Zambian Whistleblower

31/07/2025

I TOLD YOU SO

Trevor Mwiinde, named by fugitive JayJay Banda in his alleged abduction, holding dark corner meetings with Macky 2 and Kaunda.
When I asked why did Macky 3 form a parallel movement to Ichabaice you all thought ndesabaila, the all movement was to difuse Ichabaice and divide the youth.
It is the reason they want to lock up Binwell, that charge they slapped Binwell was such that he is locked up and not able to get bail so as to stop him organising the young people.
Chair The Voice Of Zambia

31/07/2025

OPPOSITION UNITY OR BUST: MUHABI LUNGU’S CANDID REBUKE TO ZAMBIA’S FRAGMENTED FRONT

By Brian Matambo, Sandton, South Africa
July 30, 2025

In a searing live broadcast on Emmanuel Mwamba Verified, former diplomat and economist Muhabi Lungu delivered what is arguably the most direct political reprimand yet of Zambia’s fractured opposition. With unflinching clarity and statistical precision, Lungu laid bare the existential stakes facing Zambia ahead of the 2026 general elections and issued a rare public appeal for humility, realism, and unity among the country’s fragmented opposition leaders.

Appearing as a guest on Mwamba’s widely followed program, Lungu did not mince words. Drawing from electoral history, demographic data, and hard political truths, he argued that unless opposition leaders form a united front - and do so soon - they risk handing President Hakainde Hichilema and his United Party for National Development (UPND) an uncontested path to a second term.

“There is no contender,” Lungu declared. “For the first time since 1991, Zambia is heading into a general election without a single opposition figure who can, alone, pose a credible threat to the incumbent.”

A NATION ON THE BRINK

For Lungu, the matter is not merely political - it is existential. “The state of the nation is very bad,” he warned early in the interview, citing what he described as an unprecedented ethnic polarization, politicization of national statistics, and a systematic weakening of democratic institutions. He accused the UPND administration of shrinking Zambia’s democratic space through repressive laws, intimidation of opposition figures, and what he termed “psychological warfare” on the legacy and family of late former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu.

At the heart of his concern was a stark prognosis: Zambia faces a crisis not just of governance, but of national cohesion.

“There is a dangerous effort to rewrite truth, distort data, and weaponize identity. That is how authoritarian regimes begin-and how nations collapse.”

THE CASE FOR A SINGLE TICKET

Lungu’s central thesis was statistical, not sentimental. He outlined three core conditions for electoral victory in Zambia:
1. Winning at least three of the five largest provinces (Lusaka, Copperbelt, Eastern, Northern, Southern).
2. ⁠Achieving a minimum 15% showing in at least three of the four remaining provinces.
3. ⁠Doing so with one or two opposition candidates, not more.

“Without meeting those thresholds,” he said, “no candidate can reach the constitutionally required 50% + 1 margin. It’s mathematically impossible.”

He dismissed arguments that voter disillusionment with UPND would automatically translate into regime change. “That’s conjecture,” he said flatly. “There is no empirical evidence to support that theory.”

*NO TO PERSONAL AMBITION*
But it was Lungu’s personal stance that shocked and resonated most. Asked whether he would stand for president in 2026, he issued a categorical no - a rare posture in a political culture often driven by personal ambition.

“We are too many people with small names and small money who suddenly believe we must be president,” he said. “I’ve never needed a title to be heard. I’ve never needed power to have influence.”

In one of the broadcast’s most defining moments, Lungu listed five types of opposition actors he believes are sabotaging unity efforts:

1. The delusional, who overestimate their electoral worth.
2. ⁠The opportunists, who run to raise donor funds.
3. ⁠The Trojan horses, planted to divide the opposition.
4. ⁠The career hedgers, hoping to grow their vote share for 2031.
5. ⁠The cynics, who believe unity is impossible and prefer a fragmented race.

Each category, he argued, reflects a failure of patriotism and a dangerous abdication of leadership responsibility.

PRIMARIES AND A SOCIAL CONTRACT

Responding to a caller’s question, Lungu endorsed the idea of a pre-election primary or equivalent process to identify the strongest opposition ticket, emphasizing the need for public input and transparency.

“We can’t afford another backroom deal. Let the people help determine who is best suited to carry the banner,” he said.

In tandem, he called for a binding social contract signed by the selected presidential ticket and witnessed by civil society organizations. This contract, he suggested, should commit to constitutional reform, economic equity, and the restoration of institutional independence within the first three years of a new government.

“We want a government of reformers, not opportunists. A presidency grounded in accountability - not cults of personality.”

EXISTENTIAL THREAT” IS NOT HYPERBOLE

Lungu repeatedly referred to Zambia’s current moment as an “existential threat,” a term he tied to three crises:
1. *Ethnic polarization,* allegedly promoted from the highest office.
2. ⁠*Democratic backsliding,* through abuse of institutions and laws.
3. ⁠*State cruelty,* especially the targeting of the Lungu family and manipulation of public mourning.

He condemned what he called the “psychological torture” inflicted on the late President’s family and challenged the government’s attempt to verify the identity of his co**se weeks after public announcements of his death.

“This is one of the darkest moments in our history. A Christian nation entertaining the idea that a family might fake the death of its patriarch? It’s vile. It’s cruel.”

WHAT COMES NEXT

The message from Muhabi Lungu was not just a critique - it was a blueprint.

If followed, his proposal could redefine the opposition’s trajectory. If ignored, it may mark a tragic turning point in Zambia’s democratic journey. In the days following the interview, political watchers across Lusaka, Johannesburg, and London have echoed a singular theme: *time is running out.*

Whether the Patriotic Front, the Socialist Party, and emerging players like “The Zambia We Want” coalition heed the call remains to be seen. But the stakes, as Lungu warned, could not be higher.

“This is not just about removing a government. It’s about rescuing a nation.”

Brian Matambo is a journalist, filmmaker, and political analyst based in Sandton, South Africa. He writes on African governance, democratic transitions, and AI-powered civic systems.

31/07/2025

INSTEAD OF VERIFYING THE BODY OF ECL, ZAMBIANS SHOULD VERIFY WHETHER THE HAKAINDE HICHILEMA OF 2021 CAMPAIGN PROMISES IS THE SAME MAN FOUND TO HAVE TOLD LIES AS PRESIDENT IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS - ZWB

30/07/2025

- Chaos Erupts in Chingola as youths riot in Chiwempala over a mine, whilst Govt Fixates on ECL’s Remains — Shops Looted, Cop Feared Dead.💀 Linda Banks

30/07/2025

The Cult of UPND Membership and the Crisis of the Other

By Chitundu

Zambia’s post-2021 political climate has steadily revealed a deep fracture—not merely along partisan lines, but across the very foundations of national unity. At the heart of this fracture is the United Party for National Development (UPND), whose rise to power has brought with it an ideology of inherited entitlement masked as democratic reform. Far from being a new dawn, the UPND’s governance structure has entrenched a dangerous model: one in which belonging, loyalty, and access to state power are no longer defined by merit or national identity, but by tribe, denomination, and regional affinity.

This ideological framework is not new; it traces back to the 2006 succession crisis in UPND following the death of its founding president, Anderson Mazoka. While many saw an opportunity for democratic transition within the party, a now infamous headline in The Post Newspaper declared: “Only a Tonga can replace Mazoka.” This chilling pronouncement was made by Henry Madyenkuku, a senior member of the UPND at the time. Whether or not he was related to Mazoka is secondary; what mattered was that this tribal declaration was never condemned by the party. Instead, it was fulfilled with the selection of Hakainde Hichilema—an individual with no significant political track record over more experienced contenders such as Sakwiba Sikota. That moment marked a shift: UPND was no longer a party of national aspiration. It had become, quietly but unmistakably, a political order defined by birthright. The silence of civil society, media, and church groups at that time—perhaps blinded by the desire for regime change or regional pride—laid the groundwork for today’s crisis.

Drawing on Sigmund Freud’s concept of dual identity—the public self and the internal psychological self—one can observe how the UPND has institutionally mirrored this split. Publicly, the party speaks the language of “One Zambia, One Nation,” but internally, it enforces a caste system based on regional and tribal legitimacy. For example, a party member from Southern Province is presumed loyal and competent by default, while someone from Muchinga or Eastern Province must constantly prove their allegiance, even when they share the party’s ideology. The UPND doesn’t just discriminate externally; it polices identity within its own ranks. Thus, the political environment under UPND has come to be defined not just by what you say, but who you are when you say it.

This structure can be distilled into seven key tiers of political legitimacy within the UPND. The first and most privileged tier is Birthright, particularly Southern Province, where UPND support is not merely political but hereditary. Those born in this region are treated as automatic insiders. However, this privileged status comes at a cost—for any individual from Southern Province who dares to challenge the political orthodoxy or the authority of Hakainde Hichilema, the backlash is often swift and unforgiving. Figures such as Raphael Nakachinda, Paul Moonga, and Obby have faced intense criticism and character assassination not from political opponents, but from within their own ethnic and regional base. They are labeled as traitors, madmen, or enemies simply for questioning the UPND agenda. In this context, tribal belonging is no longer a cultural identity—it is a political obligation, and deviation is treated as betrayal. This mentality reveals the disturbing transformation of regional identity into political servitude, where silence is rewarded, and dissent is punished.

The second tier includes tribal cousinship provinces—Western, Northwestern, and parts of Central—who are considered friendly due to historical grievances shared with the South. The third, and perhaps most overlooked, is religious affiliation, especially membership in the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA). President Hichilema is himself a devout Adventist, having been invested as a Master Guide in 2020, and his faith appears to have transcended the spiritual and entered the domain of political capital.

According to a 2022 article in the Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, the SDA Church in Southern Province voted overwhelmingly for UPND, defying the church’s formal position of neutrality. Moreover, civic platforms like Zambian Whistleblower have repeatedly documented the preferential treatment given to Adventist members in UPND appointments and national tenders. For those outside UPND’s tribal strongholds, being SDA has often functioned as a kind of “religious passport” to political acceptance—a fact widely acknowledged but rarely discussed. The SDA connection also partly explains the UPND government’s cold relationship with the Catholic Church, Zambia’s largest and historically most socially engaged denomination. Catholic bishops have criticized UPND on issues of corruption, exclusion, and governance, yet have been met with silence or passive hostility. This coldness may be theological, not just political. Influential SDA texts such as The Great Controversy by Ellen G. White portray the Catholic Church as a persecuting power. While not all Adventists share these views, it is plausible that Hichilema’s silence toward Catholic critiques is not just indifference, but doctrinal caution.

The fourth tier of UPND’s internal pyramid is composed of opportunists and useful idiots—individuals who parrot the party line but are never truly trusted. They are granted visibility, not influence. The fifth tier consists of what might be called the intellectual priesthood—a class of highly educated individuals, many of whom suffer from an entitlement complex paired with a quiet inferiority. These are the individuals who believe their academic achievements or spiritual piety automatically qualify them for leadership. For them, merit is not what one contributes to the nation, but a reflection of personal accolades, titles, and self-perception. They often dismiss others—especially those from humble or family-rooted backgrounds—as “cadres” or “unqualified.” Their belief is that if they are not in power, then something must be wrong with the system. They do not see politics as a marketplace of ideas, but as a prize for the most elite. Ironically, their disdain is not only aimed at outsiders but also toward fellow UPND members who challenge their ideological superiority or come from less prestigious academic or denominational roots.

The sixth tier comprises Western liberal allies—foreign donors and organisations that view UPND as a conduit for their values, including neoliberal economic reform and rights-based programming. These allies are often accommodated through subtle policy nods or quiet alignment. And the final tier is the digital base—social media influencers and radio pundits who echo the party’s rhetoric loudly, often with shallow understanding and tribal undertones. They serve more as noise-makers than thinkers, ensuring that any form of dissent—however well reasoned—is drowned out.

The consequences of this hierarchical structure are stark. The Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) today is composed almost entirely of commissioners from Southern Province, a fact that has raised eyebrows across civil society. Senior leadership in the military, police, and intelligence services similarly leans toward the same region. These patterns would raise alarms in any mature democracy, yet here they are rationalized as “merit-based appointments.” Critics such as Dr Fred M’membe and analysts from Zambian Whistleblower have warned that Zambia is sleepwalking into a tribalised administrative state—one which retains the appearance of pluralism while quietly excluding half the population from influence.

Perhaps most troubling is the weaponisation of identity to deflect criticism. Rather than engage with opposing views, the UPND establishment routinely reduces dissent to tribal jealousy or bitterness. When Dr. Sishuwa Sishuwa, a distinguished political thinker, critiques democratic backsliding, he is labeled bitter. When State Counsel John Sangwa questions constitutional breaches, he is painted as having a tribal agenda. This anti-intellectualism—masquerading as loyalty—has silenced critical voices, turning national discourse into a loyalty test. It sends a message that truth is tribal, and therefore disposable if it comes from the “wrong” region or surname.

What is most tragic is that all of this was foreseeable. The signs were clear as early as 2006, but Zambians were either silent or complicit. Civil society chose convenience. Churches, particularly the SDA, mistook their political alignment for divine calling. This was not the result of spiritual neutrality—it was the result of greed, misinformation, and a deep-seated hatred for Edgar Chagwa Lungu (ECL). So strong was the desire to remove ECL and the PF that many Zambians gave UPND a blank cheque, ignoring every red flag. That cheque has now matured, and its cost is steep: institutional exclusion, tribalism masquerading as democracy, and the erosion of national unity.

In a cruel twist of fate, UPND’s attempt to bury Lungu’s legacy has only intensified it. Not because he was perfect, but because the alternative has proven worse—more divisive, more tribal, and far less tolerant of criticism. The ghost of ECL continues to haunt Zambia not because of nostalgia, but because the new rulers have failed to build a truly inclusive future.

Zambia today faces not a coup, nor a war, but a creeping crisis of belonging. Our republic is fragmenting into spheres of entitlement, and our institutions are becoming gatekeepers for tribal and denominational loyalty. The UPND is no longer just a party. It is a cultural order—a political church with sacraments of origin and rituals of silence. If Zambia is to survive as a unified republic, we must confront this cult of belonging. The time to act is now.

John 8:32 "And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Get in touch with us on WhatsApp +263786654620

©️ Zambian Whistleblower

30/07/2025

UKA ON GOVERNMENT SEEKING TO FORCE INSPECTION OF BODY

Some things should never be done. Just when you thought that the government cannot not sink any lower over the issue of the body and burial of Late President Edgar Chagwa LUNGU, the UPND have managed to go lower than ground zero.

The letter from the lawyers of President Hakainde and his government is astonishing. It shows an unthinkable obsession with the body of the Late Sixth President Edgar Lungu.

Reading the letter from the lawyers it is like it’s from another realm and not this world.

If the South African Court is going to rule that the body be handed over to the Zambian Government, President Hakainde will then have the legal right to do whatever he and his colleagues crave to do with the body.

The Court clearly stated in its Orders dated the 25th and 26th June 2025 that the LUNGU family would have discretion as to who could access to or view the body of the Late President Lungu. The court did not say they must give access to everyone who requests to see or inspect the body.

Equally perplexing is how they propose to go about “identifying and authenticating the identity of the body.” Are they to extract DNA or blood samples? Which body parts do they want in their quest to “authenticating the identity of the body”?

Who are these representatives they say can “authenticate and identify” the body and what are their backgrounds and qualifications?

Paragraph 4 of President Hakainde’s lawyer’s letter is scarily mysterious when it says, “It is a necessary and respectful step to bring certainty to a matter of public and personal importance.” The public are generally not being haunted with an insatiable thirst to see and identify the body. This therefore leaves the question as to whom is being referred to as placing “personal importance” to inspect, see, access and authenticate the identity of the body.

If the body is not accessed and seen by these individuals at this stage, what harm will befall them? Why can they not wait for the Court’s determination of the main matter?

There is a saying that some people have a tendency of sticking their foot into it; President Hakainde and his government over this matter of or Late President’s body, seem to only be changing feet.

SAKWIBA Sikota SC.

UKA CHAIRMAN

30 July 2025

©️Zambian Whistleblower

30/07/2025

We Were Never Really Free: Palestine, Africa, and the Illusion of Independence

By Chitundu

As I sit and watch the slow death of Gaza — the starvation of children, the bombing of hospitals, the endless funerals of men, women, and entire families — I find myself deeply troubled, not just by the tragedy itself, but by what it reveals about the world and about us, the so-called “free.” Being Zambian, a thought crossed my mind that I have not been able to shake: while the 20th century was hailed as the age of African independence, why was the same period one of colonization, dispossession, and erasure for the people of Palestine?

Was it simply geopolitical misfortune? Or was it something more sinister — a matter of colour, identity politics, and global design? The deeper I think about it, the more convinced I become: what we call independence was never meant to be full, and what Palestine has endured was not a mistake. It was all part of the same world order — structured, protected, and preserved to benefit a few, while the rest of us live under illusions.

The UN: Resolutions Without Resolve

We often speak about the United Nations as if it were the moral compass of the world. But when it comes to Palestine, that compass spins wildly and goes nowhere. I went back and read the key UN resolutions on the conflict — and what I found was a mountain of words, and a desert of justice.

In 1947, the UN passed Resolution 181, proposing to partition Palestine without the consent of its indigenous population. That plan lit the match for the catastrophe that followed — the Nakba, or catastrophe, of 1948, when over 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes. The following year, Resolution 194 declared that those refugees had a right to return to their land. To this day, that right remains unfulfilled.

After the 1967 war, Resolution 242 called for Israel’s withdrawal from the territories it had occupied — Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem. Not only did Israel refuse, it expanded. Settlements grew. Walls went up. Checkpoints multiplied. And the UN? It issued more resolutions, more condemnations, and more silence.

Even as recently as 2023, after another horrific bombardment of Gaza, the General Assembly passed Resolution ES-10/21, calling for a ceasefire and humanitarian access. As always, the bombs kept falling. The children kept dying. And the international system, once again, looked away.

Africa’s Independence: A Flag Without Freedom

I cannot help but compare this with our own history in Africa. When Zambia gained independence in 1964, there was celebration, euphoria, pride. And rightly so — colonialism was a violent, degrading system, and ending it was a milestone. But in the years that followed, the limits of that independence became clear.

We inherited flags, national anthems, and government buildings — but the structure of control never truly changed. Our economies remained tied to global lenders. Our mines, forests, and oil were still in the hands of foreign companies. Our school systems taught us about the Queen of England, not the Kingdom of Kongo. And our leaders, in many cases, simply replaced colonial governors with strongmen beholden to Washington, Paris, or Beijing.

We were told we were free — but our development was dictated by the IMF. Our elections were watched and manipulated by the West. Our borders, drawn by colonizers, still divide our people. And today, in the face of global injustice, many of our governments speak only when it is safe — but fall silent when it matters most.

The Hypocrisy of the International Order

This hypocrisy isn’t just frustrating — it is staggering. As former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once asked in an interview with CNN: If the Holocaust happened in Europe, why must the Palestinians pay the price? That question has never been answered — only silenced.

And I must add my own: If Africans were fighting for majority rule, why was Palestine treated differently? If the ANC in South Africa fought for one man, one vote, why has no such democratic principle been applied to the millions of Palestinians under occupation or siege?

What exactly is the difference between Jewish supremacy in Israel today and white supremacy in apartheid South Africa? Or is it now enough to simply invoke scripture whenever logic fails? Do we accept racial privilege when it comes dressed in religious language — and reject human rights when it’s inconvenient for our allies?

These are not rhetorical questions. They are questions of conscience — and the fact that they remain unaddressed is proof that this global system is morally bankrupt.

Palestine as a Mirror

Palestine, to me, is not just a crisis. It is a mirror. It reflects everything that is unfinished, compromised, or betrayed about our own story. The colonizer in Palestine wears different clothes, but speaks the same language: of security, of civilization, of “right to exist” — while denying others the right to live.

The tactics are the same: land theft, ethnic cleansing, military occupation, divide and rule, and the constant rewriting of history to erase indigenous people. Just as Africans were called savages, Palestinians are now branded terrorists. Just as our resistance was criminalized, so too is theirs. Just as we were dispossessed in the name of empire, they are being erased in the name of Zionism.

And while this unfolds, I look at Africa — and I wonder: where are we?

Why do we issue weak statements, hold back from sanctions, or continue trade deals with those who bomb refugee camps and block food from reaching children?

If we are truly free, why do we act like we are still under orders?

What Was It All For?

We celebrate independence anniversaries with music and flags. We call each other “sovereign nations.” We speak proudly of our freedom. But I ask: freedom to do what? If we cannot stand with the oppressed, if we cannot speak against genocide, if we cannot say that children deserve food and safety regardless of where they are born — then what was all that struggle for?

Was our independence just symbolic? A ceremony, not a transformation?

If we cannot defend Palestine, we are not free. If we still ask permission to speak, we are not free. If we cannot prioritize humanity over diplomacy, we are not free.

And we should stop pretending otherwise.

Conclusion: The Empire Never Left

Zambia’s own history offers a lesson that most of us have forgotten. In the 1970s, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda took a bold stand and voted against Israel at the United Nations in support of Palestinian rights. As a result, the Israeli government withdrew from its commitment to help complete the construction of the University of Zambia (UNZA). That unfinished project became a lasting symbol of the cost of speaking truth to global power.

One must ask: was this the beginning of Zambia’s economic marginalization? Was the punishment that followed — including crippling IMF and World Bank restructuring programs — merely about poor management, or was it also about daring to defy the imperial consensus?

We see similar consequences today. Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, has faced smear campaigns and threats. Even the ICC Prosecutor, Karim Khan, who dared to issue warrants against Israeli and Hamas leaders, has been targeted with sanctions by the U.S. and its allies. This is the price of dreaming of justice in a world built on injustice.

As a Zambian, as an African, as a human being, I no longer find comfort in empty independence. I look at Palestine and I realize: our liberation is incomplete. Our struggle is not over. And the empire, though it may fly a different flag, never really left.

Until every child eats. Until every refugee returns. Until every people are free — from Gaza to Lusaka — we are still in the struggle.

And we should say it, without shame or hesitation: we were never really free.

©️Zambian Whistleblower

30/07/2025

Between 1991 and 2021, survey data showed that majority of both elite and ordinary Zambians support democracy relative to other forms of government. Why do Zambians continue to perceive democracy as the most legitimate political system for the country? What are the sources of that perception? On the link below is the answer.

With three peaceful transfers of power since the early 1990s and a well-established commitment to electoral politics among the country’s elite, Zambia is often held up as a model of democracy in Af...

30/07/2025

BILL 13: A Continuation of Poor Governance

By David Sichone

Much like Bill 7 before it, Bill 13 is yet another ill-conceived legislative proposal that raises serious concerns.

With the UPND government, it is crucial to ask who stands to benefit from these bills, right up to the individual and group political and business interests of those in power.

The presidency, at the head of Cabinet is involved. So is the Speaker, whose leanings have become all too apparent, especially after her ruling that Bill 7 can still proceed in parliament despite the Constitutional Court declaring its initiation and process unconstitutional.

It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the motives behind Bill 13, as for Bill 7 before it, are far from altruistic or in the public interest.

President HH entered office in 2021 on a strong platform of promises to correct what was wrong under the Patriotic Front (PF). Among those promises was that the state would repossess land allocated to individuals after suspected illegal degazetting of Forest 27 in Lusaka. Yet, once in power, his government has failed to follow through on this commitment to right what was perceived as violations of procedure for degazetting land.

Now, four years later, his government is proposing to expand the powers of the Registrar of Titles and Deeds. While this office is distinct from the Registrar of Societies, it is also a junior office susceptible to manipulation by senior government officials and the ruling party, as has haooened to the former. The Registrar of Societies has been used by the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND), through the Ministry of Home Affairs, to destabilise the largest opposition party, PF, through arbitrary administrative imposing of stooges as office holders, while frustrating efforts by legitimate office holders to resolve leadership wrangles.

Bringung such potential manipulatiins ti the issue of cancellation of title deeds on land will be catastrophic, and has suspicious motives. for similar abuses.

Given this context, who can trust legislation coming from the UPND? The rapid succession of bills suggests a scramble to consolidate power and resources before the end of their term, which is beginning to look more likely for 2026.

Zambians have grown disillusioned, withdrawing their goodwill from a government they feel has betrayed them. The UPND has quickly descended into a group perceived to be a corrupt regime.

Continuing to churn out such dubious bills as Bill 7, and now Bill 13, will simply seal their quick exit.

Zambians are no longer gullible.

John 8:32 "And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Get in touch with us on WhatsApp +263786654620

©️ Zambian Whistleblower