Zambia’s former President Edgar Lungu has died at the age of 68, his party has said in a statement. He had “been receiving specialized treatment in South Africa” for an undisclosed illness, the Patriotic Front (PF) added.
Lungu led Zambia for six years from 2015, losing the 2021 election to the current President Hakainde Hichilema by a large margin.
After that defeat he stepped back from politics but later attempted an unsuccessful comeback. He had ambitions to vie for the presidency again but at the end of last year – marking six months prior to his demise – the Constitutional Court barred him from running, ruling that he had already served the maximum two terms allowed by law.
Even after being disqualified from running for the presidency again, he remained hugely influential in Zambian politics and did not hold back in his criticism of his successor.
This article chronicles his biography and legacy.
🏛️ Edgar Lungu: Biography.
📍 Early Life and Legal Career.
Edgar Chagwa Lungu was born on November 11, 1956, in Ndola, Zambia’s Copperbelt Province. He earned a law degree from the University of Zambia in 1981 and practiced law before joining politics. His legal career faced controversy when the Law Association of Zambia suspended his license in 2010 due to professional misconduct .
⬆️ Political Ascent.
Lungu entered politics as an independent candidate in 1996 and later joined the Patriotic Front (PF) in 2001. After winning a parliamentary seat in 2011, he held multiple ministerial roles under President Michael Sata, including Justice Minister and Defence Minister. Following Sata’s death in 2014, Lungu emerged as the PF’s compromise candidate. He narrowly won the 2015 presidential by-election against Hakainde Hichilema, completing Sata’s term.
🎖️ Presidency (2015–2021)
– First Term (2015–2016):
Focused on constitutional reforms to limit presidential powers and commuted death sentences for 332 prisoners, calling prison conditions “an affront to human dignity”.
– Second Term (2016–2021):
Won a full term in 2016 but faced economic turmoil. Zambia defaulted on its debt in 2020 amid recession and COVID-19, leading to strained relations with the IMF and Western donors.
– Key Policies:
– Launched major infrastructure projects, especially road networks.
– Diversified the economy from copper dependency.
– Appointed Zambia’s first female Vice President, Inonge Wina.
– Established an annual National Day of Prayer (October 18).
⬇️ Post-Presidency and Death.
After losing the 2021 election to Hichilema by nearly a million votes, Lungu retired briefly. He returned to politics in 2023 but was barred from the 2026 race by a court ruling that his 2015–2016 term counted toward the two-term limit. He died on June 5, 2025, in Pretoria, South Africa, following complications from surgery for achalasia, a chronic oesophagal condition.
Legacy: Achievements and Controversies.
🟢 Achievements.
1. Infrastructure Development:
– Prioritized road construction and energy diversification, reducing reliance on hydroelectric power.
2. Social Reforms:
– Commuted death sentences and promoted gender inclusivity in government.
3. Diplomatic Outreach:
– Strengthened Zambia’s global ties, declaring, “We are all ambassadors of our country.”
🔴 Controversies.
1. Economic Mismanagement:
– Oversaw a debt crisis that triggered Zambia’s first sovereign default (2020), worsening inflation and unemployment.
2. Authoritarian Tendencies:
– Arrested rival Hakainde Hichilema for treason in 2017 over a minor motorcade incident, using tear gas and police brutality.
– Imposed states of emergency, restricted press freedom, and passed laws like the CyberSecurity Act to silence critics.
3. Tribalism and Violence:
– Tolerated political thuggery by supporters; failed to curb riots and xenophobic attacks.
– Analysts like Lee Habasonda termed his legacy “checkered,” noting he “allowed the poorest Zambians near power” but enabled chaos.
📌 Final Assessment.
Lungu’s legacy embodies duality: a leader who advanced infrastructure and social justice yet eroded democratic norms amid economic collapse. His tenure remains a cautionary tale of power’s fragility in Zambia’s evolving democracy.
“Respect and recognition is earned and not forced.”
— Hakainde Hichilema on Lungu’s leadership.
Legacy of election dispute.
The election disputes between Edgar Lungu (Patriotic Front, PF) and Hakainde Hichilema (United Party for National Development, UPND) centred on **allegations of rigging, institutional bias, violence, and constitutional manipulation** across the 2016 and 2021 elections. Here are the key conflicts:
⚖️ 1. Disputed Electoral Integrity.
– 2016 Election:
Lungu narrowly won (50.35% vs. Hichilema’s 47.63%), but UPND rejected the results, citing collusion between the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) and PF to “deliberately reduce” Hichilema’s votes. The EU confirmed bias in state media and police suppression of opposition rallies.
– 2021 Election:
Lungu claimed the vote was “not free and fair” due to violence in opposition strongholds, calling it a “nullity.” Hichilema countered that this was a “desperate final act” to cling to power. Despite Lungu’s objections, Hichilema won a landslide (59% to 39%).
🚨 2. Violence and Suppression Tactics.
– State-Sanctioned Intimidation:
In 2021, Lungu deployed the military under the guise of curbing violence, but UPND denounced it as voter intimidation. Police blocked Hichilema’s campaigns, teargassed supporters, and detained him at airports.
– Pre-Election Violence:
PF cadres (party militants) attacked opposition gatherings and media outlets. In 2016, post-election riots erupted in UPND strongholds, leading to 300 arrests.
📵 3. Media and Internet Manipulation.
– Social Media Shutdowns:
During 2021 voting, the government restricted access to WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram, citing “national security.” Critics viewed this as censorship to hinder vote monitoring and opposition coordination.
– Media Suppression:
Independent outlets like *The Post* and Prime TV were shut down pre-election, while state media amplified PF propaganda.
⚖️ 4. Institutional Bias and Legal Battles.
– ECZ Partisanship:
In 2016, the ECZ delayed results and ignored UPND’s evidence of irregularities. In 2021, it banned UPND campaigns in key areas under dubious pretexts.
– Constitutional Court Challenges:
– 2016:
UPND’s petition to nullify Lungu’s win was dismissed on a technicality.
– 2021:
Lungu challenged his term limit eligibility, arguing his first term (2015–2016) was incomplete. The Constitutional Court ruled in his favor, allowing him to run.
💰 5. Economic Grievances and Youth Mobilization.
– Hichilema leveraged widespread anger over the economic collapse under Lungu, including a 2020 sovereign debt default, soaring inflation, and 10-year-high unemployment. Youth voters (over 50% of the electorate) mobilized against PF’s mismanagement.
🕊️ 6. Post-Election Standoffs.
– After 2021 results, Lungu initially refused to concede, alleging “violence-tainted” outcomes. Behind-the-scenes pressure from African mediators (e.g., Sierra Leone’s President Koroma) and Western diplomats forced his eventual concession.
💎 Legacy of Election Disputes.
These clashes exposed Zambia’s democratic fragility:
Lungu weaponized state institutions, while Hichilema’s victories (2016 petition, 2021 landslide) underscored public demand for accountability. Despite peaceful transitions, the cycle of disputed elections highlights systemic reforms still needed in electoral governance.
The controversy surrounding Edgar Lungu’s attempt to run for a third term as Zambia’s president centred on constitutional interpretation, judicial independence, and political manipulation. Here are the key issues:
⚖️ 1. Constitutional Ambiguity on Term Limits:
– The 2016 Zambian constitution limited presidents to two terms (Article 106(3)) but included a loophole: a term lasting less than three years (e.g., completing a predecessor’s mandate) would not count as a full term.
– Lungu argued his first term (Jan 2015–Sep 2016, 20 months) was “incomplete” and thus exempt, making him eligible for a third term in 2021 or 2026.
– Critics contended this violated the spirit of term limits, as he had been elected twice (2015 and 2016).
👨⚖️ 2. Politicized Judicial Rulings.
– 2019 Ruling:
A Lungu-appointed Constitutional Court cited the “less than three years” clause to declare him eligible for the 2021 election, claiming a “holistic interpretation” of the constitution. The court warned critics against “attacking judges,” seen as a response to Lungu’s earlier intimidation of the judiciary.
– 2024 Reversal:
After losing power, a reconstituted Constitutional Court (following Hichilema’s dismissal of three pro-Lungu judges) unanimously ruled his first term did count, barring him from 2026. Lungu denounced this as “political manipulation”.
Key Court Decisions on Lungu’s Eligibility:
| No. | Year | Ruling. | Key Justification. | Political Context. |
| 1.0 | 2019 | Eligible. | First term (<3 years) not “full”. | Court dominated by Lungu appointees. |
| 2.0 | 2024 | Ineligible. | First term counted as full term. | Hichilema replaced judges; cited constitutional intent. |
🛠️ 3. **Executive Manipulation of Institutions.
– Lungu orchestrated the 2016 constitutional amendments to create the term-limit loophole, ensuring his eligibility.
– He openly threatened judges before the 2019 ruling, warning them not to “copycat” Kenya’s judiciary (which had nullified an election) and implying they would “plunge Zambia into chaos”.
– His government weaponized laws like the Cybersecurity Act to silence critics and shut down opposition media .
⚔️ 4. Political and Public Backlash.
– Internal Party Divisions:
Lungu’s Patriotic Front (PF) fractured over his third-term bid, echoing past failures like Chiluba’s 2001 attempt .
– Civil Society Resistance:
Groups like the Oasis Forum (which blocked Chiluba’s third term) mobilized against Lungu, citing democratic erosion.
– Public Protests:
Opposition supporters alleged electoral fraud in 2016 and 2021, with police suppressing rallies and internet shutdowns during votes.
💎 Legacy and Democratic Implications:
Lungu’s maneuver exposed critical flaws in Zambia’s governance:
– Constitutional Vagueness:
Loopholes allowed leaders to exploit term-limit definitions.
– Judicial Dependence:
Courts shifted rulings based on presidential influence, undermining independence.
– Erosion of Norms:
Lungu’s actions weakened Zambia’s reputation for democratic stability, contrasting with his infrastructure achievements.
His eventual disqualification in 2024 reaffirmed term limits but highlighted ongoing institutional fragility in African democracies . As one analyst noted, Zambia’s experience serves as a “cautionary tale” for leaders seeking to extend power through legal manipulation.
Why President Hakainde Hichilema replaced judges after a court ruling to allow Edgar Lungu to view fir a third term?
President Hakainde Hichilema’s replacement of judges in Zambia, framed as an effort to uphold constitutional intent, involved a multi-step process with significant political and legal implications. Here’s a breakdown of key actions and their constitutional justification:
⚖️ 1. Constitutional Mechanism for Judge Removal.
– Legal Basis:
Hichilema invoked Article 143 of Zambia’s Constitution, which empowers the president to remove judges upon recommendation from the Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) for grounds like gross misconduct or incompetence.
– Targeted Judges:
In October 2024, he dismissed three Constitutional Court judges— Annie Sitali, Mungeni Mulenga, and Palan Musonda —after the JCC accused them of misconduct related to their handling of the 2016 election petition filed by Hichilema against Edgar Lungu.
🔄 2. Link to Lungu’s Eligibility Case.
– The removed judges had previously ruled in Lungu’s favor twice:
– 2016:
Upheld Lungu’s disputed election victory over Hichilema .
– 2019:
Allowed Lungu to run for a third term in 2021 by ruling his first term (2015–2016) was “incomplete” under constitutional term limits .
– After their removal, a reconstituted Constitutional Court unanimously overturned the 2019 decision in December 2024. It ruled Lungu’s first term counted as a full term, barring him from the 2026 election. The court cited strict adherence to the constitution’s term-limit intent.
⚖️ 3. Criticism: Erosion of Judicial Independence**Lloyd.
– Timing and Motive:
Critics, including human rights activist Laura Miti, argued the dismissals came suspiciously late (years after the 2016 ruling) and appeared retaliatory, given Hichilema’s personal stake in the cases . Lungu’s lawyer labeled it “executive overreach“.
– Lack of Transparency:
The JCC’s proceedings are confidential, fueling allegations of politically driven “secretive tribunals“. The removed judges sued, claiming the JCC unlawfully reopened a settled 2016 complaint.
– Precedent:
A Cambridge study noted Zambia’s history of presidential interference in the judiciary, with both Hichilema and predecessors like Lungu exploiting constitutional ambiguities to control courts.
🛡️ 4. Government’s Defense: Upholding Accountability.
– Hichilema’s administration insisted the moves were procedurally legitimate:
The JCC investigated and recommended action, and the president followed constitutional protocol.
– Officials framed the Lungu eligibility ruling as correcting a “manipulation of constitutional intent,” emphasizing that term limits (two five-year terms) must apply irrespective of partial terms. Chief Government Spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa stated: “The president acted within the law… upholding the rule of law“.
📜 Constitutional Interpretation Shift: Term Limits.
| No. | Year | Ruling on Lungu’s Terms. | Court Composition. | Key Justification. |
| 1.0 | 2019 | Eligible for third term. | Lungu-appointed judges. | First term (<3 years) “incomplete”. |
| 2.0 | 2024 | Ineligible. | Post-Hichilema judges. | Strict adherence to term-limit spirit; first term counted. |
💎 KeyTakeaways. .
Hichilema replaced judges through constitutionally prescribed channels, arguing it reinforced judicial accountability and corrected past distortions of constitutional intent—particularly on term limits. However, the timing, opacity, and direct impact on his political rival fueled perceptions of executive weaponization of judicial oversight.
This episode underscores the tension between presidential powers to ensure judicial accountability and the imperative of safeguarding judicial independence in Zambia’s democracy .
Read more analysis by Rutashubanyuma Nestory
