FORMER first lady Esther Lungu says her late husband, former president Edgar Lungu, deserves a dignified burial and not what she described as an “uncompleted piecemeal compromise.”

In an answering affidavit filed before the South African High Court, Esther argued that there is no evidence the late president ever consented to a state funeral or burial in Zambia.

She also revealed that members of the Lungu family, including herself, Tasila, Chiyeso, Dalitso, and Lungu’s sister Bertha, are currently exploring options to permanently relocate to South Africa.

This comes in response to an application by Attorney General, Mulilo Kabesha, who is seeking an interim court order to prevent the burial of the late president in South Africa, arguing that it is in the public interest for his remains to be repatriated.

Named in the suit are Esther Lungu, Bertha Lungu, Tasila Lungu, Chiyeso Lungu, Dalitso Lungu, Charles Phiri, and lawyer Makebi Zulu. Two Mountains Pty, the funeral home currently housing Lungu’s remains, has also been cited as a respondent.

Esther opposed the state’s application, calling it politically motivated and an abuse of the legal process. She argued that the delay in burying her husband has caused severe emotional distress for the family.

“The application is politically motivated and constitutes an abuse of the legal process; and the relief sought, if granted, would cause irreparable harm and prejudice to the deceased’s family and disregard his clearly expressed wishes and that of the family. The late president Lungu was a man of great stature and deserved a proper and dignified burial, not an uncompleted piecemeal compromise. This caused great harm and embarrassment to the family,” she stated.

“Funerals, in African culture, serve as a way for communities to support grieving families. Delays lead to embarrassment and awkwardness within the family’s social circle, as it is perceived as being unprepared or insensitive. This also leads to social isolation of myself, as I endured great discomfort in explaining the delay or the emotional toll it has taken. The delay has caused a prolonged period of shock, numbness, and emotional distress for our family”.

Esther stated that there exists no evidence that Lungu consented to a state funeral and as such, the right to determine the manner and procession of his burial vests solely in the family .

“There exists no evidence of the late president Lungu’s consent to a state funeral or burial in Zambia. In fact, to my knowledge currently, there is no testamentary instrument expressing such an instruction and in the absence of such, it is my understanding that the right to determine the manner and procession of his burial vests solely in the family. Those wishes are that he be buried here in RSA. With respect to his desire that the current President of the Applicant, Mr. Hakainde Hichilema (“the Current President”) must not be allowed to participate in or see the body of the late president Lungu expressly told the Second Respondent of this wish which shall be duly confirmed in a sworn confirmatory affidavit,” Esther stated.

The former first lady added that the Attorney General had no legal standing or enforceable right in the South African law to compel the repatriation of Lungu’s remains.

“In concise form, I oppose the relief sought by the Applicant on the following grounds: The application is legally unsustainable, factually flawed and impermissible in the context of the South African Constitution, 108 of 1996 (“the Constitution”). The Applicant has no legal standing or enforceable right in South African law to compel the repatriation of the remains of the late president Lungu. The relief sought by the Applicant undermines the constitutional and common law rights of the family, including the right to dignity, family life, and cultural practices. The application seeks to invoke purported Zambian protocol and customs which have no extra-territorial effect and are not enforceable within the Republic of South Africa (“RSA”),” Esther stated.

“Even if there was such a Zambian law it would still not be enforceable in RSA. The late president Lungu’s benefits as a former Head of State were revoked prior to his passing, rendering him a private citizen at the time of his death. During the period his benefits were revoked, he was compelled to seek financial support from family and friends and was forced to leave Zambia to receive medical treatment in South Africa, fearing politically motivated medical negligence in his home country. The revocation of these benefits was a deliberate act by the Zambian government aimed at weakening the late president Lungu, ultimately contributing to his deteriorating health and untimely passing”.

Esther further argued that the family had suffered financial losses of approximately R1 million due to the cancellation of funeral arrangements, including catering, venue hire, and other logistical services.

She also disclosed that family members cited in the suit were considering permanently leaving Zambia to reside in South Africa.

“As a result of the Applicant’s actions, approximately two thousand mourners who had already gathered for the funeral had to be asked to leave. All prior arrangements, including catering, venue and function hire, audiovisual services, and other logistical preparations, were abruptly cancelled. The financial loss incurred due to these cancellations amounted to approximately R1,000,000, representing a significant and unnecessary waste of resources and causing considerable emotional and reputational harm to the family and those in attendance including many who had travelled from Zambia,” Esther stated.

“The matter was heard by the Honourable Judge Bam who informed us that the Deputy Judge President Ledwaba wanted to see the parties’ legal representatives in order to finalise a way forward. It is denied that the Respondents are temporarily resident in the Republic of South Africa. At this stage the First to Sixth Respondent are appraising their options to permanently leave Zambia and to reside in RSA for the reason stated supra”.

Esther stated that the matter should be dismissed as it was clear that government’s conduct had fallen short of what could be described as lawful.

“In view of all the foregoing, it is glaringly clear that the conduct of the Zambian Government has fallen far short of what could be described as honourable or lawful. Rather than treating the late President Lungu with the dignity befitting his status, or showing compassion to his family, the Government has respectfully acted with political vindictiveness and disregard for basic human rights,” stated Esther.

“Its recent efforts to interfere with the burial are nothing more than a futile attempt and insincere effort to undo the very harm it inflicted. These actions reflect not remorse or respect to the family. The Applicant’s Application should therefore be dismissed with costs on High court scale C which include the cost of two counsel”.