The Editor Zambia
There is an alarming culture emerging within sections of Zambia’s political and media space, the reckless glorification of sensitive State matters for the sake of headlines, relevance, and fleeting public excitement.
What many fail to understand is that certain public offices are not ordinary jobs. They are sacred national assignments bound by law, oath, and permanent duty. 
In Zambia, individuals entrusted with the nation’s intelligence, defence, and security architecture do not simply walk away from confidentiality obligations because they have left office.
The oath of secrecy is not seasonal. It is continuous. The obligation survives retirement, dismissal, resignation, and even political realignment.
One does not suddenly gain liberty to disclose operational details merely because public curiosity demands entertainment.
It is, therefore, deeply disturbing to witness reports suggesting that former State Intelligence Service (ZSIS) Director General Xavier Chungu granted an interview touching on sensitive matters allegedly involving underground routes and security structures linked to State House. Such matters are not casual political gossip. They concern the nerve centre of the Republic.
Under Zambia’s legal framework governing State security and protection of classified information, disclosure of restricted or protected information without authorisation can amount to serious criminal misconduct.
The law is very clear that information relating to national security installations, defence systems, intelligence operations, and protected premises cannot simply be discussed in public spaces without proper clearance from competent authorities.
State House is not merely a residential property. It is a protected national security installation and the official workplace and residence of the Head of State. Discussions surrounding its structural security arrangements, routes, access systems, or emergency protocols are not matters for political theatre or social media excitement.
Even speculative public discourse on such issues has the potential to compromise national security systems and expose vulnerabilities to hostile actors.
What is often ignored is that classified material does not lose its protected status simply because rumours already exist in the public domain.
A rumour circulating on social media does not amount to lawful declassification. There are documents, operational records, and intelligence files that remain legally protected for years, sometimes decades, regardless of public speculation.
This is precisely why seasoned public figures such as Chishimba Kambwili and former Director of Public Prosecutions Lillian Siyuni reportedly sought formal clearance regarding aspects of their oath obligations before publicly addressing certain matters.
That was not cowardice. It was an appreciation of the legal and constitutional consequences attached to privileged State information.
Unfortunately, modern politics has created a dangerous appetite for sensationalism. In the race to trend, individuals sometimes wander into legally perilous territory without recognising the gravity of their conduct.
The line between political commentary and conduct bordering on sedition, unlawful disclosure, or national security compromise can become dangerously thin.
This is why regulatory institutions cannot afford to remain passive spectators.
The Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) has a duty under Zambia’s broadcasting laws to ensure that media platforms do not become vehicles for content capable of undermining public security or destabilising State institutions.
Freedom of expression was never intended to become freedom to recklessly expose sensitive national security matters.
Equally, social media influence does not place anyone above responsibility. Whether one is a political commentator, blogger, or communications strategist, there must be restraint when dealing with matters touching on national security. Volume, popularity, and online following cannot replace prudence.
Those who later cry political persecution whenever law enforcement intervenes often ignore one basic principle: rights coexist with legal obligations. No democracy on earth permits unrestricted disclosure of security-sensitive information under the guise of political debate.
And for the former ZSIS chief Xavier Chungu, he should know that the majority of Zambians still respect him for the services and contributions he rendered to the country.
His experience in public office is valuable, and voice remains relevant within national discourse.
However, the country would benefit more from issue-based political engagement focused on governance alternatives, economic solutions, and national development rather than revisiting operational secrets or the mystique of his former office.
Nations are built on responsible leadership, disciplined speech, and respect for institutions.
Zambia must never normalise the casual handling of matters capable of compromising the security of the State.
