAS decision-making bodies until full constitutional order is restored, citing the ECOWAS Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance.
To advance mediation, ECOWAS mandated its Chair to lead a high-level mission to Bissau, including Presidents Faure Gnassingbé of Togo, Jose Maria Neves of Cabo Verde, and Bassirou Diomaye Faye of Senegal, alongside the President of the ECOWAS Commission.
The bloc further urged the Guinea-Bissau Armed Forces to “return to barracks and maintain their constitutional role,” and instructed the ECOWAS Stabilisation Support Mission to continue protecting national institutions.
Warning that it remains fully seized of the crisis, ECOWAS declared that it reserves the right to activate all measures provided in its protocols, including sanctions against “all entities deemed culpable of disrupting the electoral and democratic process.”
Donald Trump called a female reporter “stupid” after she questioned the U.S.. president about claims he made regarding the Washington DC shooting.
Suspect Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who allegedly shot and k!lled National Guard member Sarah Beckstrom, arrived in the US under former president Joe Biden’s Operation Allies Welcome scheme in 2021.
While addressing the attack on National Guard members, Donald Trump Trump accused the Biden administration improperly vetting Afghan nationals brought to the US.
A reporter the challenged Trump’s claimthat Biden is to blame and the US president asked her: “Are you a stupid person?”
Trump added: “Because they came in on a plane along with thousands of other people that shouldn’t be here, and you’re just asking questions because you’re a stupid person.”
It comes after Trump told Bloomberg reporter Catherine Lucey to be “quiet, piggy” after she attempted to follow up on a question about Jeffrey Epstein on 18 November.
Donald Trump just snapped at a reporter who confronted him over his lies on the National Guard shooter “Are you stupid? Are you a stupid person? You're just asking questions because you're a stupid person.” What an insecure child. pic.twitter.com/RLVs3F0otD
Guinea-Bissau military takeover is ‘ceremonial coup’ – Jonathan
“The military doesn’t take over governments, and the sitting president that they overthrew would be allowed to be addressing press conferences and announcing that he has been arrested. Why does this happen? Who is fooling whom?” he asked.
Jonathan also called on ECOWAS and the African Union to ensure the timely announcement of election results, stressing that the military should not interfere with the democratic process.
“Basically, what happened in Guinea-Bissau is quite disturbing to me, who believes in democracy. They have the results because AU and ECOWAS officials were in all the regions when the results were collated. They cannot change those results.
“They should tally all those results and announce them. They cannot force the military out. They must announce and let the world know who won that election. Let the world know who won that election,” he said.
He further recalled his experience overseeing elections in Côte d’Ivoire, emphasising that election outcomes must be respected.
“A similar thing happened in Côte d’Ivoire when I was the Chair of the Authority of Heads of State and Government of ECOWAS. “When we had elections in Côte d’Ivoire in 2010, Laurent Gbagbo was the sitting president. In the first round, Gbagbo got forty-something per cent of the votes, and Alassane Ouattara got thirty-something per cent of the votes.
“And their law, you must get 50 per cent of the votes plus one, at least. Democracy is about the majority. You must get a simple majority to be the president, so they had to go for a second round.
“When they went for the second round, all those other candidates that lost now supported Ouattara, and Ouattara then got more votes than Gbagbo. And Gbagbo said he was not going, that he won the election, and that Ouattara and somebody who had something could not come and defeat him. But that is their law.
“Then all the observers in the international community said Ouattara won the election. And we in ECOWAS said, well, you are our colleague, but you have to go. If the observers, everybody, say Ouattara won the election, Ouattara must be sworn in as the president of Côte d’Ivoire. I stood my ground as the Chair of the Authority of Heads of State and Government of ECOWAS, and Ouattara was sworn in,” he said.
Hollywood actor, Kevin Spacey, who is known for his work in the superhit series House of Cards, is set to face three more claims of s£xual ass@ult in the London civil court next year.
Three men have sued the actor over allegations that he assaulted them between 2000 and 2013.
BBC News stated that at a hearing in London’s High Court on Wednesday, a provisional trial date of October 12, 2026, was suggested, though it is still to be decided if the claims will be heard in a single civil trial or three consecutive ones.
Spacey, who was acquitted of s£xual ass@ult charges brought by four men in a UK criminal trial in 2023, has denied all allegations.
As per reports, the actor has formally denied two of the three civil claims in court, but has not yet filed a defense for the third.
One of the men suing Spacey in civil court previously did so in 2022, but the case was put on hold during his criminal trial. The man, who has been granted anonymity by the court, claims he “suffered psychiatric damage and other financial loss” as a result of the alleged sexual assault, which he says took place in August 2008.
Another man, Ruari Cannon, waived his right to anonymity and alleged that the actor groped him at a party in 2013 while he was starring in a play at the Old Vic, where the actor served as the artistic director. Cannon took part in last year’s Channel 4 docuseries Spacey Unmasked, to which the actor responded, “Each time I have been given the time and a proper forum to defend myself, the allegations have failed under scrutiny and I have been exonerated.”
Kevin was also sued in the New York civil court in 2022 by actor Anthony Rapp.
