The government has publicly distanced itself from controversial statements made by Mafinga Member of Parliament and opposition Patriotic Front leader, Mr. Robert Chabinga, during a press conference held on 2nd May 2025. Chabinga’s remarks, perceived as inflammatory and targeted at members of the diplomatic community, have triggered concern from both local observers and foreign missions.

In a prompt and strongly worded response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation clarified that Mr. Chabinga’s views do not reflect the Government’s official stance, nor do they align with Zambia’s foreign policy principles. The Government emphasized its commitment to the Vienna Convention and to the respectful, rules-based engagement with international partners.

Below is the full official statement from the Government:

Lusaka, 5th May 2025 — The Government of the Republic of Zambia, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, has issued a formal clarification regarding recent statements made by Mr. Robert Chabinga, Member of Parliament for Mafinga and leader of the opposition Patriotic Front, during a press conference held on 2nd May 2025.
In a strongly worded press statement, the Ministry unequivocally distanced the Government from Mr. Chabinga’s remarks, noting that his views do not represent the official position, policy, or diplomatic posture of the Republic of Zambia. The Government reiterated Zambia’s unwavering commitment to its sovereign foreign policy, grounded in constructive bilateral and multilateral engagement.
Zambia reaffirmed its status as a responsible and active member of the international community, upholding the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961). The Convention provides a vital framework for the conduct of diplomats and emphasises mutual respect between host and sending states. In line with this, the Government expressed appreciation for the vital role played by the diplomatic corps in supporting Zambia’s development agenda.
Furthermore, the Ministry stressed its full commitment to ensuring that diplomats serving in Zambia enjoy their privileges and immunities without fear or undue interference. Equally, it was acknowledged that diplomats are expected to respect the laws and regulations of the host state, including the principle of non-interference in domestic affairs.
The Ministry also took the opportunity to remind political leaders and stakeholders that matters relating to diplomatic accreditation and conduct fall exclusively under its jurisdiction. No individual or political entity is authorised to speak or act on behalf of the Government in such matters.
While Zambia welcomes robust political dialogue, the Ministry cautioned that inflammatory rhetoric, particularly in matters of foreign relations, can compromise the nation’s diplomatic integrity and standing within the global community.
The statement concluded with a reaffirmation of Zambia’s dedication to fostering cordial, respectful, and mutually beneficial international relationships.

(Original signed)
Hon. Mulambo Haimbe, S.C., M.P.
Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation
Lusaka
5th May, 2025

Chabinga’s Diplomatic Outburst Raises Questions Over Foreign Policy Discipline

In the wake of controversial remarks made by Mafinga Member of Parliament Robert Chabinga, concerns have emerged regarding Zambia’s diplomatic posture and the apparent silence from the highest offices in response to what some have termed a “grave act of diplomatic indiscipline.”

Chabinga, who has openly aligned himself with the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND) despite holding a seat under the Patriotic Front (PF), shocked the nation during a recent press conference in which he openly castigated members of the diplomatic corps. His statements, broadcast on state television, have since ignited a firestorm of public and political debate.

Observers say such actions could have far-reaching implications for Zambia’s image on the global stage. “Our country has benefited immensely from diplomatic goodwill,” one commentator noted. “From USAID to DFID and even China’s gift of the Kenneth Kaunda Wing at the Mulungushi International Conference Centre, Zambia’s partnerships with the international community have been pivotal to its development agenda.”

Zambia recently saw international solidarity during its declaration of a national drought disaster, with donations flowing in from countries like the United States and Burundi, among others. Critics argue that undermining this goodwill through unrestrained public remarks can jeopardize crucial diplomatic relationships.

The broader concern, however, appears to be institutional. According to some voices within the governance and policy space, Chabinga’s statements reflect a deeper issue — the blurring of boundaries between legislative conduct and executive diplomacy. “In any well-functioning democracy, members of parliament are not permitted to independently conduct or pronounce foreign policy, particularly outside the parameters of inter-parliamentary engagement,” an analyst said.

The development is seen as an embarrassment not only to the leadership of the National Assembly, whose members are expected to understand diplomatic norms, but also to the presidency. “If any lawmaker can take it upon themselves to issue what sounds like foreign policy, and the state remains mute, what precedent does that set for governance?”

While Chabinga’s support for President Hakainde Hichilema is well documented  from public endorsements to reports of visible coordination during past political events  some argue that such proximity should not grant impunity, especially in areas as sensitive as foreign relations.

The silence from State House following Chabinga’s outburst has only deepened the controversy. “It is not just about public relations. The president must clear the air. The world is watching,” said one political observer. “Our systems must function beyond individuals. If Zambia is to continue receiving international support, it must reaffirm its commitment to diplomatic etiquette.”

The prevailing sentiment is that the nation must protect its hard-earned international credibility. “Zambia is bigger than any individual. Let systems work, and let discipline in foreign engagement be enforced.”

The Media Liaison Committee (MLC) has accused the Swedish Embassy of sponsoring confusion within the Zambian media landscape during this year’s World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) celebrations held under the theme “Reporting in the Brave New World – The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Press Freedom and the Media.”

Traditionally, journalists in Lusaka march together and gather for official speeches from government representatives, the United Nations, and other key stakeholders to reflect on the state of press freedom in Zambia. However, this year saw an unusual development — two separate marches taking place in the capital city.

According to the MLC, one march was organised by the committee itself in collaboration with the national WPFD organising team composed of Zambian media institutions. A second, parallel march was reportedly supported by the Swedish Embassy and BBC Media Action, and involved freelance journalists and Swedish-funded media NGOs. This group voiced opposition to statutory media self-regulation — a stance that contradicts consensus previously reached by the Zambian media sector.

The MLC noted that in 2019, journalists across Zambia convened during two “Insaka” conferences where they unanimously agreed to be regulated by a statutory self-regulatory framework — one developed by journalists for journalists. This led to the creation of a draft bill, initially known as the Zambia Media Council (ZAMEC) Bill, now renamed the Zambia Institute of Journalism (ZIJ) Bill following legal guidance from the Ministry of Justice.

The MLC alleges that the Swedish Embassy, in partnership with BBC Media Action, is now backing opposition to this bill, causing unnecessary division in the media fraternity. The organisation expressed concern over the presence of the Swedish Ambassador, Johan Hallenborg, on the podium during the alternate WPFD event, alongside representatives of Swedish-funded NGOs.

In a statement issued by MLC Chairperson Ms. Felistus Chipako, the committee announced its intention to formally write to the Swedish Government, copying Zambia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, to raise alarm over what it describes as “foreign-sponsored divisions” in the local media space.

The MLC also plans to write to the Department of Immigration and the Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security, questioning the activities of BBC Media Action’s Country Director, Soren Johansen, who operates in Zambia under a work permit.

Furthermore, the committee accused BBC Media Action of engaging in destabilising activities since its entry into Zambia, including diverting donor funding away from established media umbrella bodies such as MISA Zambia, Panos Institute Southern Africa, and the Zambia Community Media Forum (ZaCoMeF), thereby weakening their influence.

The MLC reaffirmed its openness to continued internal dialogue with stakeholders who wish to offer further input on the ZIJ Bill. However, it strongly condemned any attempts by foreign entities to sow discord within Zambia’s media fraternity.

“The Zambian media has always demonstrated unity in upholding press freedom and professionalism, regardless of ownership divides. We will not stand by while foreign influence undermines this unity,” Ms. Chipako said.

UPND Faces Uphill Battle Ahead of 2026 as Analyst Warns Against Overreliance on Lungu’s Legal Disqualification

As Zambia moves steadily toward the 2026 general elections, political tensions and public expectations are mounting. At the center of the conversation is the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND), which faces growing doubts over its ability to secure the constitutionally required 50% plus one vote in the first round.

Political analyst and former Board Chairperson of the Centre for Policy Dialogue, Neo Simutanyi, has cautioned the ruling party against relying on legal maneuvers to block former President Edgar Lungu from contesting. While UPND supporters see Lungu’s disqualification as a path to an easier victory, Simutanyi argues this view is dangerously simplistic and politically short-sighted.

“Removing Lungu from the ballot may not work in UPND’s favor as expected,” Simutanyi observed. “His support base remains significant, and eliminating him does not automatically translate into public approval for the ruling party.”

The analyst noted that UPND’s focus on the former president may be distracting it from more urgent matters. Instead of building its strategy solely around sidelining opposition figures, Simutanyi advised the party to concentrate on resolving real issues affecting Zambians soaring inflation, persistent unemployment, energy shortages, and unmet campaign promises. He warned that the electorate may not be swayed by courtroom victories if their daily struggles continue unresolved.

Since assuming office in 2021, the UPND has faced mounting criticism over its economic management and delivery on key pledges. Public discontent is visible in both urban and rural areas, with citizens calling for concrete action over political rhetoric. This growing frustration could pose a serious threat to the party’s chances of achieving a first-round victory in 2026.

Simutanyi’s warning is timely: it underscores that political success will require more than eliminating rivals; it demands a proactive, results-driven approach to governance. As the countdown to 2026 continues, the UPND must now confront the dual challenge of restoring public trust and proving that its promises can translate into real progress.

In a democracy where public sentiment shifts rapidly, the coming months will be crucial in determining whether the UPND can reconnect with the electorate, or risk facing a divided and skeptical vote at the polls.