Zambia President Hakainde Hichilema has sacked three top judges from the Constitutional Court, whose previous rulings favored his political rival, former President Edgar Lungu. This controversial move has reignited debates over the independence of the judiciary and raised accusations of political interference, particularly as the nation prepares for its next election cycle in 2026.
The Background of the Dismissal
The three judges, Justice Annie Sitali, Justice Mungeni Mulenga, and Justice Palan Mulonda had previously presided over a presidential petition in 2016. In this case, they dismissed Hichilema’s challenge against Lungu’s election victory, a decision that has lingered in the memories of many Zambians. Additionally, these judges were involved in a contentious ruling that allowed Lungu to participate in the 2021 elections, despite having served two terms as president, a situation that raised questions about constitutional compliance.
The immediate cause for their dismissal came after the judges lost a court application seeking a review of a judicial panel’s recommendation for their suspension over alleged gross misconduct. A statement from the presidency confirmed their removal, emphasizing that it was executed in accordance with the powers vested in Hichilema by the Zambian Constitution. However, the decision has drawn mixed reactions from various stakeholders, reflecting deep-seated divisions within the country.
Public and Political Reactions
The political atmosphere in Zambia has been charged in recent months, particularly with the upcoming elections in 2026, where Hichilema and Lungu are expected to face off once again. This context adds a layer of complexity to the dismissal, as it raises questions about whether the actions are rooted in a legitimate concern for judicial integrity or are merely an act of political retribution.
Prominent social and political commentator Laura Miti has highlighted the polarization of opinions surrounding the judges’ dismissal. She notes that many Zambians are divided on whether Hichilema’s actions represent a legal move to hold judges accountable or a self-serving attempt to manipulate the judiciary. “My view is that the judges misbehaved spectacularly in the presidential petition in 2016. That being true, this comes across as the president exacting revenge for their judgment, which is highly concerning,” Miti stated in an interview.
Conversely, Makebi Zulu, Lungu’s lawyer, has characterized the president’s actions as an “illegality,” framing them as a dangerous encroachment on judicial independence. He expressed concern that judges should not face disciplinary action for executing their judicial responsibilities. “No judge should be disciplined for carrying out their judicial function,” Zulu remarked.
The Role of the Judicial Complaints Commission
The Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) played a pivotal role in the events leading up to the judges’ dismissal. Following a complaint from private citizen Moses Kalonde, the JCC conducted an investigation into the judges’ conduct. Interestingly, this commission had previously dismissed a complaint from lawyer Joseph Busenga, who sought the removal of the same judges on the grounds of mishandling the 2016 election petition. The mixed outcomes of these investigations underscore the contentious nature of the judiciary in Zambia.
The JCC’s findings and recommendations carry significant weight, as under Zambia’s constitution, all judges, including the Chief Justice, are appointed by the president based on JCC recommendations, subject to approval by the National Assembly. This framework inherently ties the judiciary to the executive branch, raising concerns about the potential for political influence over judicial appointments and actions.
Implications for Judicial Independence
The dismissal of the three judges has far-reaching implications for the rule of law and judicial independence in Zambia. Critics argue that such actions set a dangerous precedent, undermining the judiciary’s role as a check on executive power. As Sishuwa Sishuw, a political analyst, pointed out, the system of appointing judges is flawed, with the executive branch holding too much sway over the judiciary. He stressed that the country needs a more structured and impartial approach to judicial appointments to ensure that qualified and competent individuals serve on the bench, rather than relying on a system that can be manipulated for political ends.
The ongoing political tensions in Zambia highlight the broader challenges facing democracies in the region. The interplay between the executive and judiciary raises essential questions about accountability, governance, and the safeguarding of democratic institutions. As Hichilema prepares for a potential electoral showdown with Lungu, the actions taken against the judges could influence public perception and electoral outcomes.
The Path Forward
In the wake of the judges’ dismissal, Zambia stands at a crossroads. The country must grapple with the implications of this decision on its judiciary and political landscape. Moving forward, it is crucial for Zambians to engage in constructive dialogue about the integrity of their institutions and the rule of law. Citizens must advocate for reforms that prioritize judicial independence and accountability, ensuring that the judiciary remains free from political interference.
Moreover, civil society organizations, legal professionals, and the general public must work together to monitor the actions of the executive and hold leaders accountable for their decisions. Transparent processes in judicial appointments and conduct investigations into alleged misconduct are essential steps towards rebuilding public trust in the judiciary.
Conclusion
President Hakainde Hichilema’s dismissal of three top judges has underscored the delicate balance between political power and judicial independence in Zambia. As the nation prepares for upcoming elections, the repercussions of this decision will likely resonate throughout the political landscape. It is imperative for Zambians to reflect on the importance of an independent judiciary as a cornerstone of democracy, ensuring that the rule of law prevails and that justice is served without fear or favor. In the coming years, the interplay between the executive and judiciary will be critical in shaping Zambia’s democratic future and determining the course of its governance.
