The reason I had a rather unpleasant Christmas is that my mind kept reflecting on the constitutional court case regarding the 2019 presidential elections. The arguments and hearing of evidence in the case having been concluded, all that remains is for the court to give its ruling. 7 months have passed since the 27th of May when Dr. Jane Ansah declared the winner of the election. Considering that the court has said it will give its ruling within 45 days, it is safe to postulate that by the time the decision is made, 8 months will have passed.
8 whole months!
In those past eight months, while the legitimacy of Peter Mutharika’s presidency has been under challenge, Mutharika has been allowed to appoint a cabinet and make many far-reaching decisions that will have a lasting impact in the direction of the country.
For instance, Mutharika has allowed to remain in his cabinet as minister an individual who by all accounts all Malawians now know has fake educational qualifications- essentially a liar with fake degrees. Mutharika has also during the past 7 months removed from chieftaincy Chief Chekucheku of Neno. He spent millions of Malawi Kwacha on a trip to Madrid to attend a climate change conference and has made numerous decisions (or more accurately, if you know Peter Mutharika, many decisions have been made in his name) which the country will have to deal with whether he is validated as winner of the May 2019 elections or a fresh election is ordered by the court.
The fact that Mutharika’s electoral victory has been a matter of contention and the subject of a constitutional court challenge has also mean that the whole Democratic Progress Party (DPP) has been nervous and uneasy about its position in the country as the so-called ruling party. This uneasiness has caused those that find themselves in places of influence because of Mutharika’s shaky presidency to feel that they must make hay while the sun shines. Even a very cursory investigation reveals how the past 7 months have been 7 months of plunder of government resources for those in their positions because of their affiliation to the DPP: Cabinet Ministers, Parastatal Chiefs Executives, even Senior Police Officers and heads of other government departments and institutions.
I am very aware of the fact that the laws of the land provide that when a president is elected into office, he must have all powers of the presidency even when a challenge to the legitimacy of his or her electoral victory is mounted in the courts. The law, apparently, is that we must have a leader with full powers to lead even when that leader has become one in suspicious circumstances, and these circumstances are being investigated are the subjected of a court dispute. The law provides this probably mindful of the need for leadership of some sort at all costs. Thus, all the actions of such a leader remain valid and binding even when the dispute regarding the election is resolved against them and a fresh election is declared.
It is this provision that has ruined my Christmas. As I have learned and thought about the plunder of public funds and national resources that have been perpetrated in the past seven months by individuals whose influence lies in the balance because of the court case, I cannot help but take issue with this law.
Of course, it makes sense that there should not be a leadership vacuum after an election when there is a dispute as to the credibility of the result. Nevertheless, when you consider what those that are afraid this may be their only chance to have their hands at the government coffers have been up to during the past seven months, you must, like me, question whether there isn’t anything that can be done to ensure that during such scenarios, taxpayer funds and state resources are protected from months of gross plunder by those that feel they may never again get such a chance.
I wonder, for instance, if the drafters of the law ever envisaged a situation where a challenge to the legitimacy of a presidential electoral victory would be mounted, and would take 8 months of even a year to reach a determination (we should bear in mind that it is now 7 months and counting, and there is the possibility of appeal before this whole saga reaches a conclusion).
I imagine that in an ideal world where politicians are honest men with integrity and scruples, this provision would serve the nation well. In modern Malawi, however, where politics is not so much a calling to serve one’s countrymen but rather a path to quick riches, this provision demonstrably is precarious.
I do not advocate for a power vacuum every time a presidential electoral victory is challenged. This would be just as bad as the 8 months of plunder that I am speaking about here. I do, however, believe that as a nation we can come together and find a solution that ensures that our hard-earned taxpayer funds and precious state resources are protected in times of this kind from the greed and impunity of our politicians. Would it not make sense, for instance, to impose upon the courts a time limit, say 3 months, for them to hear and dispose of a presidential election dispute instead of giving it a carte blanche on the time such matters should take as is now the case? Is it not possible to impose limitations on the powers that a president whose electoral victory has been challenged can exercise in the period pending the determination and validation of the elections by the courts?
This is a heavy subject and certainly not exactly the kind of thinking one should engage in with a constipated Christmas stomach, but there it is. Heavy as it may be, I still invite you to join me in reflecting upon it. Believe me, it was when the horror of the fact that the past 7 months have been nothing but seven months of plunder that my bowels finally opened up and I was able to properly enjoy my Christmas pudding.
