Last Card? Tonse Alliance petitions constitutional court, seeks to overturn ruling barring Lungu from 2026 presidential poll

The debate over former President Edgar Lungu’s eligibility to contest future elections has resurfaced in the Constitutional Court.

The Tonse Alliance, a coalition of various political parties, is challenging the court’s previous ruling, arguing that it was unconstitutional to declare Lungu ineligible before he had officially filed his nomination papers.

Read More: Legal fireworks as Court agrees to hear Lungu’s case seeking to remove three judges in his eligibility case

Lungu had been announced as the Tonse Alliance’s presidential candidate for the 2026 elections before the Constitutional Court ruled him ineligible, citing that he had already served two terms in office.

However, the alliance now contends that such a declaration should only be made after a candidate formally submits their nomination, as per the Zambian Constitution.

In a petition filed by Sean Tembo, acting in his capacity as the spokesperson of the Tonse Alliance, the group argues that the Constitutional Court’s decision in case 2023/CCZ/0021 was made in error.

Tembo argues that the court’s ruling violated Article 52(4) of the constitution, which states that eligibility determinations should only be made after a candidate has submitted nomination papers.

The petition further claims that the court failed to consider Article 267(3)(b)(c), which requires that references to a sitting president be interpreted with necessary modifications to fit the specific circumstances.

He argues that the ruling overlooked legal precedents set in previous cases, including the Daniel Pule case (2021/CCZ/0025) and the Sishuwa Sishuwa case (2021/CCZ/0027), where the court had taken a more holistic approach to constitutional interpretation.

The Alliance is seeking clarity on whether Article 267(3)(b)(c), read alongside Article 106(1), 106(3), and 106(6), implies that references to an elected president should also apply to Lungu, who was the sitting president at the relevant time.

It also questions whether the Constitutional Court erred in applying the provisions of Article 106(6) without necessary modifications to reflect Lungu’s status at the time.

The petition, filed by Messrs Aongola & Co. Legal Practitioners and Kang’ombe & Associates, seeks a declaration that the Constitutional Court’s ruling of December 10, 2024, was unconstitutional, as it preemptively barred Lungu before he had submitted his nomination.

It also requests a judicial interpretation confirming whether a sitting president at the time of the 2016 constitutional amendments (like Lungu) falls within the definition of “a person elected to the office of president.”

WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.