A South African pressure group has asked police in that country to carry out a DNA test to confirm the identity of the person reported to have died as former Zambian President Edgar Lungu. The demand opens a new front in a dispute over his remains that has run for more than 16 months, with no burial yet publicly confirmed.
The Progressive Forces of South Africa (PFSA) made the request in a seven-page letter to the South African Police Service (SAPS), citing concerns over the identity of the deceased and the circumstances surrounding his death.
PFSA President Mthetho Ngcukayitobi asked SAPS to preserve the remains, arrange forensic examinations and investigate the circumstances of Mr Lungu’s reported death.
The letter is the latest chapter in a story that began on June 5, 2025, when Mr Lungu, Zambia’s sixth President, who governed from 2015 to 2021, died in Pretoria while receiving medical treatment.
In the days that followed, the Government and the family negotiated over funeral arrangements. On June 15, 2025, the two sides reached an agreement under which the body would be repatriated on June 18 and buried in Lusaka on June 23.
That deal did not hold. On June 18, the family halted the repatriation, accusing the Government of breaching the terms of the agreement. A day later, President Hakainde Hichilema ended the national mourning period early, citing the impasse.
The family then announced plans for a private burial in Johannesburg, saying Mr Lungu had made clear before his death that his successor and long-time political rival should play no part in his funeral.
The Government responded through the courts. On June 25, 2025, the day of the planned private funeral, the High Court in Pretoria issued an order stopping the burial hours before it was due to take place.
In August 2025, the High Court ruled in the Government’s favour, ordering that the body be handed over for repatriation and a state funeral. The court said a former President’s personal wishes, or those of his family, could not outweigh the right of the State to honour him. A grave had already been prepared at Embassy Park in Lusaka, the official burial site for Zambia’s former Presidents.
The family’s attempt to go directly to the Constitutional Court was dismissed on procedural grounds, without a ruling on the merits. The case then moved to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
While the appeal was pending, control of the remains changed hands. In April 2026, the Government announced that it had taken custody of the body, before a court ordered it returned to the family.
The family accused the Government of conducting a post-mortem while the body was in its possession, without a court order and without any relative present. The remains were then moved to a mortuary agreed upon by both sides, with access limited to the family.
On June 23, 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal overturned the 2025 order. It ruled that the family, not the Government, had the right to decide where and how Mr Lungu would be buried.
The court found that the Government had failed to prove that a binding agreement had been reached over a state funeral, and that it had no legal right under South African law to override the family’s wishes. It also ordered the Government to pay the family’s legal costs.
The appeal had been brought by the former President’s widow, Esther Lungu, and seven other family members, who want him laid to rest at Fourways Memorial Park in Johannesburg.
Two days after the judgment, family spokesperson Makebi Zulu said the family was holding internal consultations, had not reached a final decision on the burial site and had not set a burial date.
The PFSA letter now raises questions of a different kind. Mr Ngcukayitobi said reports in the media, legal correspondence and posts on social media had raised concerns about who the deceased was, what caused his death and how the remains had been handled administratively and diplomatically.
He said the group’s request was grounded in South African laws governing police investigations and inquiries into deaths that occur under unusual or unexplained circumstances.
The group also cited allegations that the deceased had been admitted to hospital under an alias. Mr Ngcukayitobi argued that the circumstances described in those reports brought the matter within the scope of the Inquests Act and the investigative responsibilities of SAPS.
He set out why the group believed action could not wait.
“Because of the combination of disputed identity, allegations of foul play, and the international dimension, urgent forensic steps are necessary,” Mr Ngcukayitobi said.
The PFSA called on state forensic pathology services to conduct whatever medico-legal examinations were required, warning that any delay could result in evidence being lost or contaminated.
Its demands extend well beyond a DNA test. The group asked police to secure hospital admission and medical records, staff rosters, CCTV footage and digital records from hospitals in Pretoria and Johannesburg reportedly involved in the patient’s treatment.
It also sought the preservation of relevant immigration records and diplomatic communications, and asked investigators to interview hospital personnel, administrators and funeral parlour staff.
On timelines, the PFSA asked SAPS for written confirmation of the action taken, together with an investigation case number, within 72 hours of receiving the letter. It also requested a public statement on the matter, including the status of any post-mortem examination.
Mr Ngcukayitobi said the group was ready to provide further information to investigators.
The claims in the letter are the group’s allegations and have not been tested by any investigating authority. The letter does not challenge the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling; it asks South African police to treat the death itself as a matter requiring forensic confirmation.
SAPS had not commented on the letter at the time of publication. The family’s most recent public position remains the one given after the June judgment: consultations continuing, with no burial site or date announced.
29