The decline in Zambia’s CPI reveals that arrests alone can’t win the fight against corruption

By Venus N Msyani

The latest Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) report by Transparency International Zambia (TIZ) for 2025 has sparked important national debate, and rightly so. Corruption remains one of the most serious threats to democracy, and identifying weaknesses in governance is not only necessary but healthy for Zambia’s democratic development.

Any report touching on corruption deserves careful, critical analysis, and it is encouraging to see the 2025 CPI being examined with that level of seriousness.

One key takeaway, which has not been emphasized enough, is that the TIZ report indirectly highlights the urgent need for elected public leaders to annually declare their assets and liabilities. Without this level of transparency, the fight against corruption risks losing credibility, regardless of how many arrests or convictions are recorded.

A deeper reading of the report suggests that had President Hakainde Hichilema embraced annual asset declaration, the narrative surrounding his anti‑corruption agenda might look very different today.

Corruption and economic hardship were among the major issues that propelled voters to support Hichilema in 2021. Throughout his campaign, he consistently linked the two, arguing that corruption was draining national resources and undermining economic growth. He promised that fighting corruption would be central to Zambia’s economic transformation, and that recovering stolen assets was essential to reviving the country’s struggling economy.

This message resonated strongly with the public, especially amid widespread reports of sudden wealth and large sums of money allegedly involved in corruption scandals among senior government officials at the time. Failing to act on these promises would have amounted to political self‑sabotage.

Upon assuming office, President Hichilema moved quickly. He prioritized asset recovery and oversaw the establishment of the Financial and Economic Crimes Court in January 2022. This ushered in a surge of arrests and convictions related to corruption, signaling a government eager to demonstrate action.

The CPI reflected this momentum. Sources show Zambia’s score improved steadily during the first three years of his presidency: In 2022, it scored 33/100. In 2023, the score rose to 37/100, and in 2024 to 39/100.

These gains occurred despite growing public calls for the President to demonstrate transparency by publicly declaring his assets and liabilities each year. For many citizens, the CPI improvements were confusing. Was progress in the fight against corruption simply a matter of increasing arrests and convictions?

The ruling United Party for National Development (UPND) often appeared to believe so. In 2022, the Anti‑Corruption Commission (ACC) recorded 71 arrests. In 2023, that number dropped to 38, nearly half. During the first quarter of 2024, only 12 arrests were recorded, projecting roughly 48 for the year. The decline seemed to unsettle the administration, culminating in the dismissal of the entire ACC board in July 2024.

Ironically, 2024 recorded the lowest number of arrests and convictions, yet the CPI score still rose to 39/100. This raised an important question: Are arrests and convictions truly the primary indicators of progress in combating corruption?

The 2025 CPI report complicates the picture even further. Zambia’s score dropped to 37/100, a two‑point decline from the previous year. The ACC recorded 38 arrests and 17 convictions in 2025; figures that neither fully support nor contradict the CPI trend. These mixed results make it even harder to determine whether the government’s approach is producing meaningful, sustainable progress.

What is clear, however, is that arrests and convictions alone do not define success in the fight against corruption. Other factors; public trust, political will, transparency, institutional independence, and accountability, are equally important. When these elements are weak or inconsistent, even strong enforcement efforts can lose legitimacy.

This is where the issue of asset declaration becomes critical. Had President Hichilema agreed to declare his assets annually, the narrative surrounding his anti‑corruption agenda might have been significantly different. Transparency and public trust remain missing elements in the government’s approach, and the TIZ report indirectly underscores this gap.

Arrests alone can’t win the fight against corruption. If Zambia is to make lasting progress against vice, asset declaration by elected leaders must become a non‑negotiable standard. It is not merely a bureaucratic exercise; it is a cornerstone of accountability, a safeguard against abuse of office, and a signal of genuine commitment to clean governance. Above all, it opens the door for public trust, an essential element in the fight against corruption.