Zambia's ex-President Lungu will be buried in South Africa due to family's feud with Zambia
LUSAKA, Zambia (AP) — Former Zambian President Edgar Lungu will be buried in South Africa instead of his homeland because of a disagreement between his family and Zambia's government over his funeral.
Lungu died from an undisclosed illness at a hospital in South Africa early this month and the process to repatriate his body for burial in Zambia has been marred by a bitter feud between his family and the current Zambian government. It included the family's demand that Lungu's political rival and current President Hakainde Hichilema should not attend his funeral.
The spokesperson and lawyer for the Lungu family, Makebi Zulu, said the decision to bury him in South Africa is 'in accordance with the family's wishes for a private ceremony.'
'We would especially like to extend our sincere appreciation to the Government of the Republic of South Africa for their respectful support and for honoring the family's decision to hold a private funeral and burial here in South Africa,' Zulu said.
On Thursday, Hichilema, in a televised address to the nation, canceled the 16-day national mourning that he had declared earlier.
'Our country cannot afford a state of indefinite mourning,' he said. 'We have done everything possible to engage the family of our departed sixth Republican President, and we have reached a point where a clear decision has to be made.'
Hichilema also apologized to the the South African government for the inconvenience.
Lungu, 68, had ruled the southern African country from 2015 to 2021, when he lost power to Hichilema. He remained an influential figure in the Zambian politics ahead of elections scheduled for next year.
Lungu and Hichilema were bitter rivals. Their conflict culminated in Hichilema's imprisonment in 2017, when Lungu was president. Hichilema was accused of treason after his motorcade failed to give way to Lungu's presidential convoy.
Last year, Lungu accused Hichilema's government of using police to harass him and restrict his movements. His family also said the government had initially prevented him from traveling to South Africa for treatment, a charge the government denied.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
30 minutes ago
- Associated Press
California argues in court against Trump's National Guard deployment
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California's challenge of the Trump administration's military deployment on the streets of Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday after an appeals court handed President Donald Trump a key procedural win in the case. The hearing comes a day after the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowed the president to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed in response to protests over immigration raids. The appellate decision halted a temporary restraining order from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Despite the appellate setback, California's attorneys are expected to ask Breyer on Friday for a preliminary injunction returning control of the troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days, to Newsom. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops have been necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said their presence on the streets of a U.S. city inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The demonstrations have appeared to be winding down, although dozens of protesters showed up Thursday at Dodger Stadium, where a group of federal agents in SUVs and cargo vans had gathered with their faces covered a parking lot. The Los Angeles Dodgers organization asked them to leave, and they did. On Tuesday, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles that was first imposed in response to vandalism and clashes with police after crowds gathered in opposition to agents taking migrants into detention. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, a Watergate prosecutor who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and his brother to retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration argued that courts can't second-guess the president's decisions. The appellate panel ruled otherwise, saying presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, but said that by citing violent acts by protesters in this case, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for federalizing the troops. For now, the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit proceeds. It's the first deployment by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965. Trump celebrated the appellate ruling in a social media post, calling it a 'BIG WIN' and hinting at more potential deployments. 'All over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done,' Trump wrote. Newsom, for his part, has also warned that California won't be the last state to see troops in the streets if Trump gets his way. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens,' Newsom said. Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance was traveling to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with U.S. Marines who also have been deployed to protect federal buildings, his office announced.
Associated Press
31 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Judge says he will order Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from detention
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge says he'll order Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil released from immigration detention. Judge Michael Farbiarz made the ruling from the bench in federal court in New Jersey on Friday. Lawyers for the Columbia graduate had asked a federal judge to immediately release him on bail from a Louisiana jail, or else transfer him to New Jersey, where he can be closer to his wife and newborn son. The same judge had ruled earlier that the government can continue to detain the legal U.S. resident based on allegations that he lied on his green card application. Khalil disputes the accusations that he wasn't forthcoming on the application. The judge previously determined that Khalil couldn't continue being held based on the U.S. secretary of state's determination that he could harm American foreign policy.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Benefits All Kids
Credit - Marc Elias—Getty Images President Donald Trump's raft of anti-LGBTQ+ executive orders affects many aspects of the lives of LGBTQ+ people, including their sports participation, access to healthcare, and ability to serve in the military. Advertisement One executive order seeking to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls' and women's sports, is surprisingly picking up some Democratic support. Recently, Senator Ruben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona said banning trans students from girls' and women's school sports might be 'legitimate' and argued that trans girls put cisgender girls at risk during sporting events. However, this is a damaging myth that fuels anti-trans stigma, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination and reinforces misogynistic stereotypes that girls are weak and need protection. It's not the first time a Democrat has capitulated to Republican anti-trans messaging. In Oct. 2024, during his long-shot attempt to unseat Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, Democrat Colin Allred released a campaign ad in which he seemed to oppose the participation of trans girls in sports. And in March 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom, speaking on the first episode of his new podcast 'This Is Gavin Newsom,' said it was 'deeply unfair' for trans athletes to participate in women's sports. We are not totally naïve—we get why a handful of Democrats are joining Republicans in wanting to ban trans kids from participating in sports teams consistent with their gender identities. These democratic legislators likely think their stance will appeal to 'centrist' voters; recent public polling suggests that about two-thirds of U.S. adults support such bans. But we still firmly believe that such bans are misguided, harmful, and built on falsehoods, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and inequities. Democrats should not be willing to throw transgender kids under the bus just for electoral considerations. Trans kids face higher rates of multiple physical and mental health difficulties than their cis peers—largely due to how our society treats the transgender community. But when they're allowed to play sports, these rates fall. What's more, states with policies allowing trans girls to play sports have seen increased rates of sports participation by cis girls. In other words, letting trans girls play sports benefits all girls. Shouldn't politicians be championing the benefits of sport for all? Advertisement To understand why such bans are damaging, let's back up and consider the lives of trans youth. A study by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law estimates that there are about 300,100 trans kids (ages 13-17) in the U.S., making up just 1.4% of all youth in that age range. The Center for American Progress notes that trans youth face 'high rates of family rejection, violence, discrimination, and suicidality.' Suicidality is shockingly common: the Centers for Disease Control conducts a national survey of high school students every two years to explore health-related behaviors, called the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), and the 2023 survey found that 53.8% of trans youth had seriously considered suicide, compared to 20.4% of the general youth population. Research has shown that trans kids are also at increased risk of depression, anxiety, substance misuse, and impaired quality of life. The good news is that sports can be a real lifeline. The research is clear: when trans youth are allowed to participate in sports, these mental health risks fall. For example, trans students in states with fully inclusive athletics policies are less likely to have considered suicide than students in states without such policies. Megan Bartlett, founder of the Chicago-based non-profit The Center for Healing and Justice Through Sport, told The Guardian that sports 'can be life-saving—especially for marginalized young people – because it can actually change your brain.' When kids are in sports teams, she said, the positive relationships help make them 'feel safe and practice being stressed but being able to deal with that stress,' which builds lifelong resilience. Trans kids at inclusive schools are also less likely to experience harassment and victimization. For all adolescents, participating in a sports team can reduce anxiety, depression, and feelings of loneliness. Letting trans kids play sports also improves their physical health. Trans kids have worse physical health than their peers—including higher rates of obesity and of risk factors for cardiovascular disease, like abnormal cholesterol levels—which are thought to be due to the stress of marginalization. But research has shown that playing sports lowers their risk of obesity and improves their cardiovascular health. The benefits go even further. Trans kids who are allowed to play sports in accordance with their gender identity are more likely to feel like they belong at school and more accepted by their peers. Sports help all kids gain skills in team building, management skills, commitment, and leadership. And there's even evidence that LGBTQ student athletes have higher grade point averages than those who do not play sports. Advertisement Unfortunately, several myths about trans student athletes are being promoted by supporters of school sports bans. We believe these need to be challenged. The first myth, pushed by Senator Gallego, is that anti-trans sports bans are needed to protect cisgender girls. There is no evidence that trans-inclusive policies are harmful to cis girls; indeed, trans boys and girls have been openly participating in high school sports for many years now, with no documented evidence of any harm to cis kids. States that have adopted inclusive policies have seen steady or increasing rates of participation by all youth. For example, California and Connecticut, which have allowed trans kids to play sports on the team of their choice, have seen participation of all girls increase. For instance in California, participation among girls in sports has increased by almost 14% from 2014 to 2020. The second myth, peddled by Governor Newsom, is that trans kids have an unfair advantage in sports. Trans kids vary enormously in their sporting ability, just like cis kids. Some play well and some play poorly, just like cis kids. Trans kids are all different heights, sizes, and strengths, just like cis kids. Whether any kid excels at sport is most often related to factors like how hard they train and what kind of access they have to good coaches. As the ACLU argues, when a trans kid does well at sport, they should be 'celebrated for their hard work, not demonized because of who they are.' Other myths abound. For instance, some conservative politicians and organizations push the fiction that massive numbers of trans kids are now 'dominating' high school sports. In reality, one study using CDC data found that only 40.7% of trans kids in grades nine through 12 played on at least one sports team. If we apply this percentage to the 300,100 trans kids aged 13-17 in the U.S., only 122,000 trans kids are playing sports out of a total of about 21 million kids in this age rage. This means that trans kids make up an extremely tiny fraction of those in sport. Advertisement Another false narrative claims that inclusive policies change the nature of girls' sports. But as the ACLU notes, that trans girls' 'participation in the girls' category does not change the nature of the category.' Inclusive policies do not undermine Title IX protections, and girls' sports have thrived in states that adopted such policies. This is why many women's rights advocacy groups support inclusion of trans people in sports. Trans kids just want the same opportunities as their peers. They want to be on sports teams to have fun, get exercise, and hang out with their friends. Just like any other kid. When we deny them that right, we are actively causing harm that could easily be avoided. And, in the end, this discriminatory behavior hurts us all. Contact us at letters@
