Deepfake Video Reportedly Depicts Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema Withdrawing from 2026 Election

A viral video circulating on social media in October 2023 falsely claimed that Zambian president Hakainde Hichilema announced he would not run in the 2026 elections. Fact-checkers and digital forensics experts confirmed the video was manipulated using basic AI tools. The footage originated from a TikTok account known for AI-generated content.

Risk classification

• Primary risk domain: 4 Malicious actors
• Primary risk subdomain: 4.1 Disinformation, surveillance, and influence at scale

The deepfake video was created and distributed as a political disinformation campaign targeting the Zambian President to influence public opinion regarding the 2026 election.

Additional risk subdomains

• 3.1 False or misleading information: The AI system was used to generate false and misleading audiovisual content depicting a fabricated political announcement.

Causal factors

• Entity: Human
• Intent: Intentional
• Timing: Post-deployment

The incident was caused by a human actor intentionally using deployed AI generation tools to create and distribute a misleading deepfake of the Zambian President.

EU AI Act risk tier

• Risk tier: 3 Limited Risk

Limited Risk: The report describes an AI-generated deepfake video, which falls under Limited Risk due to transparency obligations requiring disclosure of AI-generated content.

AI system and alleged parties

• AI system: None named
• AI purpose: Deepfake Video Generation; Voice Generation
• Behaviour type: Tool
• Alleged developer: Unknown deepfake technology developers
• Alleged deployer: Unknown actors, @zambian_ai TikTok account
• Alleged harmed parties: United Party for National Development (UPND), Hakainde Hichilema, General public of Zambia, Electoral integrity, Democracy

Harm severity

Severity ratings are based on this scale.

Highest direct severity in any category: Minor. Severity is scored from Negligible to Catastrophic in each harm category, for harm the reports describe as caused directly or indirectly by the AI system.

• Physical: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Infrastructure: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Property: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Financial: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Environmental: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Malicious content: direct Minor, indirect Minor
• Differential treatment: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Civil rights: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Democracy: direct Minor, indirect Minor
• Privacy: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Psychological: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Epistemic: direct Minor, indirect Minor
• Child sexual exploitation and abuse: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible

Malicious content

Reported: The report explicitly describes malicious content created and spread directly by the incident.

Directly caused: The incident involved the creation of a fabricated deepfake video of the Zambian President using AI tools.

Indirectly caused: The malicious video was shared widely across social media platforms, including TikTok where it was played over 77,000 times, and X where one post received over 5,000 views.

Democracy

Reported: The report explicitly describes an incident that threatens democratic norms by fabricating a political announcement by a head of state.

Directly caused: The deepfake video directly fabricated a retirement announcement by the sitting President ahead of the 2026 election, interfering with political discourse.

Indirectly caused: The incident prompted a police investigation and required official denials from the ruling party, potentially sowing political confusion and distrust among the electorate.

Inferred additional harm: The proliferation of such deepfakes could lead to broader erosion of trust in democratic elections and official communications in Zambia.

Epistemic

Reported: The report explicitly describes epistemic harm through the creation and spread of a fabricated video.

Directly caused: The AI-generated video fabricated the President's voice and facial movements to make a false announcement.

Indirectly caused: The video misled some social media users, requiring multiple fact-checking organizations to debunk it and the ruling party to issue a clarifying statement.

People affected

• Occurrences reported: 1
• People reportedly harmed: 1
• People reportedly exposed: 82000

Potential causes

Management

• Inadequate proactive monitoring: Platform management failed to deploy proactive AI-detection filters.

Technology

• Easy-to-use AI manipulation tools: Allowed low-effort creation of a cheap fake video of the president.
• AI facial animation software: Enabled overlaying a moving face onto a still image of the president.
• Audio-driven mouth synthesis: Synthesized teeth and mouth movements to match a fake audio track.

Data Inputs

• Use of authentic still images: Source images of the president were used to anchor the AI model.
• Synthesized audio tracks: Fake audio was used as input to drive the facial animation synthesis.

Human Factors

• Malicious political intent: Opposition actors allegedly created the video to manipulate elections.
• Uncritical social media sharing: Users and politicians shared the fake video without verifying authenticity.

Process and Methods

• Delayed platform moderation: Platforms failed to quickly detect and remove the deepfake video.
• Reliance on manual debunking: Fact-checkers had to manually analyze and flag the video post-viral.

Regulatory Environment

• Lack of deepfake regulation: Absence of strict legal frameworks to deter political AI disinformation.

Information quality

• Classification confidence: High
• Reason for confidence: The report provides clear, fact-checked information about the deepfake video, its distribution, and the reactions of authorities and experts. There is minimal ambiguity regarding the events, though the specific AI tool used is not named.
• Ambiguities identified: The specific AI software or platform used to generate the deepfake is not identified.
• Alternative interpretations: The incident could be classified primarily as Misinformation (3.1), but the political context and police investigation strongly support classification as a malicious influence campaign (4.1).

An AI-generated deepfake video of Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema was circulated on social media to falsely claim he would not seek re-election in 2026. While the video was easily debunked due to visible artifacts, it prompted a police investigation and official denials, highlighting the threat of AI-enabled political disinformation targeting state leadership.

• Overall national security impact: Minor
• Scope: Single nation
• Primary target: Zambia
• Alleged perpetrator: Unknown

Threat characteristics

• Imminence: Long-term. The incident represents an ongoing strategic concern regarding AI-enabled political disinformation rather than an active, imminent crisis.
• Autonomy: Human-controlled. The AI system was used as a generation tool directly controlled by a human creator to animate the video and match the audio.
• Novelty: Established threat. Political deepfakes and synthetic media targeting elections are well-established threat vectors globally.

Impact by dimension

• Physical security: Negligible. No kinetic threats, physical systems, or critical infrastructure were affected by this digital fabrication.
• Information security: Minor. AI-generated deepfake video targeting a head of state represents a disinformation campaign, though its low technical quality allowed rapid debunking.
• Sovereignty: Minor. The incident targeted the presidency to influence the 2026 election, prompting a police investigation and official government denials.
• Economic security: Negligible. No strategic technology theft, financial systems compromise, or economic impacts were reported.
• Societal stability: Minor. The video had potential to mislead the electorate and erode trust in official communication, but caused no reported civil unrest.