Zambia awaits presidential, parliamentary vote results

Although the final voting tally was not yet available, electoral officials reported a high turnout in Thursday's elections.

REUTERS/Jean Serge Mandela
A Zambian casts her vote during the presidential and parliamentary elections in the capital Lusaka, Zambia, August 11, 2016.

Zambia on Friday awaited the first election results from what is expected to have been a close contest between President Edgar Lungu and his main rival, who accuses him of mismanaging the economy.

Lungu narrowly beat opponent Hakainde Hichilema in a presidential vote nearly 20 months ago to fill the vacancy created by the death of then president Michael Sata, and could be forced into a second-round rerun if he does not get an outright majority this time.

Although the final voting tally was not yet available, electoral officials reported a high turnout in Thursday's elections, where Zambians also voted for members of parliament and councilors.

The economy of Africa's second largest copper producer is under stress after weak commodity prices hit exports, and the government is trying to negotiate a support program with the International Monetary Fund.

During the campaign, supporters of Lungu's governing Patriotic Front tussled with those of Hichilema's United Party for National Development, but there were no reports of violence on the day of the election.

If no candidate wins more than 50 percent, a second round between the two leading vote-getters must be held within 37 days.

Hichilema, a businessman and an economist by training, says he is more qualified than Lungu, a former lawyer, to steer the economy out of its slump.

But Lungu, who has been in office for just a year and a half, says he needs more time to diversify the economy from copper.

The Electoral Commission of Zambia has said it plans to have all of the election results announced by late Saturday or early Sunday. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.