THE growing number of running mates and candidates withdrawing from the election race shortly after nomination raises serious questions about the integrity, judgment and motives of some of the people seeking public office. It is difficult to understand how a person can pay an exorbitant nomination fee, mobilise hundreds of registered voters to support a candidature, submit nomination papers and present themselves as ready to govern, only to abandon the race when elections are just around the corner.

Politics cannot be treated like a market stall where one moves to whichever side appears to be attracting more customers. A candidature for public office is a solemn undertaking. When a person accepts to be a running mate, parliamentary candidate or presidential candidate, they are not merely making a private arrangement with a political party. They are making a commitment to citizens. They are asking voters to trust their judgment, loyalty and readiness to serve. Withdrawing like that casually after securing that endorsement is treating the electorate with contempt.

The conduct of Mr Moses Mawere is particularly difficult to defend. Mr Mawere accepted to be Mr Harry Kalaba’s running mate under the Citizens First Orange Alliance. He therefore knew the political direction, organisation and prospects of the alliance before accepting the position. He participated in the nomination process and presented himself as part of a team that was prepared to contest the August election. Yet, when he saw the hype surrounding the NRPUP and the crowds attending its rallies, he abandoned his presidential candidate and rushed to endorse Mr Brian Mundubile.

Mr Mawere claims that he is responding to the people’s call for a united opposition. That explanation is convenient, but it is not convincing. He is actually responding to the call from his stomach. If opposition unity was his genuine concern, why did he accept to become Mr Kalaba’s running mate in the first place? Why did he participate in a separate nomination process? Why did he wait until campaign momentum appeared to favour another opposition formation before discovering that unity was necessary?

The honest impression is that Mr Mawere became envious of the attention being generated elsewhere. Instead of sitting down with his presidential candidate and party colleagues to examine what they were doing wrong, how their campaign could be improved and what message they could take to citizens, he ran away to join another camp. That is not leadership but dangerous opportunism.

What kind of confidence can citizens place in a person who abandons his own presidential candidate at the first sight of a more excited crowd? What would such a person do in government when the administration faces economic pressure, public criticism or declining popularity? Would he remain loyal to the programme on which he was elected, or would he again move towards whichever political centre appears stronger?

Leadership is tested most severely when circumstances are difficult. Anyone can stand with a candidate when victory appears certain. Character is revealed when the road becomes lonely, the crowds are small and political advantage is unclear. A running mate who abandons a candidate during the campaign cannot convincingly lecture citizens about loyalty, sacrifice and national service.

Mr Mawere has gone further by telling Mr Kalaba that he has remained alone and must swallow his pride and join the Tonse Alliance. This is an astonishing level of political arrogance. The man who has deserted his own candidate now wants to portray the person he abandoned as the problem. He even invokes Scripture to suggest that God cannot be with Mr Kalaba because he is standing alone. That is a careless and self-serving abuse of religion.

Our respect goes to Mr Kalaba for the maturity with which he has handled this betrayal. Instead of responding with insults or bitterness, he acknowledged that his party was founded on democracy, freedom of association and respect for individual political choices. That level of restraint is rare in Zambian politics. To Mr Kalaba, we say: it is better to stand alone than to be surrounded by treacherous friends. A smaller team of committed people is more valuable than a crowd of opportunists who will disappear when they sense advantage elsewhere.

The ECZ has also acknowledged that the law contains a lacuna regarding running mates who resign between nomination and election day. The law appears to recognise the running mate as a candidate during nomination and later as Vice-President if the presidential candidate wins, but it does not clearly provide for resignation during the campaign period. This gap must be addressed. Elections should not proceed under legal uncertainty where voters may be asked to elect a presidential ticket whose running mate has publicly abandoned it.

But beyond the law lies a question of character. Many politicians enter politics claiming to serve the people, yet their conduct shows that they are serving personal ambition. They follow crowds, calculate positions and abandon commitments whenever another route to power appears more promising.

Citizens must study these actions carefully. A politician who cannot honour a campaign partnership may not honour promises made to the electorate. Public office requires consistency, loyalty and principle. Those who withdraw or defect for convenience must not expect voters to ignore what their conduct reveals about them.