Why is President Hakainde Hichilema Desperately Trying to Block Former President Edgar Lungu from Contesting in the 2026 Elections?
By Thandiwe Ketis Ngoma
It doesn’t take a political expert to see that President Hakainde Hichilema is directly involved in the eligibility case against former President Edgar Lungu. His aggressive push to prevent former President Dr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu from contesting the 2026 elections is less about upholding the law and more about securing his own political survival. Despite his denials, all signs point to President Hichilema orchestrating this strategy—a calculated attempt to neutralize a powerful opponent in a way that undermines Zambia’s democracy and bolsters his own ego.
This approach is stoking deep political divisions, creating a narrative that President Hichilema’s leadership is driven not by confidence but by a deep fear of competition. What should be a healthy political rivalry has instead evolved into a bitter fight that risks tearing the nation apart. The case against Dr. Lungu’s eligibility is not just a legal matter—it symbolizes a larger pattern of political manipulation, where state power is used to entrench control rather than uphold the principles of fairness and democracy.
Historical Context: Dr. Lungu’s Eligibility Rulings
This is not the first time the Constitutional Court has ruled on former President Lungu’s eligibility. On no fewer than three occasions, the court—the final authority on constitutional matters in Zambia—has reaffirmed that the two years Dr. Lungu served after President Michael Sata’s death do not constitute a full presidential term. The court has consistently upheld that according to Article 106(6)(b) of the Constitution, a term served for less than three years cannot be counted as a full term.
These rulings have established a clear precedent: Former President Lungu, having only served one full term between 2016 and 2021, remains eligible to run for another term. This legal foundation is firm, clear, and based on constitutional provisions that should guide any future deliberations.
Yet, despite these established rulings, the matter has resurfaced, driven by Mr. Chizombe Michelo, a known ally of President Hichilema and a UPND cadre, who has petitioned the court to declare that Lungu is ineligible to contest future elections. This attempt raises serious concerns about political interference in the judiciary, especially as no new evidence has been presented to justify reopening a matter that the courts have already resolved. Zambia’s legal system requires compelling new evidence to revisit settled matters, and the lack of such evidence begs the question: why is this case even being considered again?
Abuse of Power and Erosion of Democratic Integrity
President Hichilema’s efforts to manipulate Zambia’s legal institutions for political gain have not gone unnoticed. His relentless pressure on the judiciary to deliver a ruling that serves his interests is eroding public trust in Zambia’s legal system. The perception that the judiciary is being used as a tool of the executive branch undermines its independence and casts doubt on the fairness of the entire judicial process.
The timing of this challenge is highly suspect. With mounting dissatisfaction among the Zambian public over unmet promises—such as economic recovery, job creation, and the ongoing energy crisis—President Hichilema seems desperate to avoid facing a strong, credible challenger in 2026. Former President Lungu still enjoys significant grassroots support, particularly in key regions, and remains a formidable opponent. If President Hichilema is truly confident in his governance record, why resort to underhanded tactics to remove a competitor? By attempting to bar Dr. Lungu from contesting, Hichilema’s government is sending a message of weakness, not strength, further damaging its claim of delivering transformative leadership.
The Will of the People
In a democracy, it is the people—not the government—that should determine who leads them. Blocking former President Lungu from contesting the 2026 elections is a direct assault on this principle, depriving Zambians of their right to choose their preferred leader. Regardless of one’s opinion of Dr. Lungu, the core issue remains: the electorate must have the right to vote for any eligible candidate of their choosing.
President Hichilema’s actions reflect a disturbing lack of faith in the Zambian people’s ability to make informed decisions. This move threatens to undermine Zambia’s democratic foundations and fosters a dangerous narrative: that the ruling party is willing to subvert democracy to ensure its continued hold on power.
President Hichilema must recognize that blocking Dr. Lungu from the 2026 elections will not guarantee his political survival. Ultimately, power lies with the people. The electorate must have the freedom to choose their leaders, and it is their collective voice that gives legitimacy to any government. Denying them that choice undermines the very essence of democracy.
The Implications for Zambia’s Judiciary
The judiciary is the bedrock of democracy, entrusted with the impartial interpretation and application of the law. Yet, the sustained effort to challenge Dr. Lungu’s eligibility is threatening to compromise the independence of the courts. The appearance that the judiciary is acting at the behest of the executive branch diminishes public confidence in the courts, erodes the rule of law, and weakens the very democratic institutions that Zambia holds dear.
Even if the judiciary ultimately rules in President Hichilema’s favor, the perception of political interference will linger. This will not only tarnish the administration’s reputation but will also damage the credibility of Zambia’s legal system, further eroding public trust in the country’s institutions.
Political Miscalculation: Sympathy for Dr. Lungu
Blocking Dr. Lungu may backfire spectacularly. Instead of diminishing his influence, these efforts could galvanize his supporters, attract sympathy from undecided voters, and turn him into a political martyr. History is full of examples where attempts to silence political rivals have led to a surge in their popularity, as voters rally behind them in the face of perceived injustice.
Rather than consolidating his political position, President Hichilema risks alienating key voter blocs who view his actions as undemocratic and heavy-handed. If the government shifts its focus from addressing Zambia’s pressing issues to sidelining political opponents, it will face mounting criticism, both domestically and internationally.
The Path Forward: Embracing Democracy
If President Hichilema truly believes in his administration’s accomplishments—whether in economic reforms, anti-corruption initiatives, or governance—he should welcome competition. Democratic leaders who are confident in their record do not fear challengers; they embrace the chance to showcase their achievements in a free and fair contest.
Democracy thrives on choice, transparency, and the free expression of political will. Attempts to manipulate the electoral process only undermine these values, casting doubt on the government’s commitment to democratic principles. Instead of focusing on eliminating rivals, President Hichilema should focus on fulfilling his promises to the Zambian people and allowing his performance to speak for itself.
Conclusion: Let the People Decide
The ongoing efforts to block former President Dr. Lungu from contesting in the 2026 elections signal a troubling trend: the prioritization of political survival over democratic integrity. While President Hichilema may deny involvement, the coordinated actions against Dr. Lungu strongly suggest otherwise. This strategy weakens the democratic process, erodes public trust in institutions, and deepens political divisions.
Zambians deserve a government that upholds democratic principles, not one that manipulates the system for personal gain. By stepping back and allowing the democratic process to unfold, President Hichilema can demonstrate confidence in his leadership and respect for the will of the people. True leadership is about empowering citizens, not controlling outcomes. Let the people decide.
In 2026, the ballot box—not the courtroom or political interference—should determine the next leader of Zambia. Power belongs to the people, and they alone should decide who leads them.