Beneath the Sunset Skies of Hope

 

 We gave our youthful souls,

Our strength, our dreams, our finest years,

To halls of learning and generations yet unborn.

We built tomorrow with quiet, faithful hands,

Never imagining that our own tomorrow

Would be a lifetime of waiting,

And yesterday a place of tears.

 

The years have gathered upon our shoulders,

Like dust upon forgotten dreams,

Like wandering ghosts beneath the mopane trees.

We taught the young to dream of greatness,

To seek the truth, to stand with pride.

Yet now, beneath the fading sunset skies,

Our own dreams lie scattered in the dust,

Their dying embers struggling against the night.

 

Some lie sick, without the means to heal,

While others count their last coins

To put a little food on the table.

And some, too proud to beg,

Have learnt to drown their sorrows,

Behind a weary smile,

Over a glass of Tennessee whiskey.

 

We buried friends who waited beside us,

Who once believed that justice would arrive.

Their names have faded from the corridors,

Their voices silenced by the grave.

But the promises that kept them waiting

Remain, unanswered, among the living.

 

Can those in authority truly hear us,

Beyond the speeches and applause?

Can they hear the quiet weeping

Of those whose dignity has been stripped away?

Can they look into the eyes of the forgotten

And say that all is well?

 

We ask not for your generosity,

Nor riches from the nation's gold.

We ask not for pity or favours,

Nor charity wrapped in gracious words.

We ask for what our labour earned,

For the dignity of our remaining years,

Before our trembling hands grow still and cold.

 

What worth is service to a nation

If those who served are left behind?

What honour lives in solemn promises

That follow faithful servants to their graves?

What conscience sleeps so peacefully

While those who built the future

Are denied the comfort of their final days?

 

And still we wait.

And still we wonder.

How many sunsets must we watch?

How many friends must we surrender to the place of many crosses?

How many prayers must vanish into silence

Before somebody remembers that we are still here?

 

We were once the hands that served,

The minds that guided,

The shoulders upon which others rose.

Now we are the ageing faces,

That the passing years have made invisible.

Our children watch us grow weary,

Our grandchildren ask why we are sad,

And we struggle to explain,

Why a lifetime of honest service,

Has ended in such sorrow.

 

Remember us while we still breathe.

Time is a debt no wealth can pay,

And death will not postpone its day.

Do not bring us flowers when we are gone,

Do not praise our service when in the place of many crosses,

Do not speak of honour over silent coffins

When justice could have reached us while we lived.

 

So hear this cry within the silence,

Beneath the darkening skies of hope.

Let justice reach the hands that laboured,

Before the final light grows dim,

Before our homes become houses of mourning,

Before our final residence

Becomes a place of many crosses.

 

For hope is not an endless river,

Nor patience an eternal flame.

Even the strongest hearts grow weary,

Even the brightest embers die.

And a nation that forgets its servants,

That lets them perish waiting for their due,

Must one day face the silence of their graves

And answer for its shame.

 

Fiat iustitia, ruat caelum.

(Let justice be done, though the heavens fall)

The tragedy of inhumanness

Some lives begin slipping long before the body is summoned home,

their spirits wandering in dark corridors,

searching for a light

we never bothered to offer.

We walk past them like they are lepers,

never hearing how their prayers

have grown brittle,

how their hope has started

to loosen its grip on reality,

how they are walking into an abyss of nihility.

We watch officials pass them by,

eyes trained on podiums,

not on people,

on reports,

not on suffering,

on the choreography of authority,

not the trembling of the forgotten.

And when these souls finally rest

in the place of many crosses,

we arrive with borrowed holiness,

murmuring blessings over soil,

pretending we had not watched

their souls unravel while they were still calling out to us.

Leaders, officials arrive draped in ceremonial sorrow,

speaking polished condolences

over lives they never paused to see,

pretending their hands were not part of the slow unmaking,

of those who died while still breathing.

Societies learn too late

that indifference is a kind of violence,

that the tragedy of inhumanness

is not only in the dying,

but in the comfortable distance

kept by those entrusted

to keep us whole.

 

Ora pro nobis.

Whose ‘crap’ is it?

Two people can walk through the same surroundings and see the same piece of plastic dancing around. One instinctively picks it up and throws it into a bin. The other walks past it, seemingly unbothered. Is cleanliness simply a matter of hygiene, or is there a deeper social divide in how people perceive dirt and responsibility?

We learn from childhood what is acceptable, what is offensive and what deserves our attention. Social norms strongly influence littering behaviour. Where people grow up surrounded by litter that nobody bothers to remove, indifference can become a norm.

Some people want clean surroundings but believe cleaning is somebody else's responsibility. Lest we forget. Status also quietly decides who bends down. Cleaning is classic “dirty work”. Society needs it yet looks down on those who do it.  Hence, where someone is paid to clean, others feel licensed to ‘crap indiscriminately’.

At home, in our offices, hierarchy can also freeze personal responsibility to cleanliness. If bending down is the employer’s habit but not the worker’s clear assignment, the packet waits for orders from above.

Sometimes, let us accept that every space whispers a rule. People litter far more where litter already lies, because a dirty surrounding announces that ‘crapping indiscriminately’ is normal.  One ignored piece of plastic is not a small thing. It is an invitation!

The question of whose litter it is, exposes a troubling social contradiction. We may demand clean homes, clean streets and clean cities while walking past the very rubbish that makes them dirty. We complain about municipal authorities, cleaners and neighbours, yet refuse to bend down and pick up a discarded piece of plastic.

Ask anyone whether littering is wrong and they will say yes. Watch them, and the story changes. Fact is. People litter more than they admit, excusing “small” items or a missing bin. 

Until then, that piece of plastic by the gate will stay exactly where it is, seen by everyone and claimed by no one.

Res publica, res omnium.

Kozo.

How Geography and Voter Turnout Shaped Zambia’s 2021 Presidential Election Outcome

 

The 2021 presidential elections in Zambia produced a highly differentiated electoral landscape characterised by regional political dominance, varying voter turnout levels, and the influence of the rural–urban voting dichotomy. Beyond the presidential results, constituency-level data reveals important trends regarding political party dominance, voter turnout, and a distinct electoral spatial footprint. An interrogation of 156 constituencies shows how the United Party for National Development (UPND) and the Patriotic Front (PF) performed across the country and how voter turnout patterns shaped the electoral landscape.

The constituency-level interrogation shows that UPND emerged as the dominant political party nationally (Table 1). Out of the 156 constituencies interrogated, UPND dominated 97 constituencies, representing 62.2% of the total. PF dominated 59 constituencies, accounting for 37.8%.

Table 1. Political Party Dominance by Constituency

Political Party	Constituencies Dominated	Percentage
UPND	97	62.2%
PF	59	37.8%
Total	156	100.0%

UPND’s electoral spatial footprint was more nationally distributed, with dominance across Southern, Western, North-Western, Central, Lusaka, and Copperbelt provinces, while PF demonstrated stronger dominance in Eastern, Luapula, Northern, and Muchinga provinces (Table 2).

Table 2. Constituency Political Party Dominance by Province

Province	UPND	PF
Central	62.5%	37.5%
Copperbelt	95.5%	4.5%
Eastern	16.7%	83.3%
Luapula	6.7%	93.3%
Lusaka	66.7%	33.3%
Muchinga	0.0%	100.0%
Northern	30.8%	69.2%
North-Western	100.0%	0.0%
Southern	100.0%	0.0%
Western	100.0%	0.0%
Total	62.2%	37.8%

The rural–urban dichotomy also played an important role in shaping the 2021 presidential election outcome. Rural landscapes constituted most of the constituencies, making them strategically significant in determining presidential election outcomes (Table 3).

Table 3. Rural–Urban Distribution of Constituencies

Area	No. of Constituencies	Percentage
Rural	114	73.1%
Urban	42	26.9%
Total	156	100.0%

Note: Rural-urban differentiation is based on the Zambia 2022 Census of Population and Housing (Population Summary Report Volume Two, Table 5.2. With the representative geographic location operational definition being where 50+1% of a household population resides.

UPND secured majority votes in 65 rural constituencies, representing 57.0% of all rural constituencies, while PF secured 49 rural constituencies, accounting for 43.0%. In urban constituencies, UPND secured 32 constituencies, representing 76.2%, while PF secured 10 constituencies, representing 23.8%. UPND’s stronger urban performance suggests that urban voter preferences demonstrated stronger support for UPND, while rural areas remained comparatively more competitive between the two parties.

Another notable pattern emerges from voter turnout and its association with party dominance. Voter turnout percentages were categorised into five classes ranging from the minimum observed turnout of 50.52% to the maximum of 89.70% (Table 4).

Table 4. Voter Turnout Classification

Class	Voter Turnout Range (%)
Very low turnout	50.52% – 58.35%
Low turnout	58.36% – 66.19%
Moderate turnout	66.20% – 74.03%
High turnout	74.04% – 81.86%
Very high turnout	81.87% – 89.70%

 

Constituencies that had very high turnout and high turnout were more frequently associated with UPND than PF. UPND dominated 51 constituencies within these turnout classes compared to PF’s 12 constituencies (Table 5).

Table 5. Voter Turnout by Political Party

Voter Turnout	UPND	PF	Total
Very high	20		20
High	31	12	43
Moderate	38	23	61
Low	6	22	28
Very low	2	2	4
Total	97	59	156

The concentration of UPND dominance within high-participation constituencies suggests that voter mobilisation constituted a major electoral advantage in the 2021 presidential election.

A further breakdown shows that when very high and high voter turnout constituencies are aggregated, rural landscapes constitute 45.6% compared to an aggregate of 26.2% for urban (Table 6).

Table 6. Voter Turnout and Rural–Urban Dichotomy

Voter Turnout	Rural	Urban	Total
Very high	17.5%	0.0%	12.8%
High	28.1%	26.2%	27.6%
Moderate	33.3%	54.8%	39.1%
Low	17.5%	19.0%	17.9%
Very low	3.5%	0.0%	2.6%
Total	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%

 

Among UPND’s 51 constituencies within very high and high voter turnout categories, 41 were rural and 10 were urban. PF recorded 11 rural constituencies and one urban constituency within the same turnout categories (Table 7).

Table 7. Voter Turnout and Rural–Urban Dichotomy by Party

Geo-Location/ Turnout	UPND	PF	Total
Rural
Very high	20		20
High	21	11	32
Moderate	18	20	38
Low	4	16	20
Very low	2	2	4
Urban
High	10	1	11
Moderate	20	3	23
Low	2	6	8
Total	97	59	156

 

The voter turnout data therefore suggests that constituencies with stronger voter participation were more commonly associated with UPND party identity during the 2021 presidential election. Lower-turnout constituencies, on the other hand, appeared more evenly distributed between the two major political parties.

In addition, a comparative analysis of voter turnout between the 2016 and 2021 presidential elections reveals that turnout patterns were not random or isolated across constituencies. The analysis produced a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.85, indicating a very strong positive relationship between voter turnout levels in the two elections (Figure 1).

Figure 1. 2021, 2016 Presidential Elections Correlation

 

This suggests that constituencies which recorded comparatively high voter turnout in 2016 also tended to record comparatively high turnout in 2021. The findings indicate continuity in constituency-level voter participation patterns over time, suggesting that electoral mobilisation and voter engagement may have become structurally embedded within certain constituencies.

Further, a broader historical analysis of provincial voter turnout trends since the 1991 presidential elections reinforces the argument that voter participation patterns in Zambia exhibit strong spatial continuity over time. Provinces such as Southern, North-Western, Copperbelt, and, more recently, Western Province have consistently recorded comparatively high voter turnout levels across multiple election cycles, culminating in exceptionally high turnout levels in 2021 (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Provincial Voter Turnout Trends (1991-2021)

 

The persistence of relatively higher voter turnout within these provinces suggests that voter participation may not merely reflect election-specific dynamics, but also historically embedded patterns of political mobilisation and electoral engagement. The findings therefore indicate that certain electoral spaces in Zambia have evolved into persistently high-mobilisation regions capable of exerting disproportionate influence on presidential election outcomes across successive electoral cycles.

Overall, the 2021 presidential election outcome was fundamentally shaped by the interaction between geography, voter turnout, and voter mobilisation. UPND’s electoral success was driven by its broader electoral spatial footprint across provinces, stronger performance in both rural and urban constituencies, and its clear association with high voter turnout constituencies. PF, while remaining competitive in several constituencies, demonstrated a narrower electoral spatial footprint, most evident from the election outcomes in Eastern, Luapula, Northern and Muchinga provinces.

The 2021 presidential elections therefore demonstrate how geographic reach and sustained voter mobilisation can become decisive determinants of presidential election outcomes.

In retrospect, several lessons emerge from the foregoing regarding political party competitiveness.

First, future presidential election competitiveness is likely to depend increasingly on broader electoral spatial footprints rather than geographically concentrated regional support.

Second, rural constituencies are likely to remain strategically decisive because they account for more than 70% of all constituencies nationally. Any political party seeking electoral competitiveness must therefore maintain strong rural penetration while simultaneously remaining competitive in urban constituencies, where voter concentration and turnout can significantly influence electoral outcomes.

Third, urban constituencies are likely to become increasingly influential in shaping future presidential election outcomes. UPND’s overwhelming dominance in urban constituencies suggests that urban voter consolidation can provide a significant electoral advantage. As urbanisation expands, political parties that fail to remain competitive in urban areas may experience declining national electoral competitiveness.

Fourth, historically high voter turnout constituencies are likely to remain strategically important battlegrounds in future elections. The strong positive correlation between voter turnout in the 2016 and 2021 presidential elections and the observed historical provincial voter turnout trends, suggests that spatial patterns of voter participation exhibit continuity across election cycles. Constituencies with historically high turnout may therefore continue to exert disproportionate influence on future presidential election outcomes, making them critical targets for sustained political mobilisation.

Fifth, regionally concentrated political support may become increasingly insufficient for securing national electoral dominance. The 2021 presidential election demonstrated that a broader electoral spatial footprints provided a stronger competitive advantage than concentrated regional dominance. Future presidential elections are therefore likely to reward political parties capable of expanding support beyond traditional strongholds and building broader national electoral coalitions.