Paramount Chief Mpezeni’s call for Zambians to allow President Hakainde Hichilema to complete his mandate has reopened a sensitive question that has long sat beneath Zambia’s democratic surface: where traditional authority should stand once political competition begins to intensify.
By The Columnst
The chief’s remarks urging citizens not to remove the President before the end of his term were framed as a call for stability. Yet the statement has quickly expanded into a wider national conversation about whether traditional leaders should speak openly on partisan political matters.
In Zambia’s constitutional order, chiefs occupy a unique position. They are custodians of culture, guardians of land and leaders whose authority stretches across communities that include supporters of different political parties. Their influence is cultural and social, even when they choose not to exercise it directly in politics.
Chief Mpezeni’s remarks therefore touched a delicate boundary. To some observers, the chief simply restated what the Constitution already provides. Leaders elected through the ballot must serve their mandate and be judged by voters once the next election arrives.
To others, the statement sounded like something more. It felt like a traditional authority stepping into the arena of political endorsement.
That distinction matters. Once a chief appears to stand with one political position, the neutrality that allows traditional leaders to unite diverse communities begins to blur.
The debate unfolding now shows how sharply opinion can divide once tradition and politics intersect.
Among those warning about the risks of endorsement politics is All People’s Congress president Nason Msoni, who has cautioned that endorsements, whether from politicians, civic actors or influential community figures, can distort public expectations before elections.
Msoni argues that endorsements often create the perception that political outcomes are already decided before voters approach the ballot.
When those expectations collapse, frustration can quickly turn into suspicion.
“It is prudent to counsel citizens making endorsements for personal gain or benefit to desist from doing so as this potentially gives aspiring candidates false hope and could devastate the candidates after miserably losing the elections,” Msoni said.
His warning reflects concern about how endorsement politics shapes political narratives.
When influential figures signal support for particular leaders, momentum may grow but divisions can deepen.
Msoni goes further. He warns that once supporters believe victory has already been secured through endorsements, the final result of an election can trigger accusations of manipulation.
“But in an instance where their candidate loses the election the supporters will automatically take it that the votes have been stolen, which could lead to unrest and anarchy,” he said.
This is where the intersection between traditional authority and modern politics becomes especially delicate.
A chief is not simply another political voice.
Traditional leaders speak from positions rooted in history, culture and community authority. Their words carry weight among entire populations living under their jurisdiction.
That reality explains why the reaction to Chief Mpezeni’s remarks has been intense.
Across public discussion platforms, Zambians have expressed sharply different views.
Some see the chief’s statement as honest recognition of the democratic mandate given to President Hichilema.
Fred Simuyaba wrote that the chief may simply be acknowledging what he believes to be a leader working in the national interest.
“The chief is being honest, he has seen a true and hard working president who means well for the nation,” Simuyaba said.
Others have argued that chiefs naturally cooperate with whichever government is in office.
Chola Tembo suggested that traditional leaders historically work alongside the government of the day as part of maintaining governance structures.
“Traditional leaders are like civil servants they work with the government of the day,” Tembo wrote.
Critics remain uneasy.
Francis Miyoba pointed out that Chief Mpezeni had previously declared support for former president Edgar Chagwa Lungu during the 2021 elections, suggesting that public endorsements by chiefs have existed within Zambia’s political culture for years.
That history complicates the present debate.
If chiefs have spoken politically before, some ask why it should suddenly become controversial now.
Yet criticism has not disappeared.
Brian Sichilongo argued that traditional leaders must be cautious about stepping deeply into partisan politics.
Others expressed frustration with the broader relationship between chiefs and the state.
Isaac Lungu dismissed the issue as a reflection of the long standing relationship between political authority and traditional leadership.
“Don’t bite the finger that feeds you syndrome,” he wrote.
The range of reactions reveals something deeper about Zambia’s political environment.
The country has long balanced two powerful systems of leadership. One is the constitutional state. The other is the institution of traditional authority.
For decades those systems have coexisted with limited confrontation.
But once political competition intensifies and public debate becomes louder, the lines separating those spheres begin to face pressure.
Chief Mpezeni’s remarks did not create that tension. They simply exposed it. Once that conversation begins it rarely ends with a single statement.
The deeper question confronting Zambia now is whether traditional leaders can remain politically neutral within a competitive democratic environment or whether their voices will inevitably become part of the political contest.
For Msoni and others who worry about endorsement politics, the answer matters not only for elections but for the stability of communities themselves.
Once traditional authority becomes associated with political camps, the unifying role chiefs have historically played becomes harder to sustain.
Zambia’s democracy relies on institutions that command respect across political differences.
Traditional leadership has long been one of those institutions. How it navigates the pressures of modern politics will influence the country’s political culture for years.
