GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Security and Democracy in Southern Africa: Zambia

Security and Democracy in Southern Africa: Zambia

Library
Bizeck Jube Phiri
2007

Summary

What factors have influenced Zambia’s approach to national and regional security? To what extent has democratisation affected security governance? This chapter finds that geopolitics and democratisation have had significant influence on Zambia’s security concerns and approaches. Zambia has depoliticised its Defence Forces and has also to some extent achieved parliamentary oversight of the military. However, greater transparency is needed in Zambia’s security governance, and democratic oversight of the intelligence services has yet to be established.

Zambia became independent in 1964 as a unitary state with a multi-party system. Zambia openly supported the people from neighbouring countries under racist and colonial rule, and hosted thousands of refugees and freedom fighters. In 1973, the country became a one-party participatory democracy, arguably motivated by a perceived need to manage national security concerns in a volatile political environment.

The end of colonialism and of the Cold War led to a less threatening security context. This facilitated the restoration of multi-party democracy (in 1990), and a more open approach to national and regional security. Further, several failed coup attempts prior to 1990 highlighted the need to depoliticise and professionalise the Zambia Defence Forces.

A programme of early retirement and retrenchment in both the defence and intelligence services was introduced, and some defence oversight by parliamentary committees was established. From 1992, the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) scrutinised defence expenditure, and the Committee on National Security and Foreign Affairs (CNSFA) was mandated to oversee policy matters.

  • The depoliticisation of the Defence Forces is indicated by the fact that in 1992 and 1994, the CNSFA was chaired by members of opposition parties.
  • The CNSFA actively seeks public input, inviting citizens and civil society organisations to give evidence at its sittings.
  • Defence policy documentation has also become more transparent. During 2002, the Defence Council reviewed and revised defence policy. The President instructed that the revised policy document was to be circulated widely within the MoD and other ministries to ensure its proper implementation. In the past, it would have been classified.
  • Despite the CNSFA and PAC providing checks and balances on defence policy and expenditure, the two have never been involved in defence pre-budget consultations. Nor do they have powers to scrutinise defence or intelligence operations – such scrutiny is considered a threat to national security.

Lack of parliamentary scrutiny has contributed to a perception among Zambian citizens that the intelligence services abuse their mandate. Historically, there are indications of a factual basis to such suspicions, and it remains important to restore public trust. The intelligence agencies must be overseen by the CNSFA and PAC.

  • During the war in neighbouring Angola, a UN report implicated the director-general of Zambia’s Intelligence and Security Services, Xavier Chungu, in dealings with the UNITA leader. (Key government officials were also accused of supplying arms to rebel groups in the DRC.)
  • Such assertions undermined Zambia’s official attempts at mediation in the Angolan and DRC conflicts.
  • While Zambia’s democratisation process may have since ended illicit practices within the intelligence services, the secrecy in which they still operate makes this difficult to verify.

Source

Phiri, B. J., 2007, 'Zambia', in Security and Democracy in Southern Africa, eds. G. Cawthra, A. du Pisani and A. Omari, The Wits P&DM Governance Series, Wits University Press / International Development Research Centre, ch. 13

Related Content

Varieties of state capture
Working Papers
2023
Trends in Conflict and Stability in the Indo-Pacific
Literature Review
2021
Faith-based organisations and current development debates
Helpdesk Report
2020
Responding to popular protests in the MENA region
Helpdesk Report
2020

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".