By 
Barely hours after informing the High Court that they were engaged in talks with the Zambian government, the family of late former president Edgar Lungu made a dramatic turn yesterday, rushing to the South African Constitutional Court in an urgent bid to overturn the Gauteng High Court’s ruling which allowed the Zambian government to repatriate his remains for a State funeral and burial.
In the urgent application, sworn by Lungu’s widow, former First Lady Esther Lungu, the family cited the Government of Zambia, the morgue services provider, Two Mountains, and the South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) as respondents.
Read more: Unexpected twist in Lungu burial dispute as family, government open talks
Ms Lungu argued that the High Court’s ruling had infringed on their constitutional rights to dignity, privacy, and family autonomy in deciding the burial of their loved one.
“The order granted by the High Court unjustly stripped the family of its inherent right to determine the manner and place of President Lungu’s burial,” her affidavit read.
She also faulted the High Court for applying Zambian law in South Africa, insisting that the dispute was subject to South African law, which upholds the rights of families over burial decisions. “The reliance on Zambian law was misplaced. This matter concerns a body lying in South Africa, and our rights under South African law must prevail,” she argued.
On the disputed funeral programme, Ms Lungu maintained that the government could not rely on “FAA7,” a document initially proposed by the family, because it was never a binding agreement.
She explained stated that further negotiations had resumed between June 18 and 23, 2025 with new Zambian government delegations , talks that would have been unnecessary had FAA7 resolved the matter.
“The government’s own version of events shows that no agreement existed. If there had been one, fresh negotiations would not have been necessary,” she said.
The affidavit added that even if FAA7 were interpreted as an agreement, it lapsed when the parties failed to reach consensus on crucial funeral details, including whether the current Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema should deliver a speech.
“Once the parties failed to agree on the details of the funeral as envisaged in FAA7, the family was entitled to resile from any agreement that may have been in place and expressly did so,” she stated.
She revealed that funeral service provider, Two Mountains, in its correspondence to the family, warned that the prolonged standoff over the the urgent need to bury the former president, noting the natural risks associated with keeping a body for an extended period, even under advanced preservation.
The family, however, maintained that practical concerns could not override their legal and constitutional rights.
The widow urged the Constitutional Court to grant the relief sought, stating: “For all the reasons set out above and to be advanced in further legal argument, the applicants respectfully submit that this application should succeed with costs,”
WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
Comments