WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT ZAMBIA AS IT FALLS FROM GRACE UNDER PRESIDENT LUNGU defend their new democracy , political leaders have shown a greater willingness to share power than in many nearby states . On the one hand , presidents from a number of different ethnic groups have occupied State House , which has helped to manage tension . On the other , opposition parties have been able to use populist strategies to attract support in urban areas and build effective political machines . As a result , Zambia is one of the only countries on the continent – along with Benin , Ghana , Madagascar , and Mauritius – that has experienced two transfers of power .
Over the last year , though , things have changed .
Zambia ’ s fall from grace
According to the Conference of Catholic Bishops – one of the most influential bodies in the country – Zambia doesn ’ t deserve to be called a democracy . Instead , under the leadership of President Edgar Lungu and the Patriotic Front it has become a dictatorship - or getting there .
This statement needs to be taken seriously for two reasons . First , the bishops rarely speak out publicly . Second , many catholic leaders were seen to be sympathetic to the governing Patriotic Front , when it won power under Michael Sata in 2011 . So , their actions cannot simply be put down to party political bias .
So what has changed ? The bishops identify a number of recent developments as causes for concern .
First , they point to the treatment of opposition leader Hakainde Hichilema . Not only was his arrest conducted in an unnecessarily brutal manner , but the government has not yet provided any evidence to substantiate the treason charge . Instead , it appears that his detention is punishment for refusing to recognise the legitimacy of the president , who Hichilema believes won the last election unfairly .
For obvious reasons , his detention and the question of whether he will be released , has been the focus of recent media coverage . But for the Bishops , Hichilema ’ s arrest is clearly just the tip of the iceberg . The worries expressed in their statement are less about the fate of the opposition leader , and more about the systematic weakening of the state .
For example , the bishops lament the fact that the Constitutional Court failed to effectively hear the opposition ’ s election petition , believing the judiciary have “ let the people down ”.
They also note that the politicization of the police force has resulted in the violation of citizens ’ rights and that , partly as a result , the media has become entrapped in a “ culture of silence ”. The Bishops suggest that the political manipulation of these institutions has enabled the government to launch attacks on a number of civil society groups that have dared to challenge its authority , including the Law Association of Zambia .
While the charges against Hichilema may have triggered the Bishops to act , their letter is underpinned by a deeper and broader concern about the declining quality of governance under President Lungu .
What next ?
This is not the first time that a Zambian president has sought to consolidate their authority my manipulating state institutions . Nor is it the first time that opposition leaders have been arrested , or civil society groups intimidated . In the recent past , these moments of high political tension have often been resolved peacefully and it ’ s not impossible that a similar thing will happen this time .
For example , the president may decide to release Hichilema and to pull back from the prohibition of the Law Society of Zambia in the wake of considerable criticism . If the recent spate of attacks has been designed to intimidate his rivals , Lungu may feel that his goal has already been achieved and that he has little to gain by following through with his threats .
But even if this were to happen , it ’ s unlikely that it would signal a period of a more accountable government , or that Lungu will cede his quest to remain in office . Many things have changed since Chiluba failed to secure a third term in office almost twenty years ago .
While Zambians have been willing to defend their new democracy , political leaders have shown a greater willingness to share power than in many nearby states .
First , key civil society groups such as the trade unions have been weakened by privatisation , informalisation and unemployment .
Second , the Constitutional Court that ’ s responsible for interpreting the constitution was handpicked by Lungu , and is highly unlikely to oppose him .
Third , Lungu ’ s case is more complicated than Chiluba ’ s . In 2001 , the second president had served two fill terms in office and wanted one more . Today , Lungu is arguing that he should be allowed to have a third term because his first period in office did not count , as he was just serving out the final year of Michael Sata ’ s term following his untimely death in office .
This reading of the constitution is highly questionable . The clause that stipulates that a period in office only counts as a full term if it ’ s longer than three years is limited to a set of cases that doesn ’ t include the way that Lungu actually came to power . But , it is less clear-cut than Chiluba ’ s power grab .
All of this means that Lungu is likely to get his way . But , his third term will not come without a cost . Opposition protests are inevitable , as is some civil society criticism . If past form is anything to go by , Lungu ’ s government will respond with threats and intimidation , fuelling public fears that Zambian politics has become significantly more violent since the 2016 election campaign . Given this , the Bishops ’ recent letter is unlikely to be their last , and we need to talk about Zambia for some time to come .
2017 | Business Times Africa 37