By Frazer Bwalya Musonda

A while ago, I received a call from a good friend of mine, asking whether I was following the election results being announced back home in Zambia. My immediate answer was a simple “no”. In fact, when he called, I was on my way coming back home after picking up Mapalo and Natwange from school. When my wife is working full-time, I am usually responsible for collecting both of them. A good friend once jokingly suggested that my wife “abuses” me because I spend so much time doing school runs. I laughed and told him that I am their father, and I genuinely enjoy it. But that is a discussion for another day.

Back to the election…..

After the call, I opened Facebook and started paying attention to the results and the reactions. What immediately struck me was how different reality appeared compared to the picture that had emerged during the campaign period. Throughout the campaign, both HH and Brian Mundubile were drawing huge crowds. Social media feeds were filled with videos of packed rallies, and confident predictions from both sides.

Looking only at the campaign atmosphere, it was difficult to tell what the final outcome would be.

It seems that as the results started coming in, there were, as expected, allegations of vote theft and electoral manipulation. Such claims have accompanied many elections in Zambia. We should really work hard to strengthen confidence in our electoral system and continue improving the transparency and independence of our electoral institutions. It is not healthy for public confidence when individuals perceived to be politically aligned (The head of the electoral body and one of the commissioners who are well known UPND cadres) are at the helm of managing elections. Even when no wrongdoing occurs, perceptions matter. Zambians must not only have free and fair elections but they must also believe that elections are free and fair.

Over the years, I have gradually stopped following elections and sporting events with the same intensity I once did. The same thing happened during the recent Football World Cup. At one point my wife asked me why I no longer seemed as emotionally invested. My answer was straightforward. I realized I was spending too much energy worrying about things that, in practical terms, had very little impact on my daily life. Whether one football team won or lost did not change my responsibilities as a husband and father. The same principle increasingly applies to politics. I remain interested, but I try to maintain a healthy distance.

Still, this election result left me curious. As the outcome became clearer, I began speaking to people I know across different parts of Zambia. I contacted cousins, relatives, and friends on the Copperbelt, in Lusaka, in parts of Luapula where my father’s family comes from, and around Kasama, where many of my mother’s relatives live.

I expected to hear a wide variety of explanations for why people voted the way they did. Instead, I kept hearing the same answer.

Social Cash Transfer….. Every conversation eventually came back to it.

People spoke about how the programme had helped vulnerable households, elderly relatives, and struggling families. Some described it as one of the few government interventions they had personally witnessed making a tangible difference in their communities.

What surprised me was that this topic seemed largely absent from the national political conversation I was seeing online. The campaigns were often dominated by songs, slogans, entertainment, personalities, and social media battles (pa Facebook kwali ubwafya, even ambassadors). Yet when ordinary people explained their voting decisions, many pointed to a specific policy that had affected their lives directly.

For me, that raises an interesting question… Did political commentators, campaign strategists, and even opposition leaders underestimate the importance of programmes like Social Cash Transfer? Is it possible that many people were paying attention to things that were never trending on Facebook or discussed on political talk shows? Maybe some politicians listened too closely to the music and not closely enough to the people.

As I write this, the final result is not yet clear, but what makes the current result particularly interesting is that it comes after several difficult years. Zambia has experienced load-shedding and the cost of living has increased in the last years, yet despite these challenges, the leading candidate (the incumbent HH) appears to have secured a clear and convincing mandate.

That tells me something. It seems to suggests that voters are often more nuanced than political observers assume. Citizens can acknowledge economic hardships while still believing that a government is moving in the right direction. They can be frustrated with certain issues while remaining supportive of broader policies (free education and the likes). They can weigh both successes and failures and reach conclusions that surprise seasoned political commentators.

My conclusion is that democracy requires humility. Supporters of losing candidates must be willing to accept outcomes they do not like. Supporters of winning candidates should avoid arrogance and remember that political fortunes can change. Most importantly, all of us should resist the temptation to explain every unexpected result through conspiracy theories (This goes to ba Emmanuel Mwamba).

The people listened to the campaigns, considered their experiences, and made their choice. They have spoken. Whether we agree with the outcome or not, respecting that choice remains one of the most important principles of any democracy.