By Given Mutinta
TONGA TRIBALISM AND DICTATORSHIP: HOW PRESIDENT HICHILEMA HAS SINGLE-HANDEDLY DESTROYED UPND
The United Party for National Development (UPND) has long been a significant force in the nation’s political arena.
However, its internal dynamics and leadership trajectory, particularly under President Hakainde Hichilema since 2006, have drawn intense scrutiny.
The discourse surrounding his rise and reign within the party cannot be disentangled from tribalism and authoritarianism, and these factors have profoundly altered the party’s democratic fabric, cohesion, and public appeal.
Following the untimely death of Anderson Mazoka, founder of the UPND, in 2006, the succession process was marked by a profound tribal influence—specifically favoring Tongas.
On June 6, 2006, the UPND’s Tonga faction, through the Southern Province Consultative Forum, declared that Mazoka’s successor should be a fellow Tonga.
This explicit ethnic consensus sidelined other equally competent contenders such as Patrick Chisanga and Sakwiba Sikota, whose credentials and service to the party arguably qualified them for leadership.
The subsequent party convention held in Central Province highlighted the deep-seated Tonga tribal agenda.
President Hichilema, a politically passive member, was unveiled as the sole UPND presidential candidate under the shadow of implicit threats of violence should this Tonga political novice face opposition.
This event was widely condemned as a glaring manifestation of open Tonga tribalism, reflecting a broader pattern of ethnicity-based favoritism that undermined the principles of inclusive, meritocratic leadership.
Since his inauguration as UPND president, President Hichilema has exercised an unchallenged and autocratic grip on party affairs.
Across election cycles in 2006, 2011, 2016, and 2021, the party leadership contests saw no real opposition to his supremacy.
His unilateral control extended beyond the leadership seat; he has consistently appointed the National Management Committee (NMC) and chosen parliamentary candidates without meaningful consultation or party-wide democratic processes.
This de facto dictatorship within the UPND erased vibrant internal debates and decision-making diversity, fostering an environment where dissent was stifled or met with outright intimidation.
Such concentration of power allowed President Hichilema to maintain party cohesion superficially, yet at a steep cost.
For twenty-years, intra-party democracy suffered, replaced by a hierarchy where loyalty to one individual superseded collective ideals and democratic norms.
The autocratic leadership style has created a significant disconnect between the UPND hierarchy and its grassroots.
In the run-up to the 2026 general elections, President Hichilema repeated his pattern of imposing nominees for parliamentary seats and party committees, despite primaries conducted in good faith where many candidates supported by local constituencies emerged victorious.
Such disregard for primary results and local choice fomented a national unrest, prompting more than thirteen primary winners in the Southern province to defy party orders and run as independents
Their challenges met with party-sponsored intimidation and violence—including suspicious deaths—exposed a troubling party culture where dissent is penalized rather than respected.
The seemingly indomitable central leadership failed to adapt to new political realities, alienating segments of its voter base and planting seeds of factionalism and collapse.
Today, Tongaland is the most politically divided region.
Tribalism remains one of the most corrosive legacies of President Hichilema’s leadership.
The initial selection based on his narrow personal preferences rather than merit has entrenched divisions and laid a foundation for exclusionary politics.
Since 2021, this narrow focus has undercut the UPND’s ability to broaden its national appeal and effectively weakening its party support in regions it had made inroads.
This ethnic exclusivity has stifled open discourse and contributed to creating a political culture inhospitable to new leadership and fresh ideas, undermining democratic renewal.
With no clear succession planning or internal mechanism to accommodate alternative voices, the party is on a journey to fragmentation, especially if President Hichilema fails to win the approaching elections as expected because of his dictatorial and tribal leadership.
The coming elections are a pivotal juncture not only for President Hichilema but also for the UPND as a party.
Should he lose to Brian Mundubile, as many analysts predict based on his leadership style, the party’s survival will be seriously threatened.
A leadership vacuum could catalyze defections and the emergence of a new political party in the Southern province, where leaders like Gary Nkombo and others may capitalize on disenchanted voters seeking a non-tribal and more democratic alternative.
The transformation of the UPND from a once promising political vehicle into what many now perceive as a tribalistic dictatorship is a cautionary tale about the dangers of centralized power and identity politics.
The party’s future hinges on its ability to reconcile internal divisions, embrace genuine democratic reforms, and transcend narrow ethnic loyalties in favor of a genuinely inclusive vision for all people, which is difficult under a leader who has no virtue of listening, such as President Hichilema.