The Editor Zambia
The arrest of Lusaka Archbishop Alick Banda has inevitably generated political controversy, but the facts currently before the public point to a legal investigation into a specific motor vehicle rather than evidence, at this stage, of political intimidation as some people are noisily charging.
The Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) has charged Archbishop Banda with possession of property reasonably believed to have been unlawfully obtained, contrary to Section 319 of the Penal Code. 
The charge concerns a blue Toyota Hilux, registration number ALF 7734, which investigators allege was in his possession between April 22, 2021 and December 27, 2023 and was reasonably suspected to have been unlawfully obtained from the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA).
That is a criminal allegation, and Archbishop Banda has pleaded not guilty and been granted K80,000 bail in his own recognisance, with three sureties required.
With this background, it is premature to declare that his arrest is political simply because he is a senior Catholic cleric.
The central question is remarkably straightforward: how did a ZRA vehicle allegedly end up in his possession?
This is not an entirely new matter suddenly manufactured to silence the Archbishop. The DEC warned and cautioned Archbishop Banda as far back as January 5, 2026, over the same motor vehicle.
The Commission said at the time that the investigation concerned the vehicle and that, when given an opportunity to explain how he came into possession of it, he chose to remain silent.
The vehicle is also part of a much wider investigation involving approximately 22 ZRA vehicles allegedly disposed of improperly.
Evidence presented in an earlier case included testimony from former ZRA Board Secretary Suzyo Ng’andu that three vehicles that had not been advertised for sale were instead given away, including one to Archbishop Banda and two to the Heart of Mercy charity.
That background makes it difficult to sustain the argument that the Archbishop has been singled out merely because of his political statements.
Indeed, the investigation predates the current arrest and has already resulted in criminal proceedings against former ZRA officials.
Archbishop Banda’s present charge is specifically about alleged possession of property reasonably believed to have been unlawfully obtained. The DEC has not charged him with participating in the original disposal of the vehicles.
What is particularly unfortunate is the attempt to turn every legal question involving a prominent critic of government into a political persecution narrative.
Alick Banda may be a Catholic Archbishop, but his ecclesiastical status does not place him beyond investigation by lawful State institutions.
For years, Archbishop Banda has occupied an unusually prominent space in Zambia’s political discourse. His public interventions have frequently gone beyond purely pastoral matters into direct commentary on government, President Hichilema, and national governance.
That is his constitutional right. But exercising the right to criticise the government does not confer immunity from accountability when a separate matter involving public property arises.
Neither should the Catholic Church be used as a shield against legitimate investigation. The Church has every right to stand by its Archbishop, provide him with legal representation, and express concern about his welfare. But solidarity should not become a substitute for evidence or due process.
Zambia cannot build a culture of accountability if prominent individuals are automatically treated as untouchable whenever investigations concern them.
The Archbishop now has his day in court. That is not political intimidation. It is precisely where a contested criminal allegation belongs.
