A public exchange between former diplomat Emmanuel Mwamba and Lusaka-based church leader Bilon Kalumbinga has escalated into a sharp war of words over political rhetoric, religious institutions, and the state of governance in Zambia. The exchange follows Kalumbinga’s public criticism of Mwamba’s recent commentary on the Drug Enforcement Commission’s summoning of Lusaka Archbishop Alick Banda. Kalumbinga had accused Mwamba of using alarmist language, particularly references to “civil conflict,” which he said risked misleading the public and stirring unnecessary fear.
In response, Mwamba has issued a pointed rebuttal, rejecting the accusation of incitement and challenging Kalumbinga’s consistency in defending Archbishop Banda. Mwamba questioned the church leader’s silence during earlier episodes in which Archbishop Banda was subjected to public attacks, hostile rhetoric, and police action. He rejected suggestions that his commentary lacked legitimacy because he is outside the country, saying his past arrests, harassment, and torture were precisely because he spoke openly about governance and state conduct while living in Zambia.
Mwamba framed his writing as an extension of long-standing criticism of what he described as tyranny, injustice, and reckless governance, insisting that distance from the country does not invalidate his perspective or warnings. The exchange has drawn public attention not only because of the individuals involved, but because it reflects broader national tensions around governance, law enforcement, religious institutions, and political expression. While Kalumbinga has urged restraint and responsible communication, Mwamba maintains that strong language is justified by what he views as the gravity of Zambia’s current challenges.
Read Full Article on Lusaka Times
[paywall]
The confrontation highlights a widening divide over how national concerns should be articulated, where the line lies between caution and alarm, and who bears responsibility for the consequences of political speech in a polarised environment. All this is because of the Presidents failure to have dialogue with his opponents. How normal is it that a country can go for 4 years without dialogue among political stakeholders. And you go to Tanzania to go and preach the importance of dialogue to foreigners when you cant have it in your own country
[/paywall]
