67 Parliamentary Seats Go to Court as Presidential Election Challenge Fails to Reach Constitutional Court

40 ViewsLUSAKA — Zambia’s post-election battle has moved decisively into the courts, with 67 parliamentary election petitions filed countrywide after the expiry of the 14-day legal period for challenging the August 13 results. The petitions mean that nearly one in every three of the 224 parliamentary seats declared so far by the Electoral Commission of […]

40 Views

Lusaka High Court

LUSAKA — Zambia’s post-election battle has moved decisively into the courts, with 67 parliamentary election petitions filed countrywide after the expiry of the 14-day legal period for challenging the August 13 results.

The petitions mean that nearly one in every three of the 224 parliamentary seats declared so far by the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) is now facing a legal challenge.

The scale of the litigation stands in sharp contrast to the presidential election, where the main opposition candidate Brian Mundubile said he intended to challenge President Hakainde Hichilema’s victory but was unable to get a presidential petition formally lodged at the Constitutional Court within the prescribed period.

The Constitutional Court and other courts were closed on August 24 — the final day for filing a challenge to the presidential result — with the Judiciary citing security concerns.

Human Rights Watch said the closure effectively prevented the filing of legal challenges to the presidential election result.

The issue has since become one of the most controversial aspects of the 2026 election aftermath.

67 parliamentary battles

Unlike the presidential challenge, parliamentary election disputes have now entered the formal judicial process.

The 67 petitions were filed in High Courts across the country following the expiry of the 14-day period for challenging parliamentary election results.

The Lusaka High Court has received the largest number, with 41 petitions, according to the latest figures.

The losing candidates are challenging results on various grounds, including alleged vote buying, bribery, violence, defamation, voter intimidation and other alleged breaches of electoral law.

Among the constituencies already facing court challenges are Lubansenshi, Lima, Chadiza West, Chongwe East, Chilubi and Chama South.

The list also includes some politically prominent contests.

Paul Kabuswe

Sylvia Masebo

Former Mines and Minerals Development Minister Paul Kabuswe has petitioned the election of Resolute Party candidate Lupele Nsofwa Kabwe in Chililabombwe.

Kabuswe polled 8,986 votes against Kabwe’s 10,920 and is challenging the result, alleging, among other things, that his opponent’s campaign was characterised by alleged character assassination and other irregularities.

Sylvia Masebo who has been in Parliament since 2001 and served as Minister of Lands and Natural Resources in the previous cabinet and had recontested Chongwe and lost to an Independent, has also taken her election to court.

Other petitions filed before the Lusaka High Court include:

• Chitambo, where UPND’s Remember Mutale is challenging NRPUP’s Nelson Kabanda;
• Milanzi, where UPND’s Tylad Lungu is challenging independent winner Lumankio Zulu;
• Kanchibiya, where UPND’s Sunday Chanda has challenged the result though there are reports that he has withdrawn;
• Nyimba, where UPND’s Olipah Phiri has petitioned the result; and
• Chililabombwe and Chongwe, where Kabuswe and Masebo have separately challenged their defeats.

Another petition involves Mwandi, where UPND candidate Sibeso Sefulo is challenging independent MP Iris Kaingu’s victory.

Kaingu won the seat with 6,595 votes against Sefulo’s 6,110. The petition alleges bribery, corruption, undue influence and irregularities in the counting and announcement of results.

The cost of going to court

For losing parliamentary candidates, however, challenging an election is not simply a matter of filing papers.

It can be an expensive undertaking involving lawyers, preparation of affidavits and witnesses, court processes, transport, accommodation and other litigation expenses.

Legal and political sources estimate that a serious parliamentary election petition can cost around K300,000 on average, although the actual cost varies considerably depending on the complexity of the case and how long the matter takes.

At that estimated average, 67 petitions could represent litigation expenditure of roughly K20.1 million by candidates and their supporters.

That figure is only an indicative calculation, not an official cost of the petitions, because individual cases can cost substantially more or less than K300,000.

The financial barrier also raises a broader question about access to electoral justice: how many losing candidates with potentially credible grievances can afford to challenge an election result?

MPs remain in Parliament while cases are heard

Filing a petition does not automatically remove the elected MP from Parliament.

Article 73 of the Constitution provides that an MP whose election has been petitioned continues to hold the seat pending determination of the election petition. The High Court is required to hear and determine the petition within 90 days of filing.

This means the 67 MPs whose elections have been challenged remain MPs while the cases proceed.

If a High Court eventually nullifies an election, the affected seat can become vacant, subject to the applicable appeal process and subsequent electoral procedures.

The 90-day requirement is likely to put considerable pressure on the High Court as it works through dozens of election disputes simultaneously.

The presidential petition that never reached court

The parliamentary petitions have also highlighted the unusual circumstances surrounding the presidential result.

Hichilema was declared winner of the August 13 presidential election with 2,965,326 votes, representing about 60.49 percent, while Mundubile received 1,856,217 votes, about 37.87 percent.

Mundubile rejected the result and said he intended to challenge the election.

But August 24 — the final day for filing the presidential challenge — became a major point of controversy after the courts were closed and access to judicial premises was restricted.

The Constitutional Court was among the courts closed on that day, while a Judiciary memorandum cited security concerns.

Human Rights Watch subsequently said the closure effectively blocked the filing of legal challenges to the presidential result.

There was also confusion over whether a presidential petition had nevertheless been submitted.

Documents described as a “People’s Presidential Petition” were emailed to Chief Justice Mumba Malila’s private email address and he confirmed receipt and that he had referred it to the Constitutional Court.

However, a subsequent explanation of the Judiciary’s position said no presidential petition had been recorded at the Constitutional Court Registry within the filing period.

That left Zambia in an unusual situation: the presidential result was not subjected to a formal Constitutional Court petition, while dozens of parliamentary election results are now being tested before the High Court.

From campaign disputes to courtroom battles

The 67 petitions now represent the next phase of Zambia’s 2026 election.

During the campaign and immediately after polling, political parties and candidates exchanged allegations of electoral misconduct.

Those allegations can now be tested against evidence in court.

The petitioners will have to substantiate their claims through the judicial process, while the winning candidates and the ECZ will have an opportunity to defend the results.

A petition itself does not establish that an election was rigged or that electoral malpractice occurred.

The courts will ultimately determine whether the alleged irregularities were proved and, critically, whether they were serious enough to affect the validity of the election.

For Zambia’s new Parliament, therefore, the August 13 election may not yet be the final word.

Sixty-seven parliamentary seats are now part of a legal contest — and the decisions of the High Court could determine whether some of the country’s newly elected MPs remain in Parliament or return to the electorate for another vote.