……When compassion fails

The death of a former president is ordinarily a moment of national reflection, unity, and respect.

It is a time when a country collectively honors the contributions and sacrifices of its past leaders, setting aside political differences in acknowledgment of shared history.

However, the case of Edgar Lungu, Zambia’s late president, presents a starkly different scenario—one that demands critical examination of the government’s role during his final days and the ethical implications of its involvement in his state funeral.

Edgar Lungu’s passing in June 2025 has been met with an unusual and uncomfortable silence from many quarters, not least from the current government under President Hakainde Hichilema.

This silence is not only about the delay in his burial, which remains unresolved months after his death, but also about the profound dissonance between how Lungu was treated during his illness and how the state now seeks to honor him in death.

To understand why it is imperative for President Hichilema’s government to abstain from participating in the burial of Edgar Lungu, one must look closely at the treatment Lungu received while bedridden.

It is well documented that the government stripped him of all privileges ordinarily accorded to former heads of state.

This was not a mere political distancing or symbolic rebuke; it was a tangible withdrawal of support and dignity.

The government denied him his medical entitlements, forcing his family to shoulder the burden of hospital bills and healthcare costs.

This abandonment was not only a breach of protocol but also a profound moral failure.

The legal arguments presented in court by Lungu’s family highlight this glaring contradiction.

They pointed out the glaring hypocrisy in seeking to accord Lungu a state funeral—a mark of honor and respect—when, during his lifetime, the very government now orchestrating this honor denied him the rights and privileges that justified such a send-off.

The family’s lawyer posed a powerful question: How could a government that deliberately withdrew medical support and stripped entitlements from a former president suddenly claim to mourn his death with a state funeral? This question strikes at the heart of the issue and demands a response grounded in sincerity rather than political expediency.

The optics of the government’s involvement in the funeral are troubling.

Rather than being seen as a gesture of respect or remorse, it risks being interpreted as an opportunistic celebration of Lungu’s demise—an event that some might view as a political victory for President Hichilema.

This perception is fueled by the government’s previous actions, which appeared to have been aimed at hastening Lungu’s exit by denying him the care he was entitled to.

Such an interpretation casts a long shadow over the funeral proceedings, robbing them of the solemnity and dignity they should command.

Moreover, the government’s insistence on taking part in the burial could be deeply hurtful to Lungu’s family and supporters.

The family, who bore the financial and emotional burden of his final days, deserve the space and respect to mourn their loved one without the political overtones that the government’s presence inevitably brings.

The burial should be a private, dignified affair led by those who cared for Lungu most intimately—not a stage for political grandstanding.

The courts have a critical role to play in this delicate matter.

They must weigh the arguments of the Lungu family with empathy and fairness, recognizing that despite Lungu’s status as a former president, the government’s treatment of him was far from that of a respected statesman.

The legal system should safeguard the rights of the deceased’s family to conduct the burial according to their wishes, free from unnecessary state interference that could compound their grief.

This situation also raises broader questions about how societies treat their former leaders and the ethical responsibilities of governments beyond political cycles.

Stripping a former president of privileges and denying medical care is not just an administrative decision—it is a reflection of a deeper erosion of respect for the office and the individual who once held it.

Such actions risk setting dangerous precedents for future leadership transitions, undermining national unity and the very fabric of democratic governance.

The Zambian government’s conduct during Edgar Lungu’s illness and subsequent death reveals a troubling disregard for human dignity and respect. By denying him the medical care he was entitled to, the government effectively contributed to his demise.

This reality cannot be ignored or whitewashed by a state funeral that lacks genuine remorse or compassion.

The government should honor the memory of Edgar Lungu by stepping back and allowing his family to mourn and bury him with the dignity they deserve, free from political interference.

True respect for a former leader is shown not only in death but in the compassion extended during their final days—a lesson that Zambia’s current government must seriously reflect upon.

Edgar Lungu died in June 2025, but his burial remains unresolved.

The time has come for the government to recognize the pain it has caused and to act with humility by letting the family lead the way in honoring their lost loved one.

Only then can Zambia begin to heal from this painful chapter in its history.

The Maravi Post