Opposition leaders Mr Brian Mundubile and Mr Makebi Zulu, together with 16 others facing treason and terrorism-related charges, applied to the Lusaka High Court for constitutional bail. They contend that their continued detention without trial violates their constitutional…

Opposition leaders Mr Brian Mundubile and Mr Makebi Zulu, together with 16 others facing treason and terrorism-related charges, applied to the Lusaka High Court for constitutional bail. They contend that their continued detention without trial violates their constitutional rights. The focus on Mundubile highlights the serious nature of these allegations.

The applicants include former Anglican bishop Rt Rev Trevor Mwamba. In an affidavit supporting the application, they say they have been deprived of their liberty while the State continues to investigate the allegations against them.

Mr Mundubile and Mr Zulu were the presidential candidate and running mate of the opposition Tonse-Pamodzi Alliance in the August general election. Their application now places the question of pre-trial detention squarely before the High Court, emphasizing the implications for Mr Mundubile’s political future.

The applicants made clear they are not challenging the State’s right to investigate. Their complaint is with what that investigation is being used to justify.

“We don’t dispute that the State is entitled to conduct criminal investigations, but what is in dispute is the proposition that the incompleteness of an investigation constitutes a sufficient constitutional basis for prolonged detention without judicial proceedings,” the applicants stated.

They said the law guarantees them the right to be brought before a court without undue delay. If they are not tried within a reasonable time, the law entitles them to be released unconditionally or on reasonable conditions.

The applicants pointed to the position of the prosecution itself to support their case.

“We have been deprived of our liberty while the State continues to gather the evidence which, according to the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions), is required before the case can properly be taken to court,” they stated.

The affidavit cites a September 14 statement attributed to Director of Public Prosecutions Gilbert Phiri, which said investigations into the treason allegations were still ongoing. The applicants used that statement to question the continued detention of those facing terrorism-related charges.

The application also describes the circumstances of some of the arrests. The applicants said Mr Ezra Tolopo, Mr Dickson Tembo and Mr Victor Muzyamba were apprehended at Kenneth Kaunda International Airport on August 1, 2026. They were then held at unknown locations for more than nine days.

The conditions of detention have also come into question. Reports earlier this week alleged that Zambia Correctional Service officers at Mukobeko Maximum Prison in Kabwe turned away food brought by relatives for political detainees, among them Mr Mundubile and Mr Zulu. The allegation drew public condemnation from commentators, who said that even condemned prisoners are entitled to food taken to them by their families.

The applicants contend that their detention has continued without any judicial determination authorising it. They told the court they are ready to answer the charges before a competent court.

Their case rests on a distinction between investigation and incarceration. In their view, the State may take as long as it needs to build its case, but it cannot keep accused persons in custody indefinitely while it does so.

The application asks the High Court to weigh the State’s interest in completing its investigations against the accused persons’ constitutional right to liberty and to a trial within a reasonable time.

The case involves some of the most prominent figures in opposition politics, including the alliance’s presidential ticket and a former senior Anglican cleric. Its outcome will set out how the courts treat prolonged detention in high-profile security cases.

The High Court is expected to hear the bail application, with the State yet to file its response to the applicants’ affidavit.