- It Lacks Neutrality – The Foundation of Any True Council of Elders
A genuine Council of Elders must stand above partisan politics. Its authority comes from neutrality and moral credibility. However, the current grouping in Zambia is populated by individuals with well-known political histories, particularly linked to the former ruling Patriotic Front (PF). They include Muhabi Lungu, former diplomat in the PF government, former Judge Lombe Chibesakunda, who had strong links with the former government and Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika and Mbita Chitala (both who were architects of the Movement for Multi Party Democracy (MMD) which later morphed into PF.
When members have clear partisan backgrounds, it becomes difficult to claim independence. A body cannot act as a national referee while wearing a team jersey.
- Its Composition Raises Serious Questions
A credible national council must be broadly representative. Yet this group is largely made up of figures associated with past political administrations, especially PF and aligned political networks all largely coming from the PF strongholds, Northern, Eastern and other regions up north meaning it can’t claim to represent elders from the whole nation. 
If it were truly national, where are the respected traditional leaders? Where are representatives from across all provinces? Where are widely acknowledged non-partisan civic elders?
A narrow political circle can not claim to speak for an entire nation.
- It Has No Clear Legal or Constitutional Mandate
A legitimate national body should have:
- A defined mandate
- Transparent terms of reference
- Publicly known funding sources
- Accountability mechanisms
This so-called Council of Elders operates without clear statutory recognition or publicly outlined authority. Zambians are left asking: Who created it? Who funds it? Who does it answer to?
Opacity breeds suspicion.
- It Appears to Be Interfering in Active Electoral Politics
Traditionally, elders mediate conflicts and promote unity. They do not sponsor candidates or attempt to shape electoral outcomes.
Allegations that the council is trying to influence the selection of a preferred opposition candidate for the August 13 elections suggest political engineering rather than elder mediation.
When a council begins shaping political competition instead of encouraging fair democratic processes, it crosses from guidance into partisanship.
- Opposition Figures Themselves Have Questioned It
Concerns are not only coming from ruling party supporters. Even senior opposition figures like Brian Mundubile have expressed skepticism.
When individuals from within opposition ranks question the council’s sincerity and accuse it of attempting to impose a candidate, that signals internal mistrust.
If those it claim to “unite” feel uncomfortable, the problem is structural.
- It Lacks Broad National InclusivityA true national council must reflect Zambia’s regional, ethnic, religious and civic diversity.
Reports indicate limited or no representation from entire provinces and key sectors such as:
- Traditional leadership
- Major church bodies
- Independent civil society organisations
Without inclusive representation, the claim to national moral authority weakens significantly.
- It Blurs the Line Between Civic Engagement and Political Strategy
There are increasing discussions about political actors using NGOs, church platforms, and civic spaces to advance partisan goals indirectly.
If a Council of Elders becomes part of such a strategy — acting as a respectable face for political manoeuvring — then it is no longer a neutral moral body. It becomes a political instrument just like the MMD in 1991. This is supported by the membership of two MMD formation architects; Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika and Mbita Chitala.
Zambians are alert to such tactics.
- It Risks Undermining Democratic Competition
Democracy thrives on open contestation, transparent campaigning, and free choice by citizens.
When an unelected grouping attempts to influence who should challenge an incumbent president, it risks distorting democratic processes.
Elders should encourage fairness — not predetermine political outcomes.
- Its Moral Authority Is Questionable
True elders command respect through:
- Impartial conduct
- Historical integrity
- Visible independence
- Demonstrated service to national unity
If a council is perceived as advancing narrow political interests, it loses the moral standing that makes elders powerful in the first place.
Authority is not declared — it is earned.
- It Must Prove Its Sincerity Through Transparency
If the council wishes to be seen as genuine, it must:
- Publicly clarify its mandate
- Disclose funding sources
- Broaden its membership
- Demonstrate clear political neutrality
Without these steps, public perception will continue to frame it as a political front rather than a national moral institution.
- Zambians Are Politically Mature and Observant
The Zambian electorate understands political rebranding and strategic repositioning. Citizens can differentiate between authentic elder statesmanship and recycled political influence.
Attempts to cloak political projects in the language of unity and wisdom will not go unquestioned.
- National Unity Cannot Be Manufactured Through Political Fronts
Genuine unity comes from inclusive dialogue, constitutional processes, and transparent leadership.
Any body, or organisation that appears selective, partisan, or agenda-driven risks dividing the country rather than uniting it.
Closing Radio Line
“A true Council of Elders must stand above politics, not inside it. If it can not demonstrate neutrality, inclusivity, and transparency, then it ceases to be a moral compass and becomes just another political player — without a mandate.”
