By Thandiwe Ketiš Ngoma

Dr Nevers Mumba would do well to exercise restraint rather than continue making statements that risk insulting the intelligence of Zambians. His persistent claim that President Hakainde Hichilema has no interest in the body of former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu is increasingly difficult to defend in the face of information already in the public domain.

If indeed President Hichilema has no intention of seeing or presiding over the body of his predecessor, a simple and unavoidable question arises: why has he taken the grieving family to court?

This is not speculation. It is public record. The legal proceedings in South Africa did not emerge from nowhere. They were initiated by the Zambian government to halt the burial process and assert control over funeral arrangements. One cannot simultaneously claim disinterest and pursue legal action to determine how and where a former president is buried. The two positions cannot coexist without raising legitimate suspicion.

All of this information is already in the public domain. Citizens have followed events closely, from the leaked funeral programme to the family’s public statements and the subsequent court action in South Africa. Zambians are fully aware of what has transpired.

That is why many are left wondering why Dr Nevers Mumba appears to speak as though the public is unaware or incapable of connecting these events. Zambians are not foolish. They are informed, observant, and capable of drawing reasonable conclusions from available facts.

Perhaps the most important question Dr Mumba should be asked is this: why can he not simply advise President Hakainde Hichilema to respect the wishes of his predecessor?

What exactly would the President lose by not presiding over the funeral? What would diminish if he chose restraint and allowed the family to proceed according to the clearly stated wishes of the deceased?

There is no constitutional requirement that a sitting President must preside over a former president’s funeral. None. State honours can still be accorded without personal involvement. Delegation is possible. Respect is possible. Dignity is possible. So what is truly at stake?

Many citizens now ask why Dr Mumba appears more focused on defending the President’s position than on encouraging compassion and reconciliation. Why has he chosen to seemingly massage President Hichilema’s ego at the expense of a grieving family?

Yes, it is understood that political allies often defend those in power. That is part of political life. But there are moments when defence, especially for the wrong reasons, becomes unnecessary and even harmful. This is one of those moments. On this issue, there is little political gain to be made and much moral ground to be lost.

Dr Mumba would serve both the President and the nation better by offering honest counsel rather than public justification. Advising President Hichilema to respect the wishes of the deceased and his family would not weaken him. If anything, it would demonstrate maturity, humility, and statesmanship.

It must be clearly stated that the Lungu family did not refuse to repatriate the body to Zambia out of spite or defiance. Their position has been consistent and simple. They want the wishes of the deceased respected. They want the agreed conditions honoured. Their objection has never been about Zambia. It has been about the terms under which the burial would take place.

They maintain that former President Lungu left explicit instructions regarding how he wished to be buried and under what conditions a state funeral could be accepted. According to the family, those conditions included the non-involvement of President Hakainde Hichilema in presiding over the proceedings. They say those conditions were communicated and acknowledged. Yet subsequent actions, including the leaked programme and legal intervention, suggest otherwise. That is why the matter has now ended up in the courts of South Africa.

Dr Nevers Mumba should recognise that not every battle is worth fighting in defence of political allies. Some moments demand honesty over loyalty and wisdom over rhetoric. He should ask himself what is truly gained by insisting on a narrative that contradicts visible events and what is lost by simply urging respect for the deceased and compassion for the bereaved.

Sometimes leadership is demonstrated not through control, but through restraint. Advising President Hichilema to respect the wishes of his predecessor and the grieving family would cost nothing politically, yet it would restore dignity to a situation that has already caused deep national discomfort.

It really is as simple as that.