SOLWEZI COURT REJECTS MUNDUBILE, MAKEBI APPLICATION FOR ORAL EVIDENCE
POLITICSBy Zambian Observer — Zambian Observer
The legal battles surrounding opposition figures Brian Mundubile and Makebi Zulu intensified on Monday as the Solwezi Magistrate's Court delivered a crucial ruling regarding their ongoing trial. Principal Resident Magistrate Mambwe Mukonde firmly rejected an application lodged by the defence seeking to introduce oral evidence at this preliminary stage of the proceedings. The decision marks another legal hurdle for the prominent politicians, who have found themselves at the center of intense judicial scrutiny following the contentious aftermath of the recent general elections. Mundubile, who contested the presidency under the banner of the National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Prosperity (NRPUP), alongside his running mate Makebi Zulu, are facing charges related to seditious practices. The state alleges that the duo published inflammatory statements and social media posts claiming electoral victory based on parallel vote tabulations while the official tallying process was suspended by the Electoral Commission of Zambia. The prosecution argues that these declarations were calculated to incite public unrest and undermine state authority during a politically sensitive period. During the court session, the defence team pressed for the admission of oral evidence to contest aspects of the state's handling and the procedural basis of moving the trial to Solwezi, far from where the initial statements were broadcasted in Lusaka. However, Magistrate Mukonde ruled against the application, maintaining that the court must adhere strictly to established criminal procedure rules for the current stage of the trial. Legal observers note that the ruling keeps the focus squarely on the core charges, preventing premature excursions into contested factual disputes before the main prosecution case is fully unfolded. The case has captured the attention of the Zambian public, dividing opinion across various political and social spheres. While state prosecutors maintain that the law