THE POLICE OFFICER WHO SAVED HAKAINDE HICHILEMA’S LIFE IN 2014 IS NOW RETIRED IN PUBLIC INTEREST UNDER HIS PRESIDENCY 🏘️ THE PEOPLE’S POLITICAL SCIENCE: A SPECIAL EDITION DEDICATED TO MY NEPHEW, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT CHRISTOPHER CHIBUYE (RTD)
Among the most pernicious manifestations of administrative despotism is the appropriation of lawful state instruments for purposes of personal retribution, institutional victimisation and political expediency. When the machinery of government becomes susceptible to malicious intelligence, clandestine vendettas and the capricious preferences of individuals occupying positions of authority, the country itself becomes vulnerable to the corrosion of constitutional government.
Zambia is a republic. It is neither a private limited company nor the patrimonial estate of any tribe, region, political formation or privileged class. The sacrifices of our independence struggle were never intended to replace colonial repression with indigenous authoritarianism. Our founding generation envisioned a sovereign nation in which public authority would serve the collective welfare of the citizenry, governed by justice, equality and the inviolable dignity of the human person.
It is against this historical and constitutional background that I wish to examine the doctrine of retirement in the public or national interest, dedicating this edition to my nephew, Senior Superintendent Christopher Chibuye (rtd), whose recent retirement from the Zambia Police Service has occasioned considerable reflection within our family.
My nephew entered the Police Service as a constable and rose through the ranks through years of professional service. I have known him throughout his life. I know his temperament, his humanity, his professional discipline and his extraordinary capacity for compassion. I have repeatedly asked him whether he participated in any conduct that could reasonably justify his removal from the Service. He has consistently denied any wrongdoing warranting such a decision.
There is an episode in his professional life that deserves a permanent place in our family’s recollection of Zambia’s political history. On 13 April 2014, when Mr Hakainde Hichilema was an opposition leader, violent Patriotic Front cadres headed to Sun FM radio station, where he was conducting a political interview. Among the persons associated with the threatened violence was the notorious PF cadre commonly known as Chile One Commander, now deceased.
My nephew was then serving in police intelligence. According to the now publicly available account, upon learning of the impending danger, he rushed to the radio station to assist in protecting Mr Hichilema’s life. His professional understanding of the premises and available escape routes enabled him to help facilitate an emergency evacuation. Initially, his arrival reportedly generated apprehension among those protecting the opposition leader, who feared that he might be another officer acting on behalf of hostile political interests. He explained the danger and assisted in arranging an escape through the roof. Mr Hichilema survived that violent episode.
The extraordinary irony of this history is that a police officer who, according to our family account, helped preserve the life of a man who subsequently became President of the Republic should himself, years later, find his professional career terminated under the administration of that same President. I recount this history without suggesting that President Hichilema personally ordered my nephew’s retirement. The distinction between presidential authority and decisions undertaken through the administrative machinery of the state is important. Indeed, this is precisely why the integrity of institutional processes deserves rigorous public scrutiny.
Following the Sun FM incident, my nephew experienced a succession of transfers under the PF administration. Our family understood these developments as retaliatory measures arising from his assistance to the then opposition leader. During another assignment involving presidential security arrangements in Kitwe under the PF administration, he suffered a grave incident involving a moving police vehicle. He sustained serious injuries and nearly lost his life. The precise circumstances remain unclear to me, and I will not manufacture certainty where questions remain unanswered.
Our family mobilised resources to secure his medical evacuation to South Africa. We subsequently remained deeply concerned about his personal safety and professional circumstances. When the PF administration eventually lost power in 2021, we hoped that an era of institutional tranquillity, professional meritocracy and freedom from political persecution had arrived. Unfortunately, my nephew’s subsequent experiences have raised troubling questions.
While serving in the Chitambo area, he informed me of an encounter involving the then Deputy Inspector General of Police responsible for Administration, Ms Charity Munganga. According to his account, Ms Munganga requested assistance in identifying traditional land for a farm. My nephew facilitated contact with the relevant traditional authorities. When the question of customary formalities and associated expenses arose, he says he was asked to exercise his initiative in finding the necessary money.
He explained that he lacked the financial capacity to undertake such an obligation. He further alleges that he was warned that his professional life would be made difficult. Subsequent transfers to North Western Province and a proposed further movement to Ndola reinforced his apprehension that he was experiencing administrative retaliation. These are allegations arising from his account, and I believe they deserve impartial examination. Ms Munganga must equally have the opportunity to respond. My purpose in recounting them is to illuminate the potentially devastating consequences when professional authority becomes entangled with personal expectations.
Ms Munganga’s own appointment as Deputy Inspector General was terminated on 4 October 2026. Herein lies an enduring lesson about the transience of public power. The office may be formidable, but its occupant is temporary. The republic endures beyond every incumbent.
The expression “public interest” is among the most consequential concepts in constitutional and administrative jurisprudence. It refers to the welfare, security, rights and collective wellbeing of the political community. Its meaning cannot be determined by the personal convenience of an officeholder or the partisan preferences of a governing administration.
Zambian law distinguishes retirement in the national interest from retirement in the public interest. The Public Service Pensions Act, 2026 defines the latter in disciplinary terms, while retirement in the national interest encompasses government initiated separation for other reasons. The distinction was also acknowledged by the Vice President in Parliament on 16 October 2026. The existence of statutory authority, however, cannot extinguish the constitutional imperatives of fairness, rationality, accountability and protection against arbitrary administrative action.
A public officer must never be condemned by the mere circulation of an intelligence report whose contents have escaped independent scrutiny. Intelligence is information requiring evaluation. Allegation is a proposition requiring proof. Suspicion is an investigative starting point. None should be casually elevated into an incontrovertible verdict. Where disciplinary misconduct is alleged, the affected officer deserves to know the accusation and to have a meaningful opportunity to answer it in accordance with the applicable law. Where national policy is invoked, the responsible authority must be capable of demonstrating a lawful public purpose.
Otherwise, retirement in the national interest risks degenerating into a euphemism for bureaucratic banishment, an administrative guillotine descending upon careers painstakingly constructed through decades of public service. No government should possess an unquestionable licence to convert personal hostility into public policy. The police officer who serves the republic does not belong to the governing party. The intelligence officer who protects an opposition leader is fulfilling a constitutional responsibility. The civil servant who refuses an improper personal request should never be punished for preserving professional boundaries.
Today an officer may be accused of sympathising with the opposition. Tomorrow another may be accused of insufficient enthusiasm for the governing party. Eventually, the public service degenerates into a congregation of frightened functionaries, preoccupied with political survival instead of professional excellence. That is how institutional sycophancy displaces competence, how administrative servility replaces independent judgement, and how a constitutional republic gradually acquires the habits of a patrimonial state.
My nephew’s case is particularly poignant because it illustrates the moral contradiction that arises when an officer who once protected an opposition politician from political violence later finds himself confronting uncertainty under that politician’s administration. I do not demand preferential treatment for Christopher Chibuye because he is my nephew. I demand that he receives the fairness to which every Zambian public officer is entitled.
If there are substantiated grounds for his retirement, let the competent authorities identify the applicable legal basis and ensure that the prescribed procedures have been followed. If the decision arose from inaccurate intelligence, personal animosity or administrative manipulation, the appropriate authorities must correct the injustice. This principle applies equally to every police officer, teacher, nurse, intelligence officer, soldier and civil servant whose livelihood and reputation may be affected by the exercise of public power.
A government cannot denounce arbitrary retirement when it is in opposition and subsequently treat the same practice as an acceptable instrument of administrative convenience when it assumes office. What was wrong under the PF remains wrong under the UPND. What is wrong today will remain wrong under every future government. Our Republic must develop institutions whose fidelity is owed to the Constitution rather than the fluctuating fortunes of political incumbency.
The ultimate strength of a government is never measured by the number of armed officers at its command, the sophistication of its intelligence machinery or the severity of its administrative sanctions. Its strength resides in the confidence of its citizens, the integrity of its institutions and the welfare of the poor, the vulnerable and the powerless. History is replete with rulers who mistook coercive capacity for political permanence. Their authority eventually evaporated, while the grievances they disregarded survived them.
To my nephew, Senior Superintendent Christopher Chibuye, I say this, “your professional career cannot be reduced to the circumstances of its termination. Your years of service, your sacrifices and the lives you helped protect remain part of your personal history.”
To those entrusted with public authority, I offer this enduring republican admonition, “public office is a temporary custodianship of permanent national obligations. Never confuse the privilege of exercising state power with personal ownership of the state.” Zambia belongs to all Zambians. Its institutions must protect every citizen. Its laws must govern every administration. Its conception of public interest must never become the convenient vocabulary through which private vendettas masquerade as acts of national necessity. The republic must always be greater than the government of the day.
Saviour Chishimba
(Yehuda Ben David)
Jewish Scholar
Principal & Founder
THE PEOPLE’S ACADEMY