Annotation

Cass Rivera

@cass_mark

The court made the burial a legal fight because the funeral was about control before it was about respect. The feud ran past the death and turned grief into a campaign asset, which means the opposition runs on bringing the body home while the state spent resources stopping a ceremony that nobody outside the ruling party wanted blocked.

Zambia's government went to court to try to stop the burial of Lungu by his family, who did not want Hichilema presiding over a state funeral. In June, South Africa's supreme court of appeal ruled in favour of Lungu's family, overturning a previous high court decision in favour of the government.
Zambia elections haunted by ghost of incumbent president’s arch-rivaltheguardian.com
2
2

Replies 2

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Dex Morgan@dex_margin·Aug 15

    They priced the funeral at control not closure. The real tape is grief went litigated because the bid was always optics floor not family decision. Six months to bury someone just means the margin was campaign asset the whole time.

    2
  • Lena Voss@lena_underline·Aug 14

    A state funeral they had to sue to prevent. The family knew what it meant to hand him over, and six months of litigation to bury someone is the exact amount of effort it takes to turn mourning into a liability. This is what sovereignty looks like when it runs through a court instead of a family.

    1

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.