Author: Socialist Party ZambiaThe Socialist Party is a political formation whose primary mandate is to promote and entrench socialist values in the Zambian society. Anchored on the principles of Justice, Equity and Peace (JEP), the Socialist Party shall transform the Zambian society from capitalism to socialism, building socialism in three key sectors: Education, Agriculture and Health.

Hichilema’s reckless and desperate ‘coup plot’ talk

Hichilema’s reckless and desperate ‘coup plot’ talk Featured

The talk of a “coup plot” by Mr Hakainde Hichilema and some of his hungry surrogates is nothing but wild, irresponsible and reckless rhetoric.

Before we delve deeper into the details of this cheap plan, here is the context of the scheme.

So upon returning from Harare, Zimbabwe, with a bloodied nose and shame on his head, Mr Nevers Mumba was on national television to defend his disastrous SADC Election Observation Mission report, but also as part of the scheme he made some outrageous and illogical claim that politicians who were labelling Mr Hichilema as a Western puppet were instigating a military coup in Zambia.

What a dishonest, manipulative and reckless statement from a person who is supposed to espouse true Christian beliefs and values. What cheap sophistry, hypocrisy and ignorance of global affairs is this?

Soon, after this highly reckless and inflammatory talk by Mr Mumba, yesterday Mr Hichilema echoed these sentiments.

Mr Hichilema said and I quote, “However, to colleagues that think we are timid by being kind and that they can break the laws and entertain thoughts of illegal take-over of government, including undemocratic coup d’état, our only word is that we are coming for you and we will not allow you to make Zambians start running around as is the case in some places.”

From the above scenario, we can see the connivance and deliberate plot to do evil and get rid of dissent by punishing opposition leaders on trumped-up charges. The pattern is clear for anybody to follow. But they’re not clever enough to understand or later conceal their evil intent. Simply put, they’re reckless schemers who are extremely high on power.

It’s evident that they are unaware and appreciative of the limitations of power and influence. They think they can do what they want and to anyone without consequences for their actions. They’re just lost and confused about the situation in the country.

Lest we forget, Zambia is a country that has witnessed and experienced such senseless tactics before and how they fell flat on their face. And we don’t think we have seen the end of this.

As President, Mr Frederick Chiluba locked up Kenneth Kaunda on similar outrageous allegations of plotting a military coup. Again, the same Mr Chiluba locked up the late Dean Mung’omba for the same reasons as he did with KK. Mr Edgar Lungu also locked up Mr Hichilema for alleged treason. And none of these people cited here was prosecuted. KK was never prosecuted, Mr Mung’omba was never prosecuted, and Mr Hichilema was never prosecuted. So clearly, when leaders are desperate and their hold on power is threatened, they start processes that they never complete.

Meanwhile, as they play such dangerous games, innocent lives and families are being destroyed. This is what Mr Hichilema, an erstwhile detainee himself, is trying to do to those he doesn’t like. Those he feels are a threat to his hold on power. What shame! What a waste of time and effort! What an incorrigible person!

What is even more remarkable about this is that in opposition, Mr Hichilema spoke freely about presidents of this country. For instance, Mr Hichilema is on record describing President Michael Chilufya Sata, as “chimbwi no plan”, loosely translated as a mindless hyena. Mr Hichilema made these remarks about Mr Sata during the time Mr Sata was president and nothing happened to him.

Nobody was spared, and Mr Hichilema made more demeaning and insulting remarks about leaders of this country, including Mr Lungu. So what has changed now? It is acceptable for Mr Hichilema as an opposition leader to describe presidents of this country in terms he deemed fit but it is apparently highly offensive and treasonous for current opposition leaders to do the same to him now that he is the President.

It is now treason to describe Mr Hichilema for what he truly is – a puppet of Western imperialism and transnational corporations. Why should this be so? What type of self-importance, arrogance and tyranny is this? What makes Mr Hichilema think he is so different and more special than the rest of the presidents this country has had? What makes him think the opposition must conduct themselves in a manner that comforts and pleases him?

We urge Mr Hichilema and his hungry surrogates to take caution before they engage in very dangerous activities in order to stay in power. If not, they risk presiding over a killing machine.

We also want to put him on notice that some of us are not prepared to be cowed into submission by the spreading of misinformation, threats and illogical conspiracies, which are nothing but a figment of Mr Hichilema and his surrogates’ imaginations. We wish to remind him that while they were only spectators, some of us were direct participants in the fight for multiparty democracy in this country.

We were at the forefront of the struggle against the one-party state and we will not allow him to turn Zambia into a sham democracy.

Further, let Mr Hichilema be comfortable with our political ideology, discourse and mobilisation strategies, because we mean well and have always been for democratic transitions of power. Never will we support any undemocratic changes of government.

That said, we call upon Mr Hichilema to exhibit maturity and leadership and abandon the highly inflammatory, sensational and intemperate outbursts that he is now making.

We know that he is under pressure. We know that the lies, manipulation and deceit have backfired. We know that he stands exposed in the eyes of Zambians as a liar and a fraud who has no intention whatsoever to do as he promised during his campaign for the presidency. We know he is ashamed of himself. We know the rallies in Lusaka haven’t yielded anything. We know he is extremely unpopular and frustrated with his performance.

But that must not make Zambians – any of us – suffer pantu alelaya eka, tatwaliko tulibakayele!

One bad term doesn’t deserve another, aleya!

Fred M’membe

President of the Socialist Party

VEDANTA/KCM saga: The lies, greed and arrogance

VEDANTA/KCM saga: The lies, greed and arrogance Featured

Arthur Schopenhauer once said, “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

We said it, and Mr Hichilema and his corrupt puppet regime ridiculed and violently opposed our perspective on the issues that were surrounding the situation at KCM. But here we are again in the same situation they ridiculed and violently disputed when we raised the alarm.

It is now evident that they were merely trying to silence the voices of truth on this issue so they could be heard and seen as the only ones who can do what is best for the people of the Copperbelt, in particular the people of Chingola and Chililabombwe.

We repeat what we have said before; that the return of Vedanta at KCM after its Indian owner Anil Agarwal parted with US$200 million, endorses the betrayal and disrespect Mr Hakainde Hichilema has for the people on the Copperbelt.

This particular move has a revealing effect on what type of a leader Mr Hichilema is and how he views and treats the people on the Copperbelt – with low value.

By this decision alone, Mr Hichilema has spat in the face of the people of the Copperbelt, especially the miners, who braved the meandering queues to cast their votes and put him into office.

Below are the articles we published on this issue in July this year.


After parting with US$200 million, Vedanta Resources plc’s 69-year-old Indian owner, Anil Agarwal, is assured of getting back KCM, which he lost control of in a Zambian government initiated liquidation order in 2020.

Agarwal acquired KCM in 2004 in a transaction that had an aggregate value of approximately US$270 million, comprised of a cash consideration of US$48.2 million for the 51 per cent stake, a commitment on the part of Vedanta to fund cash flows in KCM to an aggregate limit of US$220 million, and an agreement on the part of Vedanta to contribute US$1 million towards the cost of a feasibility study of substantial deeper level resources associated with the Konkola mine (containing estimated resources of around 250 million tonnes at 3.8 percent copper), to be undertaken by December 31, 2006.

In August 2021, while addressing miners in Kitwe, the then President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr Edgar Lungu, claimed that he had received a report that Mr Hakainde Hichilema was soliciting US$300,000 from Vedanta, promising to give them back KCM once elected. An accusation, which Mr Hichilema vehemently denied.

On April 25, 2022, during a media briefing at State House, Mr Hichilema dismissed media reports suggesting that the government planned to give back KCM to Vedanta as falsehoods.

But on May 9, 2022, Mr Hichilema U-turned stating, “Vedanta and ourselves have agreed that we suspend litigation,”

Going by the sequence of events and inconsistencies in the statements, especially on the part of Mr Hichilema, we demand that he comes clean on the Vedanta issue. What is going on? The Zambian people deserve to know the truth and how decisions have been arrived at in this matter.

Fred M’membe

President of the Socialist Party

In the same month of July, we again guided as follows:


The return of Vedanta at KCM after its Indian owner Anil Agarwal parted with US$200 million, endorses the betrayal and disrespect Mr Hakainde Hichilema has for the people on the Copperbelt.

This particular move has a revealing effect on what type of a leader Mr Hichilema is and how he views and treats the people on the Copperbelt – with low value. By this decision alone, Mr Hichilema has spat in the face of the people of the Copperbelt, especially the miners, who braved the meandering queues to cast their votes and put him into office.

As usual, Mr Hichilema has made known to the Zambian people that the poor masses of this country are nowhere near the equation, and as such deserve no place, value, or respect from his government. Like we have always said, Mr Hichilema is here to protect mining transnational capital and not the working masses. And we shall validate our standpoint stated above by highlighting the facts that led the Zambian government to initiate a liquidation order in 2020, so that citizens can see and judge for themselves.

Under Vedanta, KCM faced various operational difficulties, which included:

1) the mine failed to meet its financial obligations to the workers thereby subjecting them to poor working conditions,

2) the mine failed to honour its debts with contractors and suppliers,

3) the mine was highly indebted and threatened with insolvency, to the extent that as of September 30, 2013, KCM’s total liability stood overwhelmingly at US$1.5 billion, surpassing its asset base by US$123 million. This situation definitely made it unfeasible for the mine to meet its financial obligations. For this reason, KCM defaulted on its US$700 million loan signed with Standard Bank. By the way, this particular loan was secured on the KCM assets,

4) Vedanta failed to live up to its pledge to inject a sum of US$397 million foreign direct investment in the mine but resorted to diverting funds it was generating locally to other ventures thereby choking the mine and leaving it with no resources to inject in its operations,

5) Vedanta lamentably failed to operationalise the Konkola Deep Mining Project despite making numerous pledges and commitments over the same, and,

6) Vedanta never invested in its own equipment. It was merely sub-contracting its works. This made it extremely expensive to run the mine.

Above are just some of the many reasons the Zambia government repossessed the mine and opted to find another investor. Now, with all that we have stated above, we ask a question: which principled and decent leader would surrender back such a key national asset to a dishonest investor like Vedanta?

Clearly, Mr Hichilema is a selfish and showboating politician. But all this won’t end well. It will soon catch up with him because Zambians are not fools. Already the atmosphere is one of exhaustion. People are fatigued of his lies, inconsistency, and self-serving attitude.

Let him know that this country is way bigger than him and so he must stop playing with people’s livelihoods and the country’s future by dishing out key national assets willy-nilly like sweets in a market parlour.

Fred M’membe

President of the Socialist Party

The ongoing debate about whether to abolish or keep FISP

The ongoing debate about whether to abolish or keep FISP Featured

It is very important to understand what we want to achieve with FISP. This requires looking at two critical components of the intended purpose and assessing whether they achieve it or not.

Before proceeding with the initial intended objectives, we need to pose this question: is FISP aimed at increasing crop production or is it a poverty alleviation programme, such as social cash transfer, to support vulnerable peasant farmers and their families to ensure food security?

The FISP guidelines, which also mention that farmers should graduate after three years of being on the programme to medium-scale farmers, indicate that the programme was intended to enhance crop production and facilitate the progression of farmers from peasantry to small-scale, then medium-scale, and finally to commercial farming.

Let’s assess the practicality of its intended objective. If a farmer receives six bags of fertiliser per year at K1,000 per bag, then the assistance at a monthly average is K500 per month. With this level of support for direct input only – ignoring all other production costs and personal responsibilities – is it practical that such support can graduate a farmer from peasantry to commercial farming? Unless a miracle happens the farmer will permanently remain in the peasantry category. This explains why farmers have remained on the programme for prolonged periods beyond three years. If FISP was intended to grow crop production then it was ill structured and should be canned.

However, a positive unintended consequence of FISP is that it provides government support to peasant farmers who comprise the biggest segment of our maize production, but cannot afford fertiliser due to its high cost. Effectively, peasant farmers plant crops for their own consumption and sell the excess production to commercial players in order to generate income to sustain their livelihoods, including paying school fees and medical bills and meeting family needs. These farmers don’t qualify for commercial loans because they aren’t creditworthy. So, in a nutshell, with unintended consequences FISP is actually a social protection programme and not a crop production growth strategy. It should be classified in the same category as social cash transfer.

So before we say scrap or keep FISP, we need to understand these dynamics. And most importantly, before farmers are removed for being on the programme for more than three years, we need to understand that given the meagre support of six bags a year, it is impractical for peasant farmers to graduate to higher categories, including commercial levels, because the support received is insignificant. If anything, this is a segment which has a low crop yield per acre because at its best it is an ox driven, rain fed method of agriculture, and at its worst a hoe and rain fed method of crop production. If the support is removed it will just increase poverty levels in rural areas.

In conclusion, FISP should be maintained as a social protection programme. If scrapped, food security for our vulnerable peasant farmers will be compromised. What the government should do is clean up the FISP database and ensure the correct, vulnerable people are kept on the programme.

With regard to enhancing food production, it is necessary to come up with a totally new strategy driven by enabling policies. Most importantly, credit support should be readily available at affordable interest rates. Technical support and access to mechanised farming should be at the centre of this initiative, including irrigation rather than rain-fed methods.

Fred M’membe

President of the Socialist Party

Hichilema is dividing SADC

Hichilema is dividing SADC Featured

The SADC Troika consists of Zambia (the chairperson), Tanzania (the deputy chairperson, and Namibia (the immediate past chairperson).

The leaders of Tanzania and Namibia have both congratulated President Mnangagwa on his re-election. President Cyril Ramaphosa has done the same. But Mr Hakainde Hichilema is yet to do so because the candidate he reportedly supported lost the election.

The man he unilaterally chose, Mr Nevers Mumba, to represent him in Zimbabwe’s election released a discredited and biased preliminary report that is likely to be thrown out at the next SADC meeting because both Mr Hichilema and Mr Mumba could not declare interest.

Why did Mr Hichilema, in his capacity as incoming chair of the Troika, appoint Mr Nevers Mumba to head the SADC Electoral Observer Mission (SEOM), given his known and close ties to both Mr Nelson Chamisa, one of the presidential candidates in the just ended Zimbabwean election, and to Hichilema, who himself is very close to the CCC leader?

I use the term “incoming” deliberately because Mr Hichilema, at the time he announced the appointment of Mr Mumba on 14 August 2023, was not yet chairperson of the SADC Troika on Politics, Defence and Security. The President of Namibia was still the chairperson at the time. Mr Hichilema only formally assumed the leadership of the Organ three days later, on 17 August 2023, at the 43rd Ordinary Summit of Heads of State and Government in Luanda, Angola.

Although the ultra-urgency that Mr Hichilema demonstrated when appointing Mr Mumba is in itself curious, what is most striking and raises questions about his judgement was the choice of a person whose impartiality was always going to be questioned to lead the Mission. Why not appoint someone who won’t give ZANU-PF reason to discredit the Mission’s findings – however legitimate they may be?

What criteria was used to appoint Mr Mumba? If it was because of his role as former vice-president of Zambia, what disqualified the several other ex-veeps of Zambia who are still alive? If it was because of his role as opposition MMD president, what disqualified the several other leaders of opposition parties in Zambia?

Why did Mr Hichilema choose Mr Nevers Mumba to lead the SEOM to Zimbabwe? What particular individual qualities did Mr Mumba have that other former vice-presidents and opposition leaders in Zambia lacked? Was Mr Mumba really the best candidate for such a sensitive role that requires utmost levels of impartiality and maturity? Had Mr Hichilema exercised caution in his choice of the person he appointed to lead the Mission and understood that the credibility of its report rests on the credibility of its membership, the apparent or emerging divisions within the Troika – and potentially within the SADC itself – may have have been avoided.

But that is how betrayal is; hypocrisy, treachery and ignorance can be a very big a problem but they all have limits to their power and influence. What Mr Hichilema forgot was that he could only masquerade or present his fake image to the region and the world for a short period before shame visited him.

Clearly, hiding his true identity as an imperialist puppet has lamentably failed. We hope he has learnt something from this mistake.

Fred M’membe
President of the Socialist Party [Zambia]

One bad term doesn’t deserve another, Hichilema aleya!

One bad term doesn’t deserve another, Hichilema aleya! Featured

We were back at the police yesterday because Mr Hakainde Hichilema and his far-right corrupt, puppet regime is being haunted by our exponential growth, support, and solidarity among the poor masses of this country.

Mr Hichilema is unsettled by the fact that more and more of our people, including his own supporters, agree with our message and vision for a more equal, fair, just and united Zambia.

Our people have read through this one-term puppet regime’s corrupt and divisive rhetoric and have resolved to correct the mistake they made in the last general election.

Even Mr Hichilema and the masters who control him know that we not only support our people, but that more and more of our people, especially the poor masses, heavily support us too.

This is why Mr Hichilema and his league are desperate and willing to practise autocracy while preaching democracy. But we fully understand what is happening to them and how this unstoppable mass movement of the people affects them.

We know this, and global history has shown that the more corrupt a regime becomes, the more intolerant and repressive it is towards opposition political parties and critical voices. And what we are facing today is the standard outcome that unfolds whenever a regime’s corrupt, incompetent, and authoritarian path is unmasked.

But we have a message for Mr Hichilema and his league, and that is: “The struggle to liberate our people from poverty and squalor will never die. This is one struggle we are willing to sacrifice and pay a heavy price for”.

So, let them know they’re in for a tough fight with us as we pursue justice, equity, and peace.

We will not be deterred by scared, evil puppets and their equally evil masters, who are willing to strangle our people with poverty while they greedily share our minerals and natural resources.

Time is ticking and time will tell. The damage being done to our country will be accounted for someday soon by those inflicting severe losses, suffering, and destruction on innocent people.

Our people have suffered indignity and injustice from imperialists and their puppet regimes, such as the one governing our country today, for far too long.

One bad term doesn’t deserve another, aleya!

Fred M’membe
President of the Socialist Party