Lubinda says PF future hinges on unity, not court rulings

Lubinda says PF future hinges on unity, not court rulings

Given Lubinda has set out what he described as the Patriotic Front’s final path forward, telling journalists that the survival of the political movement founded by Michael Chilufya Sata would be determined by internal unity rather than court outcomes.

Speaking during a press interaction, Lubinda responded to pointed questions from Mr. Zulu, Madam Tawanda and Nelson on the credibility of state institutions, growing internal friction within the PF, and uncertainty surrounding the party’s convention scheduled after mid-January 2026. His remarks came amid sustained legal and political pressure on the opposition party, with several court processes expected to reach decisive stages in early January.

When asked by Nelson how the PF could accuse the justice system of being weaponised while still expressing confidence in court processes ahead of January 9 and January 12, Lubinda offered a cautious but firm response. He said the presence of selective justice did not cancel out the possibility of lawful decisions emerging from the courts. To illustrate the point, he compared the system to a handful of groundnuts, saying that the existence of a rotten one did not mean all were spoiled.

Lubinda pointed to the Constitutional Court ruling in the Mukandila and Munia Zulu case on Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 as an example of what he described as correct judicial conduct within a broader environment he considers compromised. He said that ruling demonstrated why the PF had continued to pursue legal routes before taking major political decisions, despite its wider concerns about the justice system.

Pressed further by Mr. Zulu on what the party would do if the courts did not rule in its favour, Lubinda deliberately shifted his language away from formal party structures. He said the organisation created by Michael Sata and later led by Edgar Chagwalungu Lungu would continue “under whatever umbrella it chooses,” making clear that the movement would not allow its future to be determined by prolonged legal delays.

“We are giving ourselves only up to the 12th of January to use the judicial system,” Lubinda said, adding that once that window closed, the leadership would decide how to convene and elect new leadership without further postponement. His remarks suggested a readiness to move forward with internal processes regardless of the outcome of pending court matters.

The exchange with Madam Tawanda shifted the discussion inward, focusing on rising public concern over infighting among PF presidential hopefuls and the conduct of their supporters, particularly on social media platforms. She asked whether aspirants understood that the party’s interests should come before individual ambition at a time when the PF faced existential pressure.

Lubinda responded by drawing a clear line, stating that anyone within the PF who placed personal ambition above national duty was, in his words, “in the wrong place.” He said leadership ambition was legitimate only when it was anchored in service to citizens rather than factional advantage. Supporters who spread insults, hostility and division online, he added, were being closely watched by both party members and the wider public.

He said PF members were already forming their own judgments about which aspirants were working to unite the party and which were fuelling acrimony. Those contributing to division, Lubinda warned, were doing so at their own peril, as internal sentiment would ultimately influence the direction and leadership of the movement.

Lubinda also disclosed that the PF Council of Elders was actively engaging all aspiring candidates to secure agreement on a convention process that would strengthen the party rather than fracture it. He said holding a convention that produced a divided outcome would defeat the purpose of the exercise and weaken the movement at a critical moment.

“If I knew a convention would destroy the party, I would leave before it happened,” Lubinda said, stressing that the objective of the process was renewal, not rupture. His remarks underscored concerns within the party that unresolved rivalries could undermine efforts to present a united front ahead of the 2026 general election.

Beyond internal party dynamics, Lubinda addressed the broader role of the media and digital platforms in shaping political discourse. He urged journalists and social media users to resist becoming conduits for hostility, arguing that they carried a responsibility for national cohesion during politically sensitive periods. Responsible journalism, he said, was an essential pillar in maintaining stability and informed public debate.

The interaction highlighted the tension facing the PF as it navigates legal uncertainty, leadership succession and public expectations simultaneously. Lubinda’s responses framed the coming weeks as decisive, not only for determining how the party conducts its convention, but also for whether the movement can reassert cohesion after a prolonged period of internal and external pressure.