The Editor Zambia
The Human Rights Commission (HRC) must be careful not to create the impression that Zambia’s 2026 General Elections were compromised simply because it recorded 126 election-related incidents.
While the protection of human rights is important, the existence of incidents during an election does not automatically invalidate the process or diminish the credibility of the outcome. 
Elections are highly competitive political contests, particularly in Africa, where political loyalties run deep and the struggle for power often generates tension.
Incidents of violence, intimidation, vandalism, and disputes are not unique to Zambia but have occurred in established democracies across the world, including countries whose electoral systems are widely respected.
The critical question, therefore, is not whether incidents occurred but whether they were sufficiently widespread, systematic, and consequential to undermine the integrity of the election results.
The HRC must distinguish between recording allegations and establishing proven violations that materially affected the outcome.
A figure of 126 incidents, without a detailed breakdown of their nature, severity, geographical distribution, and verified findings, tells us very little about the overall credibility of an election.
Indeed, the Commission itself acknowledges that the recording of an incident does not establish that an allegation has been proven.
That distinction must remain central to any responsible assessment of Zambia’s electoral process.
ECZ DESERVES RECOGNITION
Instead of allowing the reported incidents to overshadow the bigger picture, the country should recognise the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) for administering an election that delivered a clear victory for President Hakainde Hichilema.
The conduct of an election must be judged by the totality of the process, including voter participation, the administration of polling stations, transparency in counting, and the announcement of results.
Isolated incidents, even where established, should not be used to discredit the entire exercise without compelling evidence that they compromised its integrity.
The ECZ deserves praise for its efforts to conduct an election that was fair, transparent, and inclusive. Zambia’s democratic institutions should be strengthened by acknowledging what worked well, just as shortcomings must be identified and corrected where necessary.
President Hichilema’s victory should not be treated with suspicion merely because some election-related incidents were reported.
Any challenge to the results must be supported by evidence and pursued through the established legal mechanisms rather than through generalised allegations that risk undermining public confidence.
HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MUST BE BALANCED WITH CONTEXT
The HRC is right to insist that allegations of killings, intimidation, and electoral fraud deserve investigation. No democratic society should tolerate violence or deny victims access to justice.
However, the Commission must also recognise its responsibility to provide balanced, evidence-based assessments that do not unnecessarily alarm the public or suggest that an entire election was defective.
Ultimately, Zambia’s democracy will not be strengthened by treating every reported incident as proof of electoral failure.
It will be strengthened by impartial investigations, transparent findings, respect for due process, and confidence in institutions that have discharged their responsibilities.
The HRC must therefore look beyond the headline figure of 126 incidents and provide the country with a factual assessment of what happened, what was verified and what consequences, if any, the incidents had on the electoral outcome.
Zambia should be proud of its democratic progress while remaining vigilant about protecting citizens’ rights. Recognising isolated problems does not require condemning the entire electoral process. Equally, defending the credibility of an election does not mean excusing proven wrongdoing.
The proper balance is clear: investigate credible allegations, hold offenders accountable where evidence warrants it, and recognise the ECZ’s achievements.
Above all, do not confuse the inevitable challenges of a competitive election with evidence that the democratic verdict of the Zambian people lacks legitimacy.
