The Editor Zambia
Interesting, really interesting how Zambian political history repeats itself with the same revolving players changing strategies.
The faces may change their slogans, the alliances may adopt new names, and the political theatre may move from one conference hall to another, but the underlying script remains strikingly familiar. 
The latest episode in this long running political play unfolded when the so-called Council of Elders, a clandestine rogue grouping that has been operating under the cloak of moral authority, finally shed its disguise and declared itself a political party.
At a gathering held in Lusaka, the group anointed former MMD and Patriotic Front (PF) figure Kapembwa Simbao as its presidential candidate under the banner of the Zambia Alliance for the 4th Republic ahead of the August 13 elections.
For those who have been following the quiet manoeuvres of this grouping, the development comes as no surprise. This platform, previously exposed the origins of this so-called council of elders, tracing it back to the famous or infamous Garden Motel meeting convened by Prince Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika and Mbita Chitala.
That meeting brought together a cluster of familiar political figures who have spent decades orbiting Zambia’s corridors of power, often under different banners but with remarkably similar objectives.
The group initially presented itself as a neutral forum of respected elders who would guide the nation toward unity and political stability.
That narrative has now collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. What has emerged instead is a political formation dominated by recycled actors from the PF and MMD camps, serial critics of President Hakainde Hichilema, and a network of former diplomats, technocrats and politicians who have struggled to remain relevant in Zambia’s evolving political landscape.
The list of names attached to this project reveals the pattern clearly. Muhabi Lungu has resurfaced as Secretary General. Lusaka lawyer Sakwiba Sikota has been installed as chairperson after defeating Bishop Trevor Mwamba. Brian Mushimba and others have been paraded as part of the alliance while economist turned politician Yusuf Dodia has been unveiled as the running mate.
The process that produced Simbao’s candidacy was presented as democratic. The first round of voting saw several candidates compete, including Dodia, Sikota, Chishala Kateka, Trevor Mwamba, Simbao, and Mushimba.
No one achieved the 50 plus one threshold, forcing a runoff between the top two candidates where Simbao reportedly secured 65 percent of the vote.
But beyond the procedural theatrics lies a deeper question about the genesis and intent of the so-called council of elders itself.
Across Africa, councils of elders traditionally serve as custodians of wisdom and national conscience. They stand above partisan politics and are expected to guide society through mediation, reconciliation, and moral leadership. Their authority derives from neutrality and public trust rather than political ambition.
The Zambian version appears to have inverted that tradition entirely. From the outset, the council was convened under circumstances that now appear deceptive. It was presented as a national moral platform meant to help guide political actors and promote dialogue.
Instead, it has morphed into a political party with the explicit goal of removing President Hakainde Hichilema from power. That transformation raises uncomfortable questions about whether the entire enterprise was conceived as a political Trojan horse from the beginning.
History provides a revealing backdrop. Two of the most prominent figures behind this council, Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika and Mbita Chitala, played central roles during the political upheavals that dismantled one-party State under Kenneth Kaunda in the early 1990s. They mobilised alliances that ushered in plural politics through the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (MMD).
While that transition was celebrated as democratic reform, it also paved the way for a new political class whose record was marred by corruption scandals and internal power struggles that stretched from the MMD era into the PF years.
Mbita Chitala, in particular, has long been associated with one of the most controversial political labels of that period, the so-called Mbala Mafias. The term emerged during fierce political battles within the MMD when rivals accused a small group of politicians, including Dean Mungomba and Ronald Penza, of using their influence within government to benefit private interests.
Critics alleged that the group transferred State resources into their own businesses while projecting themselves as crusaders against corruption.
Chitala and his allies rejected the label, arguing that it was invented by opponents who resented their attempts to clean up the then ruling party.
Whether myth or reality, the Mbala Mafia narrative remains part of Zambia’s political folklore and serves as a reminder of how quickly reformist rhetoric can morph into elite patronage networks.
It is yet to be seen whether the activism of Simutanyi, Chitala, and Simbao in this latest political project is the regrouping of the once famous Mbala Mafias.
Fast forward to today, and the same cluster of political actors has reassembled under the banner of a council of elders that claims moral authority over national politics.
Their latest project now places Kapembwa Simbao at the centre of an alliance that seeks to challenge the United Party for National Development (UPND) government.
Simbao himself is no newcomer to Zambia’s political stage. He served as a minister during the presidency of Frederick Chiluba and has since moved through various political platforms before recently becoming leader of the Zambia We Want party.
His elevation by the council therefore represents less a fresh political alternative than another recycling of familiar personalities.
Perhaps the most revealing aspect of this entire episode is the pattern it reflects within Zambian politics. Time and again, political actors have used seemingly neutral platforms such as civic forums, church networks, academic institutions, and civil society organisations as staging grounds for political mobilisation.
The Oasis Forum, the Non-Governmental Coordinating Council (NGOCC), segments of the Roman Catholic Church and academic circles have at different times served as incubators for political movements that eventually transformed themselves into partisan formations with the singular goal of removing an incumbent government.
The recurring tactic of cloaking partisan ambition in the language of moral guardianship raises legitimate concerns about transparency and honesty in Zambia’s political discourse.
However, the architects of these political parties and alliances should understand that whatever tribal, personal or regional calculations may be advancing, they are confronting a very different political landscape from the one that existed in the past.
The UPND is not a loose coalition of opportunists. It is an organised political movement with a clear governing mandate.
Under the leadership of President Hakainde Hichilema, the party has cultivated both national and international credibility while pursuing an economic and governance agenda aimed at stabilising the country and restoring institutional integrity.
Those who believe that another hastily assembled coalition of political veterans can easily dislodge such a government may be misreading the moment.
Zambian voters have become more discerning. They are capable of distinguishing between genuine political renewal and the recycling of old political networks under new banners.
In the end, political history teaches a simple lesson that has echoed across generations and continents.
The harder they come, the harder they fall.
