LUSAKA High Court Judge Kazimbe Chenda, sitting in Livingstone, has nullified the election of UPND’s Emelda Munashabantu as Mapatizya member of parliament.

The court heard that Munashabantu was declared the winner during the August 13 elections based on results from 64 of the constituency’s 75 polling stations, in which she polled 14,812 votes against Clive Miyanda’s 14,330.

Miyanda, represented by Chizai Zulu of Linus and Partners, also petitioned the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), which was represented by Mutakela Lisimba of Mambwe Siwila and Lisimba Advocates.

Munashabantu was represented by Monde Kamwi of Kamwi Andeleki Legal Practitioners.

In his judgement, Thursday, Judge Chenda said Miyanda had challenged Munashabantu’s election as MP for Mapatizya constituency on two of the three possible grounds, namely misconduct and procedural irregularities.

He, however, noted that no instance of misconduct had been proven against Munashabantu.

“It follows that the first ground of the petition lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. As for the second ground, there is no evidence of major irregularity or other fault with the way the mandate of the Second Respondent (ECZ) was executed at the stages preceding and on voting day. However, it has been proven to the satisfaction of this Court that the post-voting electoral processes were not conducted by the Second Respondent substantially in accordance with the electoral laws. It has similarly been proven that the procedural irregularities were so serious as to have affected the result in terms of the success of one candidate over the other. Fortified by these findings, the second ground has merit and the petition is successful,” he said.

“I therefore invoke sections 97(2)(b), 97(4) and 99(a) of the EPA (Electoral Process Act), and hold that the election result for Mapatizya constituency, following voting on 13th August 2026, is void. Consequently, the declaration of the First Respondent as MP, made on 16th August 2026, is hereby nullified”.

He further ordered the ECZ to pay Miyanda’s legal costs.

“In the case before Court, the Petitioner has succeeded and there is nothing in the nature of the claim nor conduct of the Petitioner (during the case) which warrants any deprivation of costs. As for the First Respondent and Second Respondent, it is necessary to backtrack that they and the Petitioner were all affected by the violence that rocked the totalling centre at Kabanga. However, it is the irregular steps taken by the Second Respondent’s agent thereafter that triggered this petition. Therefore, the Second Respondent shall bear the Petitioner’s costs of this action, to be taxed if not agreed. Turning to the First Respondent, even though vanquished as a litigant, she has been found blameless in the Second Respondent’s condemned steps and shall therefore be spared of any costs burden other than her own to bear. So I order,” ruled Judge Chenda.