TONSE ALLIANCE LAWYERS GIVE ECZ 3 HOURS TO CLARIFY ‘X’ OR TICK VOTE MARKING

NRPUP LAWYERS GIVE ECZ 3 HOURS TO CLARIFY ‘X’ OR TICK VOTE MARKING Lawyers representing the National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Prosperity (NRPUP) have given the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) three hours to clarify whether voters will be allowed to use either a cross “X” or a tick/check mark when marking ballot papers […]

NRPUP LAWYERS GIVE ECZ 3 HOURS TO CLARIFY ‘X’ OR TICK VOTE MARKING

Lawyers representing the National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Prosperity (NRPUP) have given the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) three hours to clarify whether voters will be allowed to use either a cross “X” or a tick/check mark when marking ballot papers in the August 13 General Election.

In an urgent letter dated August 9, 2026, Aongola & Co. Legal Practitioners, acting jointly with Makebi Zulu Advocates, warned that ambiguity over the acceptable method of marking ballots could create uncertainty and potentially trigger disputes during the counting and verification of votes.

The lawyers have specifically cited Regulation 33(d) of the Electoral Process (General) Regulations, 2016, which they say provides that a voter shall signify their vote by “marking the ballot paper with a CROSS in the appropriate place.”

The legal team is demanding that the ECZ immediately confirm that the cross “X” remains the only valid mark for indicating a voter’s choice, unless the Commission can point to a specific legal authority allowing a different marking system.

They have further demanded that any instructions or voter education materials suggesting that a tick may be accepted be withdrawn, suspended or corrected if they are inconsistent with the regulations.

The lawyers argue that the criteria for determining whether a ballot is valid must be clear and uniform before polling begins, warning that uncertainty could result in different interpretations of ballot papers at different polling stations.

“The integrity of an election requires that the criteria governing the validity of a ballot be known, uniform and consistently applied before polling commences,” the lawyers stated.

The NRPUP legal team has also raised concerns over reports that the ECZ may delay the progressive announcement and publication of election results after polling closes on August 13, with aggregated results allegedly expected to be announced in blocks from around August 17.

According to the lawyers, such an arrangement would represent a significant departure from the progressive availability of results at polling stations and subsequent levels of aggregation.

They argue that polling-station results are the primary building blocks of the national result and should therefore remain publicly accessible and capable of independent verification by political parties, candidates, observers and other stakeholders.

The lawyers have demanded that the ECZ confirm that results will be announced publicly at every polling station and that copies of result forms will be provided to polling agents.

They have also called for polling-station-level results to be published in an accessible manner and for all subsequent aggregation to be mathematically reconcilable with the results recorded at individual polling stations.

The legal team warned that withholding progressive results while aggregation takes place could create what it described as an “information vacuum” at a critical stage of the electoral process, potentially increasing public apprehension and suspicion.

The lawyers maintain that transparency in the electoral process requires an uninterrupted and verifiable chain from the casting of ballots through the polling-station count, constituency tallying and national aggregation to the final declaration.

With only days remaining before polling, the NRPUP lawyers have demanded a written response from the ECZ within three hours of receipt of the letter.

They warned that failure by the Commission to provide the requested clarification could result in the party seeking legal redress to protect what it considers the integrity of the electoral process.

The lawyers said their demands were made without prejudice to the party’s rights and expressed hope that the ECZ would ensure that the August 13 election is conducted in accordance with the Constitution, the Electoral Process Act and relevant regulations.

The ECZ had not, at the time of publication, publicly responded to the demands contained in the letter.