Lungu family demand answers over secret post-mortem

FORMER First Lady Esther Lungu and the family of late former president Edgar Lungu have accused the South African Police Service (SAPS), prosecutors, and Zambian diplomatic officials of unlawfully seizing his body, conducting a post-mortem, and carrying out DNA sampling without their consent or presence. The family seeks justice for their loved one, Edgar Lungu.

Through their Johannesburg-based lawyers, Mashele Attorneys Inc., the family has written to State Attorney Yusuf Baba and SAPS investigating officer Sergeant Nompilo Ngwenya, demanding an urgent explanation over what they describe as a disregard of binding court orders.

They believe that the actions taken concerning Edgar Lungu were not only wrong but also violated his dignity.

“Our clients regard the conduct of SAPS and the prosecution as unlawful and in direct contravention of the court of law, and they demand a full explanation on the legal basis upon which the body was seized and a post-mortem conducted,” the lawyers said. This case has become vital for many Zambians, especially given the legacy of Edgar Lungu.

In an April 24, 2026 legal letter, the family said the actions culminating on April 22 were in direct violation of an August 8, 2025 High Court order, which had expressly stated that the body of the late former president was only to be handled and surrendered through the Sheriff of the Court and in the presence of specifically identified individuals.

The lawyers argued that despite full knowledge of that order, SAPS officers, acting with the investigating team and prosecution, took possession of the body unilaterally and contrary to the court’s directive.

They further stated that during inquest proceedings held on March 31, 2026 before the Randburg Magistrates’ Court, Senior Public Prosecutor Yusuf Baba and Sergeant Ngwenya had been directed to exchange submissions on whether an inquest could lawfully proceed in light of the existing High Court order.

The matter had been adjourned to May 29, 2026 for hearing, but before the issue could be determined, SAPS allegedly moved ahead and initiated forensic processes on the body.

The family said the situation worsened on April 22 when Justice Francis Subbiah granted another court order directing that the body be returned without delay to Two Mountains Burial Services or another mortuary nominated by the family.

The order also expressly interdicted the handing over of the body to SAPS and called upon relevant parties to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of court.

Despite being served and acknowledging receipt of that order, the family said SAPS still proceeded with a post-mortem examination, DNA sampling, and identity verification without lawful authority, family consent, or their presence.

Mashele Attorneys said SAPS officers, together with diplomatic representatives of the Zambian government, were present during the post-mortem and took photographs and video recordings of the late president’s body.

The family said they were neither notified nor consulted and were denied an opportunity to be present during the procedure.

“This conduct has caused profound distress and has, quite plainly, added insult to the family’s grief,” the lawyers stated.

They also said Sergeant Ngwenya directly instructed the Chief Pathologist to proceed with the post-mortem despite the existence of binding court orders regulating the handling of the body.

The family complained that SAPS refused to disclose the location of the body when requested, stating that this raised serious concerns about transparency and legality.

They rejected claims that the alleged lapsing of an appeal justified the police action, arguing that even if such a lapse existed, it would only have made the original High Court order fully binding and enforceable.

The lawyers also questioned the basis for the invasive forensic procedures, stating that no credible evidence had been presented before any competent court to justify claims of poisoning or the need for a post-mortem.

They noted that a family member allegedly linked to poisoning claims had denied such suspicions under oath.

The family has now demanded copies of all subpoenas and legal authority relied upon by SAPS and prosecutors and warned that failure to provide satisfactory answers would result in legal proceedings against all responsible parties without further notice.

Full Letter Below

STATE ATTORNEY
Yusuf Baba
SGT NOMPILO NGWENYA
BY EMAIL

Date: 24/04/26
Our ref:CIV/LUNGU/
Your Ref:

29 Scott Street,Waverly |
Tel: +27 11 056 7228 | | Email: [email protected]
Partner: Neo Eddie Mashele,
Associate: Manqoba Radebe , Qaqamba Maquthu,
Candidate attorneys: Thando Tshabalala, Kutloano Segone(
29 Scott Street
Waverly
Johannesburg, 2090
Tel: +27 11 056 7228
Email: [email protected]

RE: UNLAWFUL SEIZURE, REMOVAL AND POST-MORTEM OF THE BODY OF THE LATE
FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA, MR EDGAR LUNGU

1. We address this correspondence on behalf of our respective clients , First to Seventh
   Respondents, being the surviving spouse and family of the late former President of
   the Republic of Zambia, Mr Edgar Lungu, .
2. The correspondence is addressed to you in circumstances of the utmost gravity
   arising from the events culminating on 22 April 2026. These events must be
   understood against the binding Court Order granted on 8 August 2025, which
   expressly regulated the manner in which the body of the deceased was to be
   handled, surrendered, and dealt with, including that such surrender was to be
   effected solely through the Sheriff of the Court and in the presence of specifically
   identified individuals, and not by members of the South African Police Service acting
   unilaterally.
3. Notwithstanding the aforesaid Order, and despite full knowledge thereof, members of
   the South African Police Service, acting under the direction of the investigating team
   and in concert with the prosecution, proceeded to take possession of the body in a
   manner wholly inconsistent with and in direct contravention of the Court’s order.
4. This conduct was compounded by the inquest proceedings held on 31 March 2026
   before the Randburg Magistrates’ Court, where Senior Public Prosecutor Yusuf Baba
   appeared for the prosecution and Sergeant Nompilo Ngwenya acted as the
   investigating officer under Brigadier SefalotseThe court at such proceedings directed
   that the parties exchange submissions on whether an inquest could lawfully proceed
   in the face of the High Court Order stating otherwise the matter was remanded for
   hearing on the 29th May 2026. Notwithstanding this directive, and before the issue
   could be determined, SAPS proceeded to seize the body and initiate forensic
   processes.
5. The position reached its most egregious point on 22 April 2026, when the Honourable
   Justice Francis Subbiah granted a further Court Order directing, inter alia, that the
   body of the late Mr Edgar Lungu be returned without any delay to the custody of Two
   Mountains Burial Services (Pty) Ltd, alternatively to a mortuary nominated by the
   family, expressly interdicting the handing over of the body to SAPS, and calling upon
   the relevant parties to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of court.
   Despite the aforesaid Order being duly served on all relevant parties, and
   notwithstanding that receipt of such Order was acknowledged, members of SAPS
   nevertheless proceeded to conduct a post-mortem examination on the body of the
   deceased in brazen disregard of the High court’s order.
6. Notwithstanding both Orders, SAPS retained possession of the body and proceeded
   to cause or permit a post-mortem, DNA sampling, and identity verification processes
   to be conducted without the consent, knowledge, or presence of the family and
   without lawful authority from a competent court.
7. We are further instructed, and it has since come to our attention, that the post-mortem
   examination was conducted in the presence of various members of the South African
   Police Service, as well as diplomatic representatives of the Government of the
   Republic of Zambia, who proceeded to take photographs and video recordings of the
   body of the late President during the course of such procedures. This occurred in
   circumstances where our clients, being the lawful family and rights-bearers, were
   neither notified, consulted, nor afforded any opportunity to be present. This conduct
   has caused profound distress and has, quite plainly, added insult to the family’s grief.
8. It has further come to our attention that Sergeant Nompilo Ngwenya, in her capacity
   as the investigating officer, demanded that the Chief Pathologist conduct the post-
   mortem examination, notwithstanding the existence of the binding Court Orders
   regulating the handling of the body. This conduct raises serious concerns regarding
   the propriety, lawfulness, and independence of the processes that were undertaken.
9. Of equal concern is the fact that SAPS refused and/or failed to disclose the location of
   the body to the family when requested to do so. In light of the above conduct, the
   reasons for such refusal now appear self-evident and further underscore the extent to
   which the process was conducted outside the bounds of transparency, legality, and
   respect for the rights of the family.
10. We are further instructed that reliance has been placed on the alleged lapsing of an
    appeal to justify these actions. That position is fundamentally misconceived and
    legally untenable, as even if such lapse were to be accepted, which is denied, the
    legal consequence would have been to render the High Court Order fully operative
    and binding, requiring strict compliance therewith. At no stage did such alleged lapse
    confer authority upon SAPS to act outside the parameters of the Order, and it is
    therefore beyond dispute that SAPS had no lawful authority to take possession of the
    body, to exclude the Sheriff, or to bypass the presence of the designated individuals
    stipulated in the Order.
11. Of even greater concern is that the invasive forensic procedures, including the post-
    mortem and DNA sampling, were conducted in circumstances where no prima facie
    evidence or credible basis was placed before a competent court to justify such
    measures. Allegations of poisoning were not supported by objective evidence, the
    family member who was alleged to have stated such had under oath denied any such
    suspicion, and no corroborative material was produced. This gives rise to serious and
    legitimate concerns regarding the true purpose and motivation behind the actions of
    SAPS and the prosecution.
12. The conduct described herein, viewed holistically, constitutes a flagrant disregard of
    binding court orders, a clear usurpation of the judiciary and the power it holds, and a
    profound violation of the rule of law. It has further had the effect of causing immense

distress, anguish, and additional trauma to a grieving family who were entitled to
dignity, respect, and lawful process in the handling of the remains of their loved one.

13. In the premises, we are instructed to place on record that our clients regard the
    conduct of SAPS and the prosecution as unlawful and in direct contravention of the
    court of law. We accordingly call upon you, as a matter of urgency, to provide a full
    and detailed explanation of the legal basis upon which the body was seized, the
    authority relied upon to conduct the post-mortem and DNA procedures, and copies of
    all subpoena’s relied upon.
14. Failing a satisfactory response, our clients reserve all their rights to institute
    appropriate proceedings against all responsible parties without further notice.
15. Be guided accordingly

Kind Regards,
Signed electronically
MASHELE ATTORNEYS INC.
Tel: 010 500 4835
Email:

Source:Download LETTER TO THE STATE AND NPA. 2026.04.26