STATE GRABS THE COFFIN! – Pretoria Court to Decide If Lungu’s Family Loses Burial Rights
The legal tug-of-war between the Zambian government and the family of late President Edgar Chagwa Lungu reached a critical stage on Monday as the Pretoria High Court concluded oral arguments in the ongoing burial dispute. Contrary to public expectation, the court did not deliver a final ruling but announced that judgment would be handed down before Friday, 8th August 2025.
Representing the Lungu family, Senior Counsel Makebi Zulu described the government’s conduct in the case as a “legal overreach,” alleging that the State’s court strategy reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of procedure and principle. “They are playing rugby in a game of football,” Zulu said during a post-hearing interview, referencing what he called the State’s misapplication of legal remedies and tactics.
The legal battle was initiated in late June, specifically on the 24th and 25th, when the Zambian government approached the South African courts seeking to interdict the family from proceeding with the burial of the late President in South Africa. While no formal interdict was granted, the parties agreed to a mutual undertaking to halt burial proceedings until the matter was judicially resolved.
A series of court-directed filings followed: the State was expected to file its originating process by 4th July, the family to respond by 11th July, and the State to reply by 18th July. The State, however, missed its deadline and submitted documents on 22nd July. The family complied with the final response deadline of 24th July, leading to the oral hearing held today.
According to court documents and Counsel Zulu’s submissions, the Zambian government is seeking four principal reliefs:
1. A declaratory order affirming the State’s exclusive right to repatriate the body of the late President to Zambia for a state funeral and burial;
2. A mandatory order compelling the funeral home (the 8th respondent) to release the body to the Zambian High Commission upon demand;
3. Authorization for an official State delegation (including an undertaker, aide-de-camp, and two family members) to accompany the body under State arrangements;
4. Exclusion of the family’s decision-making authority over the repatriation and burial process.
“The government is attempting to seize control of a deeply personal and national process, effectively sidelining the family under the guise of state protocol,” argued Counsel Zulu. “That is neither legally sound nor morally acceptable.”
A major point of contention is the alleged existence of a prior agreement between the government and the family regarding the body’s repatriation. While the State’s oral submissions referenced such an agreement, Zulu noted that the reliefs filed made no legal claim based on contractual breach or specific performance.
“If the government truly believed an agreement existed, they should have asked the court to enforce it. Instead, they are seeking brand new orders, trying to reframe the dispute into something the family never consented to,” he added.
Zulu emphasized that even if such an agreement had existed which the family denies it stipulated that the family would oversee the repatriation. “We had a private jet on standby,” he said. “The State is now trying to reverse roles entirely.”
Legal observers note that the central issue lies in the first relief: whether the Zambian government holds the exclusive right to repatriate and bury the late President. According to Counsel Zulu, this is the issue the court is expected to address first and foremost.
“The court must decide not only whether the government has this right, but on what basis whether by law, by agreement, or by State prerogative,” he stated.
As South Africa’s judiciary deliberates on the matter, questions of state authority, individual rights, and posthumous dignity hang in the balance.
“The family has done everything required under the law,” Zulu said in closing. “Now the world watches to see if the law will uphold not only justice but also humanity.”
The Pretoria High Court’s ruling is expected to set a significant precedent in cross-border state and family relations involving the burial of former heads of state. Until then, the body of Zambia’s sixth President remains in legal and political limbo a stark reminder of how death can still spark disputes over power, identity, and legacy.
KUMWESU