100 Views For the August 13, 2026 General Election, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) is printing ballots in Dubai, United Arab Emirates with Al Ghurair Printing & Publishing. The printing process is beginning today 30 June 2026, with the presidential paper going to the press first. Meanwhile, on the cost side, the Electoral Commission […]

100 Views

For the August 13, 2026 General Election, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) is printing ballots in Dubai, United Arab Emirates with Al Ghurair Printing & Publishing.

The printing process is beginning today 30 June 2026, with the presidential paper going to the press first.

Meanwhile, on the cost side, the Electoral Commission of Zambia estimate the cost at US$5 million for printing ballot papers alone.

That’s just printing, not logistics/shipping.

Oversight; ECZ says parties must sponsor their own representatives to Dubai for the 20-day exercise, meaning travel and accommodation is not covered by ECZ.

Democratic Union President Ackim Njobvu recently criticised the electoral management body, arguing that this risks excluding smaller parties who can’t afford it.

He has called for local printing to cut costs and make oversight accessible.

This raised the transparency arguments questioning why printing is being done abroad.

ECZ hasn’t published a full list of names yet in the reports available with regards to which parties or candidates are represented.

The electoral management body only described those available as “stakeholders” including “presidential candidates’ representatives, civil society organisations and other interested groups.

In practice, major parties with resources like UPND, Tonse Alliance/NRPUP, PF, Democratic Union, etc, are the ones most likely to have sent representatives with smaller parties flagging the cost as a barrier.

1. *Security/Tech*: ECZ Vice Chair Maj. Gen. Mukanda says ballot printing needs “advanced technology in multi-printing and packaging”. He says local capacity is “still a far-fetched reality”.

2. *Stakeholder witnessing*: ECZ maintains that allowing parties, CSOs, and candidates’ reps to monitor printing in Dubai “enhances transparency and helps build confidence”. Reps are there now to verify candidate details, layouts, and security features.
3. *Track record*: Al Ghurair has printed for Zambia before and “developed its capacity over the years”.

*Transparency concerns:*
1. *Access barrier*: Requiring parties to fund their own 20-day Dubai trip may mean not all stakeholders can attend. That weakens the “broad participation” needed for public confidence.
2. *Local capacity push*: Critics say government should invest in local firms or Government Printers instead. ECZ itself says it’s “in the best interest… to print locally” but capacity isn’t there yet.

*Costs vs Transparency: The Trade-off*
**Printing Abroad in Dubai** **Local Printing**
**Cost**: ~$5M + parties fund own oversight trips **Cost**: Likely lower. No international flights, hotels, forex
**Transparency**: Witnessing possible, but only for parties that can pay **Transparency**: Easier, cheaper for all parties/CSOs/media to monitor
**Security**: Argued to be higher-tech, harder to compromise **Security**: ECZ says local firms lack capacity/tech yet.

*Bottom line*: ECZ chose Dubai for security/technical reasons and is keeping the $5M budget. But the “pay-your-own-way” model is being challenged because it could limit oversight to well-funded parties. The push is to build local capacity for future elections so transparency doesn’t depend on travel budgets.

How other SADC countries handle ballot printing:

*1. South Africa*
*Who prints*: *Government Printing Works [GPW]* – a state-owned entity.
*Where*: 100% local, Pretoria.
*Cost*: Funded through IEC’s budget. No dollar spend to foreign printers.
*Transparency*: Political parties, IEC, and observers monitor locally. No travel costs. GPW has printed all national/provincial ballots since 1994 with security features like UV ink, microtext, watermarks.
*Why it works*: SA invested early in security printing capacity. IEC says this reduces cost + increases oversight access.

*2. Zimbabwe*
*Who prints*: *Fidelity Printers and Refiners* – Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe subsidiary.
*Where*: 100% local, Harare.
*Cost*: ZEC budget in local currency. Much lower than forex printing abroad.
*Transparency*: Multi-party liaison committees + ZEC officials witness printing on site. Observers, parties, and media can access without visas/flights.
*Controversy*: Past elections had trust issues, but the model itself is “local printing for access”. Security features include serial numbers, UV elements, specialized paper.

*3. Zambia vs the 2 models*
**Country** **Printer** **Location** **Oversight Cost to Parties** **Main Reason**
**Zambia 2026** Al Ghurair Dubai, UAE Parties pay own flights/hotels for 20 days ECZ cites lack of local tech/capacity
**South Africa** Government Printing Works Pretoria $0 – local access Invested in state security printing
**Zimbabwe** Fidelity Printers Harare $0 – local access Central Bank subsidiary handles it
*Key takeaway*:
SA and Zim both use local, state-linked printers. That keeps costs in local currency and makes transparency cheaper/easier because every party can send a rep without forex.

Zambia’s ECZ says local capacity isn’t there yet, hence the ∼$5M Dubai contract. Critics argue that’s why smaller parties may be locked out of oversight.

*The debate*: Pay more for “perceived security” abroad, vs invest once to build local capacity for cheaper + more inclusive transparency later.