Livingstone PF Condemns Mundubile Over Alleged Constitutional Breach

 Livingstone PF Condemns Mundubile Over Alleged Constitutional Breach

The Patriotic Front (PF) in Livingstone has condemned Porokoso Member of Parliament Brian Mundubile for allegedly flouting the party constitution by aligning with the opposition Tonse alliance.

PF Livingstone Constituency Chairman, Thomas Kabanda said the party operates strictly under its constitution, which guides the conduct of members and the election of leaders. He said the recent developments in the Tonse alliance, which saw the PF’s patriotic branch reportedly removed, raise serious legal and ethical concerns.

“The patriotic branch, which was an anchor party in the Tonse alliance, has been removed by Danipules, Zimba, and others. Now, one of our members of parliament has been elected to lead that alliance, yet the party that sponsored him does not belong there,” Mr Kabanda said.

He said the PF constitution requires the election of leadership through a convention, scheduled for later this month, and until that process is completed, collaboration with the Mundubile faction cannot be recognised.

“For now, the Brian Mundubile group and the PF are two different entities. We are not going to join the Brian Mundubile group because it is not recognised by the PF constitution,” he said.

Mr Kabanda questioned the credibility of members who disregard party rules. “If someone can easily break the constitution of their own party, how safe is the national constitution in their hands? Leadership is not a one-man show,” he said.

He reaffirmed the PF’s loyalty to the party’s founding principles, tracing leadership from the late President Michael Sata to his successor Dr Edgar Chagwarungu, and the current leadership under the central committee.

“The PF we belong to is the one founded by President Michael Sata, succeeded by Dr Chagwarungu, and currently guided by the central committee. Anything else is not one of us,” Mr Kabanda said.

He further criticised potential alliances led by figures outside the PF, questioning their ability to form credible governments. He singled out Davis Mwila, a supporter of Mundubile, as part of the forces that have weakened the party.

“Our loyalty in Livingstone remains with the PF, its rightful leaders, and the central committee. Any person who disrespects our constitution shows a lack of respect for the rule of law,” he added.

End 

Kabanda questions cost of living, says economy ‘biting’ ordinary Zambians

By CHALI MULENGA in Livingstone

PATRIOTIC Front (PF) Livingstone Constituency chairperson Thomas Kabanda has questioned the state of the economy, saying rising living costs have made it difficult for many families to afford basic necessities.

Mr Kabanda said if the economy was performing well, ordinary citizens would be able to afford three meals a day without struggle.

“In a country like ours, why should our people fail to afford three meals a day if the economy is performing well?” he asked.

He expressed concern over the financial pressures facing civil servants, arguing that recent salary increments are insufficient to cushion them from the high cost of living.

Mr Kabanda cited a K700 increment for some workers, saying statutory deductions such as Pay As You Earn (PAYE), National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) contributions and union fees significantly reduce the net amount.

“If you take out deductions like NAPSA, PAYE and union contributions, what remains? It is something that cannot buy much,” he said.

The PF official said many families are struggling to meet daily household needs, including purchasing mealie meal, which remains a staple food for most Zambians.

“Zambians are waking up every day worried about how to put food on the table. If you are a married man and your wife asks you to buy a bag of mealie meal, you have to think twice,” he said.

Mr Kabanda said the rising cost of essential commodities is putting pressure on households and contributing to growing frustration among citizens.

He urged Government to pay attention to the concerns of ordinary people and implement measures that will ease the burden on workers and low-income families.

“The economy is biting,” Mr Kabanda said. “We must ensure that policies translate into real relief for the common citizen.”

He said leaders must prioritise interventions that improve purchasing power and stabilise the cost of basic goods to ensure that citizens can live with dignity.

Kabanda calls for unity, respect for democracy ahead of polls

By CHALI MULENGA in Livingstone

PATRIOTIC Front (PF) Livingstone Constituency chairperson Thomas Kabanda has urged Zambians to rise above political differences and uphold democratic principles as the country heads towards the next general elections.

Mr Kabanda said citizens must “fly above” their problems and divisions for the sake of national unity, in line with the One Zambia, One Nation motto.

“Above our problems, we must all strive to fly above our differences together for the sake of our mother Zambia,” he said.

He noted that President Hakainde Hichilema has repeatedly emphasised unity under the theme “One Zambia, One Nation, One People,” adding that such unity must be reflected in decision-making and governance.

Mr Kabanda said democracy is anchored on equality, freedom and respect for divergent views.

“Through our history, the most important aspect of democratic life has been the principle of individual equality and freedom,” he said. “Citizens in a democracy must be entitled to equal protection of their persons, possessions and rights. They must have equal opportunity to pursue their lives and careers and equal rights of political participation.”

He said democratic societies must guarantee freedoms within the framework of the law, including the right to believe, speak and express differing opinions without fear of insult or intimidation.

“If I have a different view from someone, I must not be insulted for expressing that view. That is not democracy. Each person’s view must be respected,” Mr Kabanda said.

The PF official said political parties are a necessary part of democratic governance because rival parties give voters meaningful choices.

“Rival parties make elections meaningful by giving voters candidates who represent different interests and points of view,” he said.

Mr Kabanda also appealed for tolerance and forgiveness, describing Zambia as a Christian nation that should be guided by love and reconciliation.

He referenced the late former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu, saying the country must overcome divisions and heal.

“As a country, we must heal. There is a lot of hate amongst ourselves,” he said, adding that political leaders must preach peace and genuine love as the nation approaches elections.

Mr Kabanda further called for equitable sharing of national resources and urged leaders to pay attention to the concerns of ordinary citizens.

Quoting former United States president Thomas Jefferson, Mr Kabanda said government must prioritise the welfare of the common citizen.

“I favour a government that pays more attention to the common citizen,” he said, urging leaders to listen to the voices of the people instead of making empty pronouncements.

Mr Kabanda emphasised that Zambians should be allowed to freely elect leaders of their choice without interference.

“We have only one country. Let the people democratically elect the leaders they want. If they are given that space of freedom, they will choose,” he said.

He maintained that unity, equality, respect for rights and genuine commitment to democratic values are key to national development and peaceful elections.

Kabanda urges end to election violence

By CHALI MULENGA in Livingstone

PATRIOTIC Front (PF) Livingstone Constituency chairperson Thomas Kabanda has called for the depoliticisation of the electoral process and urged stakeholders to work together in ending political violence.

Mr Kabanda said Zambia’s national values and principles, as enshrined in Article 8 of the Constitution of Zambia, should guide the conduct of political players ahead of forthcoming elections.

He said the country cannot speak about democracy and development without safeguarding life and human dignity.

“Nothing can have value without life. When we talk about national values and principles, we must start by protecting life,” Mr Kabanda said.

He cited morality and ethics, patriotism and national unity, democracy and constitutionalism, human dignity, equity and social justice, good governance and integrity, and sustainable development as key pillars that must be upheld.

Mr Kabanda urged political parties to bury differences and focus on fostering unity under the One Zambia, One Nation motto.

He appealed to the Church, civil society organisations and traditional leaders to advise political players on the need to find sustainable solutions to election-related violence.

Mr Kabanda said although there have been statements suggesting that political violence has reduced, there are incidents that require clarity from law enforcement agencies.

He cited the alleged harassment of a lawmaker in Kabwe, an attack on the PF secretariat and other incidents of violence reported in various parts of the country.

In Livingstone, Mr Kabanda referred to disturbances that occurred during voter registration exercises at Mbita Market, where a police officer was reportedly shot and suspected cadres allegedly brandished pangas.

He said the public needs to know the status of investigations and whether suspects have been apprehended.

Mr Kabanda has since appealed to President Hakainde Hichilema to ensure that the forthcoming elections are conducted in a peaceful and transparent manner.

He also called on the Church to continue speaking out against injustices, noting that religious leaders have previously addressed issues affecting citizens, including the high cost of living during the tenure of former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu.

Mr Kabanda said free and fair elections can only be achieved if political parties restrain their cadres and allow electoral officers and polling agents to carry out their duties without intimidation.

He said once people cast their votes, they should be allowed to return home peacefully and wait for results instead of congregating at polling stations.

Mr Kabanda emphasised that national development will only be realised if political players accept shortcomings and collectively work towards unity and sustainable progress.

PF QUESTIONS PRESIDENT’S CALL FOR UNITY

 

By CHALI MULENGA
Livingstone

THE (PF) in Livingstone has criticised President ’s recent address to the nation, saying it did not adequately address the continued delay in the burial of Zambia’s sixth Republican President, , and the rising cost of living.

PF Livingstone constituency information and publicity secretary Edward Miti said in an interview that while the President emphasised unity, peace and love, he did not mention the status of the late Mr Lungu’s burial.

Mr Miti said many Zambians remain concerned about the matter and feel the country is still in mourning.

“As Zambians, we are still in a state of mourning because the former Head of State has not yet been laid to rest. We expected that the President would address that issue,” he said.

He said it was important for leaders to demonstrate unity through actions, particularly during periods of national grief.

Mr Miti also questioned Government’s assertion that the economy is improving, stating that the reported decline in inflation and stabilisation of the kwacha have not translated into lower prices of essential commodities.

He said many households are struggling to afford basic food items, including mealie meal, and are facing challenges with electricity tariffs.

“People are finding it difficult to afford even one meal a day. When they buy electricity units, they do not last long. These are the realities on the ground,” he said.

Mr Miti further alleged that the distribution of mealie meal in some areas is being politicised ahead of the general elections.

He also accused Government of selectively applying anti-corruption measures, claiming that only certain individuals are being targeted.

On infrastructure, Mr Miti said some developmental works in Livingstone, such as installation of solar street lights and road maintenance, appear to have intensified as the country approaches the election period.

He cited the Livingstone–Sesheke Road, which he said had previously been declared a priority but has not been fully rehabilitated.

Efforts to get a comment from State House by press time proved futile.

Law Was Followed, But Justice Feels Unfinished

By Chali Mulenga

The acquittal of Livingstone Mayor Constance Muleabai by the Economic and Financial Crimes Court has reignited an old and uncomfortable national debate: can a judgment be legally correct yet leave the public dissatisfied?

On the face of it, the ruling by Magistrate Trevor Kasanda was firmly anchored in law. The court repeatedly returned to one foundational principle of criminal justice — that the burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecution and that guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Where the State failed to meet this threshold, acquittal was inevitable.

From a purely legal standpoint, the judgment is difficult to fault.

The prosecution framed its case around the allegation that the mayor solicited and received money from a specific source. Yet evidence led the court to conclude that the funds passed through intermediaries and were not obtained in the precise manner alleged. In criminal law, the court cannot convict on suspicion or assumption, nor can it amend the prosecution’s case from the bench. The State must prove the case as charged, not as later explained.

Equally, on the second count, the mayor’s defence that she was not present in her office on the material day was not successfully challenged by the prosecution. Once such a defence is raised, the law demands that the State disprove it. The failure to do so left the court with no lawful option but to acquit.

However, legality is not the same as public confidence.

The court acknowledged that money did change hands. It acknowledged communications between the parties. It acknowledged interactions that raised legitimate suspicion. Yet none of this culminated in a conviction. To many citizens, this feels like a gap between lived reality and legal outcome — a space where wrongdoing appears visible but remains legally untouchable.

This is where discomfort sets in.

Corruption cases are rarely neat. They are often built on circumstantial evidence, coded language, intermediaries and informal networks. Critics of the judgment argue that the court adopted an overly narrow interpretation of solicitation, one that may not fully reflect how corruption actually operates in practice. They fear that such strictness, while legally sound, risks turning anti-corruption laws into technical minefields where cases collapse on drafting errors rather than substance.

Yet the court cannot fix investigative failures.

If there is blame to be assigned, it rests less with the judiciary and more with weak investigations and poorly framed charges. Courts are not forums for moral judgments or political expectations; they are instruments of law. When prosecutors fail to align evidence with charges, courts are duty-bound to acquit — even when the outcome is unpopular.

The political reaction to the acquittal further complicates matters. Claims of political persecution and counterclaims of investor betrayal now compete for attention, threatening to overshadow the central institutional lesson: Zambia’s fight against corruption will succeed only if investigators, prosecutors and lawmakers do their jobs with precision and professionalism.

The danger lies in misreading the judgment.

To celebrate it as proof that corruption does not exist would be reckless. To condemn it as proof that courts protect the powerful would be equally unfair. The truth is more uncomfortable: the law worked as designed, but the system feeding cases into the courts did not.

Justice was applied. Whether justice was felt is another matter entirely.

Until the State strengthens investigations, improves charge drafting and treats corruption cases with the seriousness they deserve, similar outcomes will recur — lawful, defensible, and deeply unsettling.

And the public will continue to ask the same question: not whether the court was right, but why the system keeps arriving at such endings.

End 

Bill 7: A Reform Without a Soul

By Chali Mulenga

As the debate around Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 intensifies, one thing has become unmistakably clear: 

Zambia is facing not merely a legislative dispute but a constitutional crisis rooted in mistrust, opacity and political overreach. 

Bill 7 has been marketed as a sweeping modernisation of our governance system is promising improved representation, inclusivity and electoral clarity. 

Yet, beneath the surface, the Bill reveals deep gaps that threaten both constitutionalism and democratic stability.

A Flawed Process From the Start

No constitutional amendment can stand on a broken foundation. The Constitutional Court’s declaration that Bill 7 is a nullity should have halted the process entirely. 

Instead, the Bill is being revived and repackaged, ignoring the Court’s directive that wide public consultation is mandatory are not optional.

 The opacity surrounding the so-called “Technical Committee,” whose reports remain unpublished, only worsens public suspicion. Constitutional reform demands transparency; secrecy is a red flag.

For a country that has long struggled with mistrust in public institutions, pushing ahead in defiance of judicial guidance undermines the rule of law at its core.

 Power Concentration Masquerading as Representation

Supporters of Bill 7 tout expanded constituencies, proportional representation, and reserved seats as victories for inclusion. 

On paper, these appear progressive. But the devil lies in the design. By increasing nominated seats and allowing political parties to fill vacancies without by-elections, the Bill shifts control away from voters and towards party elites.

Instead of empowering citizens, the proposed structure risks entrenching the ruling party’s influence, weakening checks and balances, and centralising power under the executive.

 A parliament enlarged but politically weakened serves no one except the powerful.

 No Roadmap, No Models, No Trust

Electoral reforms must be technically clear and publicly scrutinised. Bill 7 offers neither. 

The lack of a published delimitation report, unclear formulas for proportional representation, and unexplained criteria for reserved seats all signal that citizens are being asked to trust a process that refuses to trust them back.

If the goal was truly inclusivity, the framers of Bill 7 would have engaged the voters most impacted such as youth, women, and persons with disabilities. 

Instead, decisions are happening behind closed doors, and the public is presented with outcomes rather than participation.

 Missed Opportunities in a Critical Moment

Zambia desperately needs comprehensive constitutional reform. We need stronger protections for economic and social rights, reinforcement of judicial independence, stronger local governments, and guardrails against executive overreach. 

Yet Bill 7 focuses almost exclusively on redistributing political seats is essentially rearranging the political furniture while leaving the structural cracks untouched.

The result is a reform without a soul. It claims to modernise, but it does not democratise.

Timing That Raises More Questions Than Answers

Introducing major constitutional changes less than a year before the 2026 general elections is not a coincidence, it is a strategy. 

Rushed reforms close to an election cycle tend to benefit those already in power. 

And without a clear implementation roadmap, the possibility of manipulation, whether through delimitation, vacancy-filling rules, or representation formulas, cannot be dismissed.

For a nation still healing from electoral tensions, this timing risks sowing further distrust.

What Zambia Needs Now

Zambia needs constitutional reform that strengthens institutions, protects rights, enhances transparency, and builds trust, not reforms that deepen political divides. 

Bill 7 could have been a milestone. Instead, it has become a symbol of caution: a reminder that reform without legitimacy is simply political engineering.

If constitutional changes are to stand the test of time, they must be owned by the people, not merely drafted for them.

Author is executive director of Building Bridges for Change Foundation