By Deus Chikalaza
BLANTYRE-(MaraviPost)-The circulation of a purported government letter authorising a “No Objection” for Electricity Supply Corporation of Malawi (ESCOM) to proceed with the award of contracts has understandably generated public debate.
However, before the matter is portrayed as evidence of corruption or wrongdoing, it is important to consider both what the document appears to show and what it does not.
On its face, the communication authorises ESCOM to proceed with procurement processes relating to transformers and wooden poles.
By itself, however, it does not establish illegality, fraud, personal enrichment, or the circumvention of procurement laws.
Therefore, such conclusions can only be reached following a thorough and objective examination of all the facts by the relevant competent authorities.
A respected Malawian legal scholar, who spoke on condition of anonymity, observed that the real concern should extend beyond the contents of the document to the circumstances under which confidential government correspondence found its way into the public domain.
According to the scholar, effective public administration depends on confidentiality, trust, professionalism, and respect for institutional processes.
The selective leaking of internal communications, particularly without the accompanying documentation necessary to provide context, risks creating misleading impressions, fuelling speculation, and undermining public confidence in state institutions.
Similar sentiments have reportedly been echoed by a prominent private legal practitioner, who cautioned against drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.
Where genuine concerns exist regarding the integrity of the procurement process, the appropriate course of action is to utilise established oversight mechanisms, including the Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets Authority (PPDA), the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), internal audit structures, and Parliament.
Allegations of wrongdoing should be investigated through these lawful channels rather than being determined in the court of public opinion.
Furthermore, it would be both surprising and inconsistent to hastily attribute corrupt motives to President Peter Mutharika in the absence of credible evidence.
Throughout his public service, the President has repeatedly condemned corruption and called for greater transparency and accountability in the management of public resources.
It is therefore prudent to first establish the nature of the communication, the legal authority under which it was issued, and the procurement procedures that were followed before condemning individuals or institutions.
Renowned governance scholar, Professor Fedex Houverghton, argues that good governance demands not only vigilance but also fairness and adherence to due process.
As a nation, he contends, Malawi must resist the temptation to substitute suspicion for evidence and speculation for fact.
The mature and responsible response is to seek the full context, allow competent institutions to establish the facts, and permit due process to take its course before reaching conclusions.
By engaging civil society organizations to blame on the head of state without getting facts straight is very dangerous.
Let’s get facts not rushing with emotions on issues of national importance.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are those of the author not necessarily of The Maravi Post or Editor
