THE SELECTIVE SILENCE OF ZAMBIA’S INTELLECTUALS: A DANGEROUS RATIONALISATION OF TYRANNY The debate surrounding the “deafening silence” of Zambian academics has reached a critical juncture following a provocative commentary by law lecturer Dr. O’Brien Kaaba. Writing on the government’s recent revocation of historian Dr. Sishuwa Sishuwa’s passport, Dr. Kaaba argued that while international scholars have […]

THE SELECTIVE SILENCE OF ZAMBIA’S INTELLECTUALS: A DANGEROUS RATIONALISATION OF TYRANNY

The debate surrounding the “deafening silence” of Zambian academics has reached a critical juncture following a provocative commentary by law lecturer Dr. O’Brien Kaaba. Writing on the government’s recent revocation of historian Dr. Sishuwa Sishuwa’s passport, Dr. Kaaba argued that while international scholars have fiercely rallied behind Dr. Sishuwa, local academics remain silent because they understand the context better.

He asserted that academic freedom is not a blank cheque for partisan activism, implying that Dr. Sishuwa “went rogue” and that local scholars are silent because they recognise his output as political warfare rather than protected scholarship.

While Dr. Kaaba provides a sophisticated academic framing for this silence, his argument is a dangerous rationalisation of state authoritarianism. To reduce the state’s weaponisation of administrative power to a mere debate over “academic boundaries” is to miss the forest for the trees.

A Mirror Image: Comparing the Lungu and Hichilema Administrations:
To understand how deep the intellectual hypocrisy runs, one only needs to look at the striking structural similarities between the abuses committed by the Edgar Lungu administration and those happening today under Mr Hakainde Hichilema.

The PF administration weaponised state immigration departments, frequently threatening critics with deportation or questioning their true nationality to stifle debate. On September 11, 2026, the UPND government arbitrarily revoked the passports of Dr. Sishuwa Sishuwa and other critics on vague “national security” pretexts effectively trying to trap or strand dissenters abroad.

Weaponising the Legal System: Under the Lungu administration,  opponents were routinely arrested on trumped-up charges. Most famously, Mr Hichilema himself was detained for four months under a brutal treason charge over a traffic dispute.  While Mr Hichilema commendably abolished the law on defamation of the president, his administration immediately shifted to alternative laws using charges of sedition, criminal libel, and espionage to lock up political opponents and noisy critics.

Police Crackdowns and Intimidation: Under the Lungu administration, the state police were used aggressively to break up opposition gatherings under the Public Order Act, leading to high-profile tragedies like the fatal police shooting of opposition supporters in December 2020.  The UPND continues to use the very same Public Order Act and systemic police harassment to restrict assembly, leaving opposition figures like the late former President Lungu complaining that they are living “virtually under house arrest”.

My Critical Analysis of the Situation:
When analysed through the lens of true democratic accountability, the current situation reveals three disturbing realities:

The Weaponisation of the State is Inexcusable: There is no academic nuance that justifies a government revoking a citizen’s passport or tampering with their citizenship status without a transparent, fair legal process. Labelling a critic “partisan” or “toxic” does not give the UPND administration the right to use state apparatuses to administratively disappear its detractors.

Dr. Kaaba’s Defence Mimics Past Oppression: Dr. Kaaba’s attempt to separate “the objective scholar” from “the rogue commentator” is a classic authoritarian tactic. Historically, regimes always seek to delegitimise their most effective critics by labelling them as “biased,” “partisan,” or “agents of chaos.” By validating this narrative, Dr. Kaaba is not defending academic standards; he is providing intellectual cover for regime overreach.

The Sishuwa Precedent Threatens All Dissidents: If the state can successfully silence an internationally recognised scholar like Dr. Sishuwa, while local academics nod in agreement or look away, it sets a terrifying precedent. It signals to every ordinary citizen, journalist, and mid-level academic that no one is safe if they cross the ruling party’s red lines.
Conclusion: Consistency is the True Test of Academic Integrity:

Ultimately, the local academic community’s silence is not a sign of “superior local understanding” it is a symptom of political compromise and fear.

Many of the intellectuals currently rationalising or ignoring the abuses of the UPND regime are the very same individuals who quite rightly loudly condemned the Patriotic Front for similar overreaches. To remain silent now simply because the current perpetrator wears a different party colour is the definition of intellectual dishonesty.

True intellectual freedom does not stop where the ruling party’s comfort zone begins. If an action was tyrannical under Mr Lungu, it remains tyrannical under Mr Hichilema. By choosing neutrality, or worse, generating academic excuses for state overreach, Zambia’s intellectuals are failing in their historic duty to serve as the conscience of the nation.

Fred M’membe