Mundubile accuses Local Government Commission of poll manipulation as CF running mate defects to his camp

Allegations of electoral manipulation by state organs, such as the recent accusation against Zambia's Local Government Commission (LGC) for holding 'unnecessary meetings' with council secretaries, raise significant concerns about the integrity of the electoral process. This article examines the legal framework governing elections in Zambia, focusing on the distinct roles of the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) and local government officials, particularly council secretaries who also serve as District Electoral Officers. It delves into the constitutional and statutory provisions designed to ensure free and fair elections, and analyses how such alleged administrative interference could constitute undue influence or electoral malpractice under Zambian law. The piece highlights the high standard of proof required in election petitions and the implications for maintaining public confidence in democratic outcomes.

Zambia's democratic landscape is periodically tested by allegations of electoral impropriety, with recent accusations against the Local Government Commission (LGC) by Tonse Alliance president Brian Mundubile serving as a stark reminder. Mundubile alleged that the LGC was attempting to manipulate the August 13 general election by convening 'unnecessary meetings' with council secretaries across the country at taxpayers’ expense. While the specific election referenced in the excerpt is now in the past, the underlying legal issues surrounding administrative interference in electoral processes remain critically relevant for practitioners navigating Zambia's electoral law. Such claims underscore the perpetual tension between state administrative functions and the imperative for independent, credible elections.

The bedrock of Zambia's electoral system is enshrined in the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, which establishes the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) under Article 229. The Constitution mandates the ECZ to direct, supervise, and control elections in a fair and impartial manner, asserting its independence from any person or authority. Further elaborating on this framework is the Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016, which provides a comprehensive legal and procedural blueprint for general elections, including voter registration, nominations, voting procedures, and the accreditation of observers. This Act also criminalises corrupt and illegal practices, and outlines the mechanisms for election petitions. A key component is the Electoral Code of Conduct, which binds all stakeholders, including public officers, to promote conditions conducive to free and fair elections.

Local government in Zambia operates under the Local Government Act, 2019, which defines the establishment and functions of various councils. Central to local government administration is the office of the Council Secretary (also known as Town Clerk), a statutory post established under Article 152(4) of the Constitution. Council Secretaries serve as the Chief Executive Officers of their respective councils, responsible for strategic management, human resources, and the provision of legal, administrative, and logistical support services. Significantly, Council Secretaries are also designated as District Electoral Officers and perform electoral duties for Presidential, Parliamentary, and Local Government Elections, making them critical interfaces between local administration and the electoral process. The Local Government Commission, on the other hand, primarily exercises administrative oversight over local government staff, including hiring, promotion, and discipline, rather than direct involvement in electoral administration.

The accusation that the Local Government Commission's 'unnecessary meetings' with council secretaries constitute poll manipulation directly implicates the principles of electoral independence and integrity. While the LGC's mandate is administrative, the fact that council secretaries double as District Electoral Officers creates a potential nexus for undue influence. The Electoral Process Act, 2016, and the Electoral Code of Conduct prohibit actions that undermine the fairness of elections. Specifically, the Code stipulates that every person, including public officers, must promote conditions conducive to free and fair elections and refrain from political activity whilst in public service. Meetings convened by a body like the LGC, if perceived to be outside the scope of routine administrative duties and held during a sensitive electoral period, could be interpreted as an attempt to sway or direct the conduct of these key electoral administrators.

Such allegations fall under the broader category of electoral malpractice, which in Zambia includes the misuse of government resources for political advantage and partisan bias by electoral officials. If proven, such actions could lead to an election petition. Zambian courts have consistently held that for an election to be nullified on grounds of electoral malpractice, the petitioner must demonstrate, to a fairly high degree of convincing clarity, that the alleged corrupt or illegal practice or misconduct was committed in connection with the election and that it prevented or may have prevented the majority of voters from electing a candidate of their choice. This high standard of proof presents a significant hurdle for petitioners, as establishing a direct causal link between administrative meetings and a widespread impact on voter choice can be challenging.

Furthermore, the independence of the ECZ, as enshrined in the Constitution, is paramount. Any perceived interference by other state organs, even indirectly through administrative channels, can erode public confidence in the electoral body. The ECZ is empowered to administer and enforce the Electoral Process Act and the Electoral Code of Conduct, including the power to disqualify a political party or candidate in breach of the Code. While the ECZ primarily settles minor administrative disputes, more serious allegations of manipulation would likely be pursued through election petitions in the Constitutional Court or High Court, depending on the nature of the election. The jurisprudence in Zambia, as seen in cases like *Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika and Others v Frederick Jacob Titus Chiluba* and *Samuel Mukwamataba Nayunda v Geofrey Lungwangwa*, emphasizes the need for clear evidence that the malpractice affected the election outcome.

Comparative analysis with other African jurisdictions reveals similar challenges where the lines between administrative oversight and electoral interference become blurred. The susceptibility of the 'first-past-the-post' electoral system, as practiced in Zambia for parliamentary and local government elections, to various forms of malpractice further underscores the need for robust legal frameworks and vigilant enforcement. The ongoing debate around the scope of agency in election campaigns also highlights a potential gap, where actions by party members or affiliated state officials might not always directly impute liability to a candidate without further proof.

The allegations against the Local Government Commission serve as a critical reminder to legal practitioners of the intricate interplay between administrative governance and electoral integrity in Zambia. For attorneys advising political parties or candidates, it is crucial to understand the distinct mandates of electoral bodies like the ECZ and administrative entities such as the LGC, as well as the dual roles played by local government officials in the electoral process. Any perceived deviation from impartiality by state actors, particularly those involved in election administration, warrants close scrutiny and potential legal challenge.

Practitioners should be prepared to gather robust evidence demonstrating not only the occurrence of alleged malpractice but also its material impact on the election outcome, given the high standard of proof required in Zambian election petitions. Monitoring the conduct of all state organs during electoral periods, advocating for strict adherence to the Electoral Code of Conduct, and pursuing legal remedies where warranted are essential for upholding the principles of free and fair elections. The ongoing evolution of Zambia's electoral jurisprudence necessitates continuous engagement and vigilance from the legal community to safeguard democratic processes against all forms of manipulation.