By LordDenning SC
Lord Denning SC, one of Maravi Post contributors exposes how Law Professor Danwood Chirwa contradicts himself on the ongoing Malawi Presidential Election Case.
The contributor presents two pieces in which Chirwa seems to speak differently from what he highlighted early days of the case until Friday, When key Malawi Congress Party (MCP) witness Daud Suleman exposed rigging tactics Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) favored President Peter Mutharika as the winner for May 21 polls.
Here are two pieces the Law professor has been found into:
After MCP Suleman exposed MEC
____________________________ “After a long time, I got to listen to a small fraction of the elections case this afternoon. It’s clear The case has made a lot of progress.
A significant amount of evidence has been led, and now the technical aspects of the evidence are been dealt with.
That the courts have managed to unlock bottlenecks to getting all the relevant evidence on record is highly commendable.
Elections cases are won and lost by the degree to which the courts open their eyes to all the relevant evidence.
This case is unlike any other that has been conducted and argued on the continent. While I do not like the fact that it’s taken too long, the careful manner in which the evidence has been led and tested bodes well for the final outcome.
So let’s see what the experts say. Their evidence might be the tipping point in the case. If the petitioners expert can show that the IT system by which the final outcome was decided was manipulable or manipulated, the commission will have a lot to explain and justify. After all, it bears the primary responsibility to deliver free and fair elections.
Looking further forward I wonder whether the decision not to depose the Chair of the Commission was a wise one.
Only she can tell the court how the commission reached the final outcome and resolved issues around erasures, monitors not signing results sheets, the use of duplicates etc.”
___________________________
SOMEWHERE ON OR AROUND 22ND JUNE THE ESTEEMED PROFESSOR OPINED AND POSTED WHAT I CALLED A MISGUIDED OPINION
He alleged that the Petitioners had no case whatsoever by stating that their evidence is not only weak but also founded on mere Facebook hearsay.
I challenged his opinion. Before long, he was proven wrong by the Court which sustained the petitions and endorsed that there was a case to be heard.
The revered professor went into hibernation on the matter only to re-emerge today with the above opinion.
Essentially, he has now discarded his earlier opinion and allowed reality to sink in through his mental profile.
But wait a minute, soon after remembering his earlier post, he has either deleted or hidden the today’s post as many have testified that they can’t see it.
Welcome professor to the reality of the matter. You can sit down and we will serve you cold bottles to make you chill.
Stay happy.